Matt Lauer: "Now the President Always Has to Back Up His Words with Proof?"

Again from @benk84. Matt Lauer is just beside himself.

During a panel discussion on Tuesday's NBC Today about the White House releasing a photo of President Obama skeet shooting to dispel doubt about his claim of doing it "all the time," co-host Matt Lauer worried about the precedent that had been set: "So like releasing the birth certificate a year or so ago, this is the next step, that now the President always has to back up his words with proof?" [Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]

Lauer's concern seemed to follow administration talking points perfectly. On Sunday's Today, correspondent Peter Alexander reported: "This weekend, the White House tried to shut down the doubters. The President's former senior advisor [David Plouffe] even referred to those who still question where Mr. Obama was born. [Image of Plouffe Tweet] 'Attention, skeet birthers. Make our day – let the photoshop conspiracies begin!'"

One point I've wanted to make about Skeet-Gate for a few days now is that conservatives tend to put themselves in the worst possible position rhetorically, and not just by accident; I think it's intentional. It seems to happen a lot.

What I mean in this: Obama claimed to shoot skeet "all the time." This claim is obviously a lie. Until this photo was released, we had zero reports of him shooting skeet, and zero photos of it. In his entire life I think this might have been his only reference to shooting skeet.

Now, given that, I think it's plainly untrue that he shoots skeet "all the time." Things one does a lot become naturally associated with one, because one is, again, doing it "all the time."

Thus, attacking Obama's untrue statement -- and his intended manipulation of the public, suddenly declaring himself, in effect, to be a "gun guy," with all this skeet shooting filling up his days -- would have been a slam dunk for us.

But we didn't do that, or at least enough of us didn't do that that the slam dunk eluded us. Instead, we put our chips on the proposition that he never shot skeet at all, not once, not ever, and now the media is basically running with the story "Obama wins again; Obama told the truth."

Consider how easy it is to win on the proposition that Obama does not, in fact, shoot skeet "all the time." And consider how easy it is to lose on the question of whether Obama has never once in all of his life shot skeet.

Consider that proof of a single incidence of skeet shooting tends to win the question for us if we advance the first proposition, and lose the question for us if we push the second. Also consider how unlikely that is-- I'm not a gun guy either, but if you push the "You've never, ever fired a machine gun" proposition against me, you lose -- I shoot machine guns "all the time." (By which I mean, as Obama apparently did, "once or twice" in my life.)

Instead of pushing the attack that was most difficult for Obama to falsify, we pushed the attack that was most easy for Obama to falsify.

And I do not think this was an accident. Time and time again we do this sort of thing. It is not enough for us to win small on any question; no, we must Win Big, so push the Biggest, most expansive point we can think of (instead of just scooping up our earnings with the small win), and then lose the point.

During the campaign, for example, a lot of conservatives got angry at Romney for conceding the economy was growing a little bit but not much, and certainly not growing anywhere near the way the economy typically grows after a recession. They wanted him to make the rhetorical point that the economy wasn't growing at all, and thought it was a betrayal of him to concede so much ground.

But in fact the economy is, by the GDP figures at least, growing slowly (or at least it was; now it's contracting). Further, Romney was also attempting to preserve multiple outs, as they say in poker, for the campaign. What if the economy posted a decent GDP growth number right before the election? He wanted to be in a position wherein the central justification for his campaign wasn't easily falsified by a single GDP release. He wanted to have a position and a fall-back position, too: Even if the economy grows, it's barely growing, and this meager growth is unacceptable.

But where Romney saw a very smart way to put himself in the best position to win over a range of possible late-election-cycle scenarios, many conservatives saw betrayal. Unless we're advancing the Strongest Possible Form of any argument -- including mere factual arguments, did this happen or did this not happen -- we're not being honest and we're not being truly conservative.

When you're losing -- and we are losing, make no mistake -- you always have to make sure that your frustration at losing isn't further compromising your performance. It happens to everyone. Professional football players start making stupid frustration-penalties when their team can't get anywhere. People can't get out of their own heads and start missing easy lay-ups.

I think this is where we are, as a group. And I think Obama is planning on just this -- he's planning on being so obnoxious and loathsome to us that we start racking up penalties and putting ourselves further behind.

We should resist it.

Skeet-gate was not all that important. No one will ever ask "Where were you when Obama released his skeet picture?"

But this is a tendency I keep seeing over and over again, the urge to grasp for the Strongest Possible Statement of an Argument (or Strongest Guess About a Fact in Dispute), which I think is caused by the same sort of thinking that causes a gambler on a losing streak to make bigger and bigger bets -- trying to recoup lost money by making larger wagers. And that, of course, is when you're supposed to walk away from the table and get your head on straight.

Actually, of course, you're supposed to leave the casino entirely, but we're not in a position where we can do that; we have to remain at the tables, and ride this grim run of horrible luck out until exhaustion.

Posted by: Ace at 12:50 PM



Comments

1


...this is the next step, that now the President always has to back up his words with proof?


Yes, because of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1SZrJLMTO-8#!

Posted by: Cat hair & Heston at February 06, 2013 12:52 PM (LpQbZ)

2 Good analysis.

Posted by: Kenny Rogers at February 06, 2013 12:53 PM (mi1DY)

3 And I do not think this was an accident. Time and time again we do this
sort of thing. It is not enough for us to win small on any question;
no, we must Win Big, so push the Biggest, most expansive point we can
think of (instead of just scooping up our earnings with the small win),
and then lose the point.


This is also what happens when the need to be the purest on your side overshadows the need to defeat your opponent. Any deviations from the most extreme orthodoxy are evidence of insufficient ardor and must be denounced. See the Cultural Revolution.

Posted by: pep at February 06, 2013 12:53 PM (YXmuI)

4 I think TFG might have been referring to Dave Chappelle's version of "shooting Skeet."http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKTqHsMqkb0

Posted by: Charlie Murphy at February 06, 2013 12:55 PM (aCzO0)

5

This topic, that photo, was for this:

http://tinyurl.com/auyk635

Di$stractive Fund$$$$$$$$$$

Posted by: beachboyz at February 06, 2013 12:55 PM (LpQbZ)

6 IOW, people stop thinking about how to respond to the real opponent, in favor of demonstrating their bona fides to their allies. It happens a lot around here.

Posted by: pep at February 06, 2013 12:55 PM (YXmuI)

7 Ya. THAT is the real problem here.

Posted by: reality bites at February 06, 2013 12:55 PM (SSWdi)

8 "Trust, but verify." -Ronald Reagan's advice concerning other avowed Marxists seems to be in order here.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at February 06, 2013 12:56 PM (71LDo)

9 Bush Lie, A million Iraqis Died!
- disproven

Bush hates black people.
- no evidence ever offered

Bush will make rape legal
- did not happen

Gee, Ace, I guess we just have to be held to a higher standard ... for the childrenz.

Posted by: The Left at February 06, 2013 12:56 PM (NTBjC)

10 Ace, you're completely correct on this.

Somehow, some way, you need to get wider distribution and exposure -- sometimes I think you're the proverbial "vox clamantis in deserto" (voice crying in the wilderness).

I hope you're using a portion of your off-hours (heh) to take action on pushing your idea that a deep-pocketed conservative (or group of them) must needs acquire and bust out a new MSM-like media platform for the conservative message.

Posted by: RamonAllones at February 06, 2013 12:56 PM (3lLli)

11 I'd trade 5 min in the box for a chance to spear TFG.

Posted by: garrett at February 06, 2013 12:56 PM (11K5j)

12 In Soviet America, it's not what you say, but who says it.

Posted by: WalrusRex at February 06, 2013 12:57 PM (XUKZU)

13
Darkness!

CHARLIE MURPHY!

Posted by: Zombie Rick James at February 06, 2013 12:57 PM (11K5j)

14
Ace, respectfully, I don't know what Obama was doing in that photo but it sure wasn't shooting skeet. I don't know how the meme became that the photo proved that he once shot skeet and therefore people who doubted him prior to its release are lying liars who lie, but the reality is that is not skeet shooting in that photo.

It's kind of like saying Obama "does football all the time" and then posting a photo of him at a baseball game bouncing a pitch short of the plate as proof he plays football.

Posted by: @JohnTant at February 06, 2013 12:57 PM (tVWQB)

15
"I'd trade 5 min in the box for a chance to spear TFG."

A game misconduct seems to be a worthwhile risk.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at February 06, 2013 12:58 PM (71LDo)

16 >>>This is also what happens when the need to be the purest on your side overshadows the need to defeat your opponent. Any deviations from the most extreme orthodoxy are evidence of insufficient ardor and must be denounced. See the Cultural Revolution.

Yup yup yup yup yup.

Anytime you're in a group of like-minded individuals there's going to be a natural human tendency towards proving who's The Most. The Most committed ideologically; the Most Trekkiest Trekker there is, etc.

Meanwhile there's a social penalty of sorts paid by those who say, "Well, I'm not really the Most committed here at all. And I'm not sure being the Most committed is a good thing."

I've seen this with the Left where everyone's essentially *bidding* with each other for the prize of Most Leftiest Lefty there is.

We should not follow their many errors.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 12:58 PM (LCRYB)

17
oh noes, pleez don't labels me a birther!!

fuck that


Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 12:58 PM (9Q7Nu)

18
David Plouffe can go horsefuck.

#gohorsefuck

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 12:58 PM (9Q7Nu)

19 He throws like a girl, and shoots like a girl.

This is my surprised face.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at February 06, 2013 12:59 PM (xAtAj)

20
11 I'd trade 5 min in the box for a chance to spear TFG.
Posted by: garrett at February 06, 2013 12:56 PM (11K5j)


I think we can all be certain that he has without a doubt never played hockey.

Posted by: buzzion at February 06, 2013 12:59 PM (GULKT)

21
oh, and call me a gas birther from now on

because I can't believe these prices

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 12:59 PM (9Q7Nu)

22 >>>ce, respectfully, I don't know what Obama was doing in that photo but it sure wasn't shooting skeet. I don't know how the meme became that the photo proved that he once shot skeet and therefore people who doubted him prior to its release are lying liars who lie, but the reality is that is not skeet shooting in that photo.

I forgot to mention: And then, having placed so many chips on a proposition you can't afford to lose, you are then virtually compelled into denialism. When you lose a bet you can't afford to lose, you then have to argue with the Pit Boss that the dealer was cheating.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 12:59 PM (LCRYB)

23 That picture of the JEF shooting at something on the ground was as lame as the Twitter picture of his chair.

Posted by: logprof at February 06, 2013 01:00 PM (mi1DY)

24

OK so we are dumbasses.

Got it.

W. I. B.

Posted by: Meremortal, watching it burn at February 06, 2013 01:00 PM (1Y+hH)

25 @14 @JohnTant

You're correct but still would chalk up a loss in the terms that Ace very astutely outlines.

Posted by: RamonAllones at February 06, 2013 01:00 PM (3lLli)

26 Lauer is as prissy a metrosexual as his Drone King, Skeeter.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 06, 2013 01:00 PM (UOM48)

27 Matt Lauer buggars little boys.
Proof? The hell you say. I don't need proof. You can't handle the proof!

Posted by: rickb223 at February 06, 2013 01:00 PM (GFM2b)

28 #14

Yeah, the muzzle of Obama's shotgun is pointed horizontally. Its pretty clearly a posed shot.

And to be clear, Obama never said HE shot skeet all the time.

When asked if he's ever fired a gun what he said was:

Yes, in fact, up at Camp David, we do skeet shooting all the time.

Its a rhetorical dodge. . .its a deliberately ambiguous statement implying that he shoots skeet frequently (which is obviously) untrue, but actually just stating that the activity is conducted (ie without him) all the time.


Posted by: looking closely at February 06, 2013 01:00 PM (PwGfd)

29 My only thought ace is, in this particular instance is that what happened? Or did the media manipulate our responses so they looked like this?

I don't recall seeing anyone ever say "Obama never shot skeet in his life."
What I do recall was people saying "this is absurd, if he did it all the time, and we're constantly seeing photo ops of him doing everything else, what haven't we seen a picture yet?"
Which I think is the proper response: The president is getting his photo taken more often than not (especially this celebrity president) and they almost always get released so if there hasn't been a photo released yet it means he doesn't really do it all that often.

But the media (and the democrats of course) turned this logic into "Pics or it didn't happen." which really was never the point. The point was "he's passing himself off as something he's not."

So then the picture comes out and most of us are saying "great, one photo, it still doesn't tell us anything other than 'he's shot a gun, which really isn't relevant to the question at hand which is: did Obama try to push himself off as something he's not."'
And again this get's twisted into "See you can't please these guys even with proof. The referencing to the birther movement was just further attempts to make connections that never existed in the first place.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 01:01 PM (wGOqj)

30
No, conservatives didn't say he never shot skeet. That's the message that the media is attributing to Republicans. And Ace is simply playing along with it.

Conservatives don't make bad arguments. The Media repackages conservative arguments after the fact and MAKES them bad arguments.

Posted by: egd at February 06, 2013 01:01 PM (XVGEg)

31 >>I think we can all be certain that he has without a doubt never played hockey.

They don't have ice in Kenya.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (team #letitburn) at February 06, 2013 01:01 PM (WDCYi)

32 Amen! ... although, leaving the"table" does have a certain appeal since the game is so full of cheats and card sharks. A fair player doesn't stand a chance.

Posted by: and irresolute at February 06, 2013 01:01 PM (DBH1h)

33 Well since Obama lied about his parents meeting in Selma, lied about his racist girlfriend, lied about Bill Ayers, lied about the New Democrat Party, lied about Acorn, lied about Obamacare, lied about eating dog , lied about playing Basketball, lied about being a Constitutional law professor, lied about his social security numbers, lied about going to Pakistan and lied about smoking. (limited list off the top of my head)

The high rolling conservatives thought they may have had a sure bet. Of course it was still a long shot that he never shot skeet when the Presidential Marine detail has a competition every year at Camp David. Maybe they counted on him just watching.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 01:01 PM (m2CN7)

34 You are spot on here, Ace. We need to fight smarter and hopefully Baby Breitbarts everywhere are reading this (and comments ) and saying to themselves, "Yeah, we have to stop proving our beliefs to each other and figure out a way to take it to Obama and whoever might follow him (in every sense of the phrase).

I feel better about our future just reading this, because it is a step away from the frustrations and the losses and staying "Chill. You got this" to ourselves

Posted by: JJ Stone at February 06, 2013 01:02 PM (SUX5l)

35 the pic was only waist up. nobody saw the pee stains

Posted by: Bigby's Cold Dead Hands at February 06, 2013 01:03 PM (VLJ8Q)

36 "Skeet-gate was not all that important."

When was the last election cycle in which the GOP outperformed? 2010.

What was the clear theme of GOP messaging in 2010?

Asking the rhetorical question, "Mr. President, where are the jobs you promised?"

Since then, GOP messaging has been, variously:

-- "I agree with the President"

-- Rape pregnancies "are something God intended"

-- Skeetgate

And a bunch of other stupid shit that hasn't worked.

In case no one noticed, jobs aren't any more plentiful or any better paying than they were in 2010. Maybe, possibly, how's-about we go back to the jobs theme for a while, the theme that actually brought in votes, and shut the fuck up about all this other peripheral stuff that doesn't bring in votes?

Posted by: torquewrench at February 06, 2013 01:03 PM (gqT4g)

37 It's not just the "media" saying he never shot a shotgun; I see lots of people claiming this photo is staged or is a photoshop.

Now why would they do that, if they were not committed to the Never, Ever, Never form of the claim?

>>>Conservatives don't make bad arguments.

Never? Really?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:03 PM (LCRYB)

38 Bush was wearing an earpiece during the debate!1@!!#@!!

Posted by: The Left at February 06, 2013 01:03 PM (NTBjC)

39 >>I forgot to mention: And then, having placed so many chips on a
proposition you can't afford to lose, you are then virtually compelled
into denialism. When you lose a bet you can't afford to lose, you then
have to argue with the Pit Boss that the dealer was cheating

I don't think whether or not Obama has ever discharged a firearm in his life is the "hill to die on" so to speak.

Its painfully obvious to anyone who is a shooter, that Obama is not.

Its also painfully obvious to anyone adept at sniffing out BS, that Obama's statement on "doing skeet" is full of crap.

Obama was not the winner of this exchange.


Posted by: looking closely at February 06, 2013 01:03 PM (6Q9g2)

40 At least the pic was proof that he wears mom jeans all the time.

Posted by: Opus An Arcus at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (cyzli)

41
We waste a lot of time on this picayune shit.

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (9Q7Nu)

42 5

This topic, that photo, was for this:

http://tinyurl.com/auyk635

Di$stractive Fund$$$$$$$$$$
Posted by: beachboyz at February 06, 2013 12:55 PM (LpQbZ)

---
From the comment section, "can't wait for the Bob Menendez action figure"

Posted by: Lurkasaurus at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (K5kaS)

43
Did we learn Nothing from 2012?


Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (9Q7Nu)

44 Anytime you're in a group of like-minded individuals there's going to be a natural human tendency towards proving who's The Most.

true. there's a running joke about it. because it's true.

it's an especially dumb game when the media is lined up against you.

Posted by: No Feet Johnson at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (KHo8t)

45 >>>Its painfully obvious to anyone who is a shooter, that Obama is not.

yes... but when the argument has turned from that into whether he ever fired a gun in his life, we lose on that point.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (LCRYB)

46 Dear Ace,
that picture proves little bammy shot a SHOTGUN. Once.

It does not prove he shoots SKEET; not even once, let alone multiple times.

Posted by: Michael Moore at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (x7g7t)

47 "There are some who say I never shot skeet. And, uh, some say I shoot skeet all the, uh, time. I reject both false extremes"

Posted by: Bigby's Cold Dead Hands at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (VLJ8Q)

48 Echoing a Moron... "Prez 0, w/o video, it didn't happen."

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:05 PM (1V6Pv)

49 Starting to not like to see the word "us" being used when talking about the current main stream Republicans. They are effin' up that bad in general. Obama is dribbling them like the punks that they have become.

Posted by: Pipe Holder at February 06, 2013 01:05 PM (VTeUD)

50 Posted by: torquewrench at February 06, 2013 01:03 PM (gqT4g)

This might be closer to the point.
We're not going to win on "he's not like you at all, he's lying about that."

Of course we can't win on policy either these days.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 01:05 PM (wGOqj)

51 #37

Being committed to the "never fired a gun" position is just stupid.

Again, I'm not exactly sure what Obama is shooting at in that picture, but its not a clay skeet target.

But even stipulating that he's fired a gun a few times in his life, so what?

He can shoot 100xs all day long; the guy is still mired in the language of "guns are for hunting", he still wants to limit our gun rights, and he's wrong.


Posted by: looking closely at February 06, 2013 01:05 PM (6Q9g2)

52 I forgot to mention: And then, having placed so many chips on a proposition you can't afford to lose, you are then virtually compelled into denialism. When you lose a bet you can't afford to lose, you then have to argue with the Pit Boss that the dealer was cheating.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 12:59 PMOh, I don't think I'm in denial...the Administration released a photo of him doing something and is playing it to political effect. That the photo doesn't actually show him doing what he says he's doing is immaterial to the low-info/no-info people who don't actually know what skeet is. The media is allowing it to happen since they have interest in advancing the narrative in this instance.What's important here, I agree, is no longer what Obama is actually doing in that photo, but what people *think* he's doing. I'm still comfortable saying the guy has never shot skeet ever, but alas, that actually no longer matters. Besides, I believe it was the media who started up with the whole conspiracy-theory meme.Anyway, to the extent that I had any "chips" on said proposition, it was mostly to mock The One going all Kim Jong Il about his shooting habits than to try and make any kind of political point out of it.

Posted by: @JohnTant at February 06, 2013 01:05 PM (tVWQB)

53 But this is a tendency I keep seeing over and over again, the urge to grasp for the Strongest Possible Statement of an Argument (or Strongest Guess About a Fact in Dispute), which I think is caused by the same sort of thinking that causes a gambler on a losing streak to make bigger and bigger bets -- trying to recoup lost money by making larger wagers.


"Next time, bet WIT-a you 'ead, not ABOVE-a you 'ead." - Furio Giunta (The Sopranos)

Posted by: BlueStateRebel at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (7ObY1)

54 I think it's also telling that the Left celebrates a victory when the president tells the truth. You can practically see the headline:

"OBAMA VICTORY AS MEDIA DOESN'T HAVE TO SUPPLY FACTS FOR HIM."

Posted by: Sgt. York at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (jEvoA)

55 >>>It does not prove he shoots SKEET; not even once, let alone multiple times.


arguing with the pit boss. Given that he's shooting a shotgun I assume he had some purpose for doing so. I assume he doesn't just shoot shotguns off on a shoulder-level trajectory just to do it.

So he's warming up for skeet or something.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (LCRYB)

56 “I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that"

Posted by: The Left at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (NTBjC)

57 I have this horrible mental picture of TFG and Reggie Love. Skeet! Skeet! Skeet!

Posted by: Charlie Murphy at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (aCzO0)

58 It's really simple Ace. Democrats can push the hardest, most ludicrous lies and the Media yells them from the rooftop 24/7, only to issue a quiet retraction on B10.

Republicans meekly suggest that Obama might not be much of a gunslinger, and we get 24/7 "fact checks" about how the statement is "true, but false".

Might as well go big.

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (wsGWu)

59
The most important lesson we needed to learn from 2012 is this: Nobody knows nor gives a shit about 99% of the stuff we discuss here on AoS.

People are oblivious to the daily outrages inflicted upon us (and on them) on a daily basis.


Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (9Q7Nu)

60 Limbaugh skewered the photo: wrong smoke, wrong angle, wrong size.
There's lots more wrong with the photo (find your own link), and I'm not even a shot-gunner.

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (1V6Pv)

61
"We waste a lot of time on this picayune shit."
___ ____ _____ _____ ____ ____ ___ _


"Don't sweat the picayune shit."

"It's all picayune shit."

-GOPe

Posted by: Meremortal, watching it burn at February 06, 2013 01:07 PM (1Y+hH)

62 I don't give a damn if he skeets or not.

The 2nd Amendment is not for our skeet rights.

I want to send TFG and his lackeys packing.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at February 06, 2013 01:07 PM (xAtAj)

63 Isn't the unreasonable position the media's servile boot-licking that, why, yes, a single image of Barry with a shotgun is proof that he shoots skeet 'all the time'?

Posted by: Waterhouse at February 06, 2013 01:07 PM (xGlYu)

64
In other words, this is how many votes all this skeet horseshit will net us:

0.

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 01:07 PM (9Q7Nu)

65 It's not that we don't believe him ,
it's just that he's a known LIAR...

When the boy cries wolf all the time for attention
eventually the sheep get attacked...

These things have to be proven because the
4th estate refuses to do it...

Posted by: American Dawg at February 06, 2013 01:07 PM (trA4n)

66
Good rant/analysis as usual Ace. Part of the problem, though, is message discipline, or lack thereof. Regardless of how much you may plead with conservatives to not make these silly mistakes, some inevitably will. And the MSM will run with the most extreme positions/statements and present them as if they are what we are all saying (because there's nothing the MSM likes more than making conservatives look stupid and extreme). Regardless of what we were actually saying, the MSM will declare this picture to be proof that we're wrong. Because they like straw man arguments, and there are always going to be some conservatives who will supply those straw men.
Message discipline is a hell of a lot easier when you have the MSM on your side. If 90% of the Left stays on message and 10% veers off course, the MSM will hide those 10%. For us though, we need 100% message discipline. Which is impossible.
Yet another reason to take back the media.

Posted by: SkepticalMI at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (vHA67)

67 PS: Ace, this is what the dems did for 8 DAMN YEARS to Bush. And it worked.

First they would make one claim. Then it would be disproved; then they'd move the bar, and that would be disproved.

They would keep changing the goalposts. Eventually Bush got sick of it and wouldn't respond at all.

That tactic worked. When your opponent says or does something, you make fun of it and of him. Then you move the goalposts.

Posted by: Michael Moore at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (x7g7t)

68 "[W]e will put 1 million plug-in hybrid vehicles on America's roads by 2015."

Posted by: The Left at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (NTBjC)

69 Matt Lauer can go know himself in the biblical sense.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (EDjKF)

70 I'm surprised that we allowed a discussion on one of our fundamental civil rights to be reduced to a recreational activity.

Posted by: Wabbajack at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (Y3C5w)

71 <<Yes. You must stop grasping ace.>>

It's speculation, but I think Ace has gone back to grasping himself.

Posted by: Sgt. York at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (jEvoA)

72 Anytime you're in a group of like-minded individuals there's going to be a natural human tendency towards proving who's The Most. The Most committed ideologically; the Most Trekkiest Trekker there is, etc.

Meanwhile there's a social penalty of sorts paid by those who say, "Well, I'm not really the Most committed here at all. And I'm not sure being the Most committed is a good thing."

I've seen this with the Left where everyone's essentially *bidding* with each other for the prize of Most Leftiest Lefty there is.

We should not follow their many errors.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 12:58 PM (LCRYB)



Parallel this with this morning's news dump link (to the Daily Beast re: Michelle Rhee):

“Here’s the problem with your thinking,” I’d answer. “My job is not to preserve and defend a system that has been doing wrong by children and families. My job is to make sure that every child in this city attends an excellent school. I don’t care if it’s a charter school, a private school, or a traditional district school. As long as it’s serving kids well, I’m happy. And you should be, too.”

Here’s the question we Democrats need to ask ourselves: Are we beholden to the public school system at any cost, or are we beholden to the public school child at any cost? My loyalty and my duty will always be to the children.

Not everyone bought it. In fact, most of my Democrat friends remained adamantly opposed to vouchers. It was interesting, though: they were always opposed to the broad policy, but they could never reconcile their logic when thinking at the individual-kid level.

Posted by: beachboyz at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (LpQbZ)

73 #46

Who is making the argument that Obama has "never fired a gun"?

The very fact that his camp felt compelled to bring out a picture of him firing a gun means that HE feels like he was losing that argument.

Lets sees the video of Obama shooting skeet. . .That footage is probably 50 miles deeper than the Rashid Khalidi Video, and the reason is that Obama is a wuss, terrified of guns, who not only couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with one, he'd actually get a sore shoulder from two shells from an over-under.



Posted by: looking closely at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (6Q9g2)

74 >>>Might as well go big

not if "going big" every time is just throwing good money after bad.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (LCRYB)

75 Well, considering he spent the rest of that day golfing, I suspect he held the gun for the photo op and then flung it away distastefully.

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (wsGWu)

76 I really disagree, Ace. Maybe I read different stuff, but the speculation I saw is that, yes, he did probably shoot once (although very interesting that this photo hadn't seen the light of day before).

I think the Left made that the bar because, remember, the issues we raise are phrased for us by the media. The media decided that the bar was to be that he just had to shoot a gun once. Not us.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (Xd2w5)

77 yes... but when the argument has turned from that into whether he ever fired a gun in his life, we lose on that point.

Then you turn it back to the point and tell them to stop moving the goal posts. "Ever fired a gun in his life" is NOT the point. Lying about shooting skeet "all the time" is.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (GFM2b)

78 We do not live in fear when Obama is at the range.

Posted by: The Skeets at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (J6hHs)

79 Skeet Gate Isn't important. True. Just another lie. But I don't see where anyone made a big deal out of it other than to make fun of the lie. Nobody and I mean NOBODY actually thinks Zero did anything but pose for a picture. I think Ace is making something more important in his mind than anyone else is.

Posted by: maddogg at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (OlN4e)

80 Or the unquestioning acquiescence that shooting skeet at Camp David qualifies you as an expert on the 2nd Amendment?

Posted by: Waterhouse at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (xGlYu)

81 Also it's silly to talk about this beyond his ridiculous lying about "all the time".

We can't prove a negative.

Stick with the fact that he's a lying SCOAMF.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (xAtAj)

82 yeah I'm going to post that Michelle Rhee article, and I was wondering about making a big push on it.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (LCRYB)

83 I confess, I've fallen into this trap of Going Big many times. When I first sniffed out the fallacy behind the Al Gore Global Warming meme, I went big, claiming there was no warming, period.

Then I did some research. I've since found that there may have been some in the 90's and first decade of the 21st century ... but it wasn't completely clear that there was or that it was an aberration. Further research has proven (to me, at least) that most of the premises the Global Warming argument are built upon are shaky at best, outright fallacies or lies at worst. But there was some warming in that time period.

The reason I Went Big was because I knew instinctive the whole thing was built on a lie. But with all lies there is some truth. You weave your lie out of truth threads. And that was my mistake: attacking even the truth threads.

Ace, you are dead on on this one. I have changed my ways.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (deaac)

84 No, conservatives didn't say he never shot skeet. That's the message that the media is attributing to Republicans. And Ace is simply playing along with it.

Conservatives don't make bad arguments. The Media repackages conservative arguments after the fact and MAKES them bad arguments.


Posted by: egd at February 06, 2013 01:01 PM (XVGEg)


Exactly this. Twisting words and meanings around, purposely looking out the wrong end of the binoculars and authoritatively declaring of our positions that, "there's no there . . .there."

Posted by: Count de Monet at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (BAS5M)

85 I'll say it again--the point of this was not if his Holiness ever shot a gun, but if he did it all the time--therefore, once more, a politician putting a fire hat on in a photo does not a fireman make. Mike Dukakis riding in a tank does not make him a tank commander.

If Barack Obama has been such a firearms man before this, why has he not spoken about it? Too cowed by his extreme left, that wishes no guns in the hands of Americans?

Posted by: Hell on the Wabash at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (RQiI5)

86 They don't have ice in Kenya.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (team #letitburn) at February 06, 2013 01:01 PM (WDCYi)

--Actually, Mt. Kenya is near the Equator and has a glacier (unless Al Gore really did make it disappear).

Posted by: logprof at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (mi1DY)

87 11 I'd trade 5 min in the box for a chance to spear TFG.
Posted by: garrett at February 06, 2013 12:56 PM (11K5j)

I would pay big bucks to have O'Reilly do his next interview with TFG "Slapshot" style.
http://www.you tube.com/watch?v=n_w4MV_LwMw

Posted by: jakeman at February 06, 2013 01:09 PM (96M6e)

88 Wasn't it the Searchhlight Stalker that said it is beholden on the accused to prove their innocence?

Posted by: Darth Randall at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (mV8sg)

89 Well.... I know this sounds "deranged" and all but shouldn't some of our congressman be talking about the legal questioning and possible impeachment of a sitting President who ordered the killing of an American citizen by birth without a trial?

I mean label me a "kook", but putting ourselves in ideological boxes where we play by one set of rules and the left plays by none at all is a losing proposition. A sitting president after 4 years in office says all of a sudden he does an activity that noone has ever seen him do before. It wasn't people on the right turning the argument into "omg he had never shot a weapon before!", that was the press... And I never saw this rush by left wing blogs to put a clamp on their kooks unless you want to reference truthers on Kos but that was after years of ranting and allowing so many other over the top references to Bush as Hitler or as a murderer that it really didn't matter. Yet here we are yet again holding ourselves to standards while they have none.

Oh no maybe one person on the "right" said something stupid, I don't really see the reason we need to all assemble our circular firing squads over it. It's divisive, cause right now I don't give two shits if someone thinks Obama is a fucking Muslim cannibals from Venus as long as they don't want him to advance liberalism I'm right there with them.

Posted by: Mr Pink at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (JeZFX)

90 So I guess we shouldn't say anything anymore? I don't care a whiff if obama fired at clay pidgeons or the ground. He looked like an ass doing it and I think their petulant little "skeet birthers " remark back fired on them... Excuse the pun...Just my opinion though.... Have a nice Day...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (9+ccr)

91 yeah I'm going to post that Michelle Rhee article

Its a good liberal mugged by reality piece. Go for it!

Posted by: The Skeets at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (J6hHs)

92 arguing with the pit boss. Given that he's shooting a shotgun I assume he had some purpose for doing so. I assume he doesn't just shoot shotguns off on a shoulder-level trajectory just to do it.

So he's warming up for skeet or something.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (LCRYB)

Says you; you didn't disprove my argument.

Again, how does that picture prove his statement that he 'shoots skeet all the time'. Where are all the people backing up the claim that he shoots skeet all the time.

Posted by: Michael Moore at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (x7g7t)

93 Now Michelle's ass, that thar IS a big deal.

Posted by: maddogg at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (OlN4e)

94 Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (LCRYB)


Ace next time you're in these neck of the woods, let me take you down to the hunting farm.

We do occasionally fire guns off just for the sake of making things go boom. So it's not that incredible an idea . (Usually we put cans or something up, just to watch the carnage.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (wGOqj)

95 10 I think you're the proverbial "vox clamantis in deserto" (voice crying in the wilderness).

------------

Didn't you mean to say "vox clamantis in desserto" (voice crying in the dessert, specifically pudding).

Posted by: Citizen Anachronda at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (FzhYM)

96 >>>. Maybe I read different stuff, but the speculation I saw is that, yes, he did probably shoot once

Well you're quite right that that was in the mix -- certainly we did not all collectively decide on a *single* claim.

But there was enough oomph behind the Never, Ever claim that -- while Lauer is doing what Lauer will, misrepresenting things for Democratic advantage -- there is an element of Giving Your Opponent the Dagger to Stick Between Your Shoulderblades here.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (LCRYB)

97 arguing with the pit boss. Given that he's shooting a shotgun I assume he had some purpose for doing so. I assume he doesn't just shoot shotguns off on a shoulder-level trajectory just to do it. So he's warming up for skeet or something.
Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (LCRYB)


That may be what was planned but I'll just speculate to mock President sissypants. He fired the gun to try it out, the photo was snapped on that first shot, and he didn't like it so he didn't shoot it anymore. Because, again, sissy.

Posted by: buzzion at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (GULKT)

98 66 yes. We're not questioning TFG so much as questioning the MFMs 'authority'

Posted by: Bigby's Cold Dead Hands at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (VLJ8Q)

99 But we didn't do that, or at least enough of us didn't do that that the slam dunk eluded us. Instead, we put our chips on the proposition that he never shot skeet at all, not once, not ever, and now the media is basically running with the story "Obama wins again; Obama told the truth."

Yeah. I said at the time it was a fucking stupid theme on the conservative interwebs. Which says a lot since I'm fucking stupid.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (9KqcB)

100 The most important lesson we needed to learn from 2012 is this: Nobody knows nor gives a shit about 99% of the stuff we discuss here on AoS.

People are oblivious to the daily outrages inflicted upon us (and on them) on a daily basis.


Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 01:06 PM (9Q7Nu)

Who won Honey Boo Boo again?

Posted by: 0bot No. 267452 at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (mi1DY)

101
Posted by: Mr Pink at February 06, 2013 01:10 PM (JeZFX)

Congress knowingly let it happen. They breathe a sigh of relief that they don't have to Deal With It.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (xAtAj)

102 Ace,

Your point would be more believable if you could cite one Leftist lie that hurt the Left politically. Otherwise you are merely pointing out the double-standard.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (NTBjC)

103 @30 egd
Re your first paragraph: Nope -- Ace is calling this whole thing correctly -- sorry but there it is.

As to the second paragraph: Yes and no. The arguments themselves are solid. But they are inexpertly deployed in the hands of most "users," i.e., conservative office-holders/-seekers frequently subject to ambush by the MSM (and who ought to know damn well that they're always frequently subject to such ambush).

I'm not a sock-puppet for a reader-commenter over on PJMedia named "Art Chance," but yesterday he had some excellent observations in this regard, including the remark that the conservative movement/GOP recently has hurt itself with candidacies (for any given target office) where the candidates had "more money than sense." See his very cogent series of comments about internecine GOP/conservative strife that follow on yesterday's PJMedia column by Rick Moran. The Moran column itself is not all that illuminating or well-expressed, but "Art Chance" contributes observations that are.

Posted by: RamonAllones at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (3lLli)

104 Reminder: These are the same set of assholes that went dumpster diving in Sarah Palin's email.

Which yielded such a rich trove of nothing.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 06, 2013 01:11 PM (EDjKF)

105 I think the explanation is more insidious -- the enemy has someone on the inside.

A Fifth Column.

A mole.

A shill, or barker, or whatever.

But then again, so-called "doctors" keep throwing around words like "paranoid" and "let's up his meds" whenever they talk to me.

So, draw your own conclusion, but I still think I'm onto something.

Posted by: Phinn at February 06, 2013 01:12 PM (x+Knu)

106 Then you turn it back to the point and tell them to stop moving the goal posts. "Ever fired a gun in his life" is NOT the point. Lying about shooting skeet "all the time" is.
Posted by: rickb223 at February 06, 2013 01:08 PM (GFM2b)

exactly. ace why don't you tweet Lauer with sarcastic response addressing this along with other lies and exagerrations of Obama.

That is what you should be doing instead of analyzing and scolding the right for something I don't think they did.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 01:12 PM (m2CN7)

107 >>arguing with the pit boss. Given that he's shooting a shotgun I assume
he had some purpose for doing so. I assume he doesn't just shoot
shotguns off on a shoulder-level trajectory just to do it.



Why assume?

I say his "purpose" in shooting this gun was purely to create a picture of him shooting a gun. Its a pure photo-stunt.

>>So he's warming up for skeet or something.

You don't "warm up" for skeet by firing your gun at the ground.

Again, I don't really give a rat's ass about whether Obama has fired a gun once, or a thousand times (though I don't believe he's ever fired one more than a few times, and have yet to see evidence to the contrary).

The issue is he's trying to prevent ordinary folks from having guns, and part of this effort is his false posturing as a "sportsman". He got called out it, and I don't think it was to his benefit.


Posted by: looking closely at February 06, 2013 01:13 PM (PwGfd)

108 Oh and Matt, any proof that we might require probably lies in the digital audio editing bank at 30 Rock. Dick.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 06, 2013 01:13 PM (EDjKF)

109 I think the internet plays a role in this too.

It's a medium that encourages a lot of rhetorical firebombing, flippancy and 'GO F*CK YOURSELF' responses to disagreements.

Essentially, WoW forums infused with politics.

Posted by: El Kabong at February 06, 2013 01:13 PM (LR8/y)

110 Inaccurate mischaracterizations are not a hill to die on.

Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 06, 2013 01:13 PM (Qxe/p)

111 BSA Executive Board deferred any decision re: homosexual leaders until May 2013

Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at February 06, 2013 01:13 PM (Jcd0S)

112 >>>The reason I Went Big was because I knew instinctive the whole thing was built on a lie. But with all lies there is some truth. You weave your lie out of truth threads. And that was my mistake: attacking even the truth threads.

that's a good way to put it. Virtually everything Obama said was a lie: He didn't shoot skeet all the time, and he offered this lie to imply he was a 2nd amendment enthusiast (also a lie, though an implied one).

But, as you say, not every single possibility contained within those words is a lie.

Even the devil tells the truth sometimes, to make his lies sound more plausible.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:13 PM (LCRYB)

113
I usually just call Odictator a liar about everything and leave it at that.

As far as Romney leaving himself outs, it turned out it was the base he needed to turn out. So probably fail. On the 4th hand, the country has changed.

Therefore, lets just mock our dictator.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 06, 2013 01:13 PM (p/cQy)

114
Yet another post thinly disguised as a Get Ready for Christie pep-talk. 4 years. Fun.
Posted by: F. Nietzsche





#MakingLifeWork

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 06, 2013 01:13 PM (kdS6q)

115 92
So I guess we shouldn't say anything anymore?


No, but we can be smart about it, so as not to fall into the traps set by the Demedia.

Posted by: pep at February 06, 2013 01:14 PM (YXmuI)

116 Good one, Ace.

Posted by: Torgo at February 06, 2013 01:14 PM (t1NLo)

117 I don't think you understand. It doesn't matter what we say, Obama will get cover. Hell, they even cut away from his baseball bouncing into the mound to preserve his "dignity".

If we had said "yeah, I doubt he does that much" the media response would by "Evil Reguglikkans question Dear Leader's honesty because they're racist racists."

There's no winning the PR battle against Obama. He could kill a toddler on live television, and the headlines would read "Republicans Attack Obama Over Television Decency".

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 01:15 PM (wsGWu)

118 The most important lesson we needed to learn from 2012 is this: Nobody
knows nor gives a shit about 99% of the stuff we discuss here on AoS.


I do overhear an occasional conversation at work about ammunition.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at February 06, 2013 01:15 PM (ZKzrr)

119
Posted by: Torgo

Get back under the stairs.

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 01:15 PM (9Q7Nu)

120 I have fired a gun before. You have the proof right in front of you. So, now, you see how qualified I am to take away your gun rights. The MSM has my back on this.

Posted by: President Obama at February 06, 2013 01:15 PM (mjR67)

121 >>now the media is basically running with the story "Obama wins again; Obama told the truth."


So the media is shilling for Obama again. . .what else is new.

Because the media always carries his water, we're not supposed to call him on obvious BS?



Posted by: looking closely at February 06, 2013 01:15 PM (PwGfd)

122
Here's the thing.....

They lie. . . . and they lie when they dont need to. About little stuff.

I shoot skeet all the time.

Love Story was about me and Tipper.... and I invented the internet.

Yes..... but I didnt inhale.

I dodged sniper fire in Bosnia.

I was named after Sir Edmund Hillary (despite being born BEFORE he climbed Everest.)


.... and these are the SMART ones..... these arent Hank Johnson or Shelia Jackson comments...... these are lies designed to curry favor and enhance standing.

.... and the Stepford Media just goes along. Its infuriating.....




Posted by: fixerupper at February 06, 2013 01:15 PM (nELVU)

123 Argument over. There's now video proof of the president skeet shooting:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/d38joq

Posted by: Sgt. York at February 06, 2013 01:15 PM (jEvoA)

124 @104 Walter Duranty?
No....

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:15 PM (1V6Pv)

125 So I guess we shouldn't say anything anymore?

No, but we can be smart about it, so as not to fall into the traps set by the Demedia.


Posted by: pep at February 06, 2013 01:14 PM (YXmuI)

Nice in theory, but hard to counteract the media. I know, we have to be careful what we say, but fuck that... It doesn't matter anymore because everything said by anyone who doesn't worship at the feet of obama is getting skewered anyway...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at February 06, 2013 01:16 PM (9+ccr)

126 I am looking forward to a dirty breast thread on AoS

Posted by: art garfunkels ugly kid at February 06, 2013 01:16 PM (SwEEj)

127 I dont know that *we* made the he never did skeet argument.

Obama and his people LOVE to defeat straw men, they know the media will cheerlead them for it, and that oh btw people on the right will start to question the right on the whole thing.

Obama proved he did skeet. In our faces says Matt Lauer. But did Obama explain why he covered up for Menendez?

Posted by: blaster at February 06, 2013 01:16 PM (AGTQg)

128 I'm so conservative that I don't even believe Obama when he said his father was Kenyan.

He's lying. He's really half Chinese, half Japanese.

Also, 9 years old.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 06, 2013 01:16 PM (SY2Kh)

129 Ace,

So just out of curiosity should we have just let this one slide all together? Because I'm not seeing a winning strategy on this for us given your take away.

You say there wasn't enough "oomph" to the arguments that it's the "all the time" part that was focused on.
But yet, that's all I ever saw. Twitter, blogs, heck even on CNN Erin Burnett pointed out that was remarkably stupid that the president would try to pander to people in that way when it was obviously not true.

But then the photo gets released, the MFM and team Obama (BIRM) spin it as akin to the birther movement (which again, I'd argue it never was). And we start losing because we're accused of making arguments that never happened.

Strange game, the only way to win is not to play.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 01:16 PM (wGOqj)

130 As far as Ace's point--

The Titanic was sank by a glancing blow on the side that caused a slow leak by bolts being sprung.

Not by plates being ripped wide open.

Glancing blows. Glancing blows. If you can get the kill shot, take it. Otherwise, avoid, or glancing blows. Glancing blows.

Posted by: Hell on the Wabash at February 06, 2013 01:16 PM (RQiI5)

131 I don't know about others, but my reaction to Obama doing skeet "all the time" was that by "all the time" he means "give me until the end of the week to stage a photo shoot". I don't know what others were arguing, but I certainly "won" the argument in my circle.

Posted by: mugiwara at February 06, 2013 01:16 PM (qbFh9)

132
I do overhear an occasional conversation at work about ammunition.

And that's why I said 99%!

But that's a good example because people do know and feel the stuff that hits their wallet. Skeets, not so much.

Posted by: Soothsayer at February 06, 2013 01:17 PM (9Q7Nu)

133 There is no even playing field. The totalitarian left and the GOP lapdogs have co-opted the entire national media which dutifully twists every word to it's advantage.

Occasional logic and common sense breaking through is a filter failure.


Posted by: T. Hunter at February 06, 2013 01:17 PM (EZl54)

134 I guess when the president goes by an alias it's hard to believe what he says.

Posted by: eleven at February 06, 2013 01:17 PM (KXm42)

135 Didn't Obama commit the ultimate foul in all of this?


The-- "don't photoshop Obama warning--or else."

That should have been the take away by a fair and balanced press--but no one in the MSM is criticizing the Obama Administration on that point.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:17 PM (r2PLg)

136 We don't frame arguments and discussions; the MFM does


Whatever we say or do gets 'translated'; the MFM are the ones with those simultaneous translation' headphones ( like at the U,N, )

Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:17 PM (Dll6b)

137 Ace, if you're not ADVANCING, then you're RETREATING!!!!!!

/s

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at February 06, 2013 01:17 PM (YYJjz)

138 Sarah Palin said she can see Alaska from her house!!#$$@@!!!

Posted by: The Left at February 06, 2013 01:18 PM (NTBjC)

139 130 I'm so conservative that I don't even believe Obama when he said his father was Kenyan.

He's lying. He's really half Chinese, half Japanese.

Also, 9 years old.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 06, 2013 01:16 PM (SY2Kh)

--What's interesting is that one of his (half-)brothers actually lives in China.

Posted by: logprof at February 06, 2013 01:18 PM (mi1DY)

140 Obama COULD have been shooting skeet in the infamous picture. It's likely that his aim is as bad as his baseball pitches.

Mock Obama mercilessly; just don't stake out his nebulous skeet shooting claim as a hill to die upon.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at February 06, 2013 01:18 PM (1DpQI)

141 They can't help themselves.

It's as if Matt Lauer really expects people to forget 2001-2009.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 01:18 PM (LRFds)

142 140
Sarah Palin said she can see Alaska from her house!!#$$@@!!!


Posted by: The Left at February 06, 2013 01:18 PM (NTBjC)

Romney was a tax cheat, dog torturer, gay boy hair cutter, and a murderer of a sick woman...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at February 06, 2013 01:19 PM (9+ccr)

143 ...and a direct link to the released White House footage of the president skeet shooting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk47saogI8o

Posted by: Sgt. York at February 06, 2013 01:19 PM (jEvoA)

144 It seems that the only way to "win" is not to play.

Posted by: WOPR at February 06, 2013 01:19 PM (YmPwQ)

145 What is "Truth"?

Posted by: Pontius Pilate at February 06, 2013 01:20 PM (z3Lez)

146 And a lie, Mr. Mulder, is most convincingly hidden between two truths.

Posted by: Deep Throat at February 06, 2013 01:20 PM (ZKzrr)

147 Your point would be more believable if you could cite one Leftist lie that hurt the Left politically. Otherwise you are merely pointing out the double-standard.

If you know you're held to a higher standard, don't you try harder to avoid humiliation, and not try less?

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:20 PM (9KqcB)

148 Oh good, ergie's back from Siberia.

Posted by: logprof at February 06, 2013 01:20 PM (mi1DY)

149 Again, if Obama shoots skeet all the time, where is the video of him actually shooting skeet?

Even if he totally sucks at it, if he really did it "all the time" as he implied, he'd at least *occasionally* hit a clay, and his dutiful press corps could release a carefully edited video showing it.

But nope. What we have is a carefully posed image showing him firing a shotgun at something NOT an aerial clay target.

If the goal was to give his fawning press something to coo over, that's a "win" for him, but bluntly, that's a pretty low bar.

If his goal was to show sportsmen that he is one himself, that's a "fail".



Posted by: looking closely at February 06, 2013 01:21 PM (PwGfd)

150 Hop in the Tub and tell me all about our inadequacies, Ace.

Posted by: Ric Flair at February 06, 2013 01:21 PM (k49gO)

151 I will have to disagree with this one. Yes I admit some on the right make "us" look bad. Some make "us" look crazy. But there is no fucking way to mitigate that when the press is actually out to make that the dominant caricature of the entire right wing. We can sit around and whine all we want but at the end of the day if the American media can make a bunch of middle class protestors at tea parties out to be insane, and the OWS fucking raping car shitting lunatics out to be just normal people, there is no use fucking anyone back.

The results even if people followed your advice ace would be the same. Especially in a 300 million population country there is no way someone won't say something nutty that might reflect bad on you.

Posted by: Mr Pink at February 06, 2013 01:21 PM (JeZFX)

152 I smell cat piss

Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:21 PM (Dll6b)

153 When you're losing -- and we are losing, make no mistake -- you always have to make sure that your frustration at losing isn't further compromising your performance.

But you know, there's something to be said for ridicule.

Posted by: Saul Alinsky's Rotting Corpse in Hell at February 06, 2013 01:22 PM (tQHzJ)

154 Next, they'll tell us that Obama knows how to ride a horse. Well, the first lady does look accustomed to a saddle, so I guess the jury's out on that one.

Posted by: model_1066 at February 06, 2013 01:22 PM (7xPCu)

155 <<Again, if Obama shoots skeet all the time, where is the video of him actually shooting skeet?>>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk47saogI8o

Posted by: Sgt. York at February 06, 2013 01:22 PM (jEvoA)

156 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a malignant traitor.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 01:22 PM (8y9MW)

157 exactly. ace why don't you tweet Lauer with sarcastic response addressing this along with other lies and exagerrations of Obama. That is what you should be doing instead of analyzing and scolding the right

Why can't he do both?

It's not just this stupid issue. It's the whole concept of "we must Win Big, so push the Biggest, most expansive point we can think of." And it's not scolding. This is just tactical common sense.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:22 PM (9KqcB)

158 It's as if Matt Lauer really expects people to forget 2001-2009.

The Iraq Civil War still rages, you know.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 06, 2013 01:22 PM (EDjKF)

159 Wow, that's almost as long as one of Ace's movie reviews.

Posted by: Al at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (V70Uh)

160 If you ask me it's Obama who went too over the top and extreme with that photo shop warning.

It's creepy.

Next thing you know the Obama Administration will send out an edict outlawing cartoon drawings of--Obama.

Really is there much of a difference?

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (r2PLg)

161 Fucked we are. Commie scum Matt Lauer is.

Posted by: Yoda at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (XUKZU)

162 i just shat myself.

Posted by: ergmcmuffin at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (mi1DY)

163
Obama lies - **Crickets**

A single individual on the right overstates the facts - CNN/MSNBC Headline.

Posted by: The Problem at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (JalcS)

164 Attention Matt Lauer: HE LIES. HE ALWAYS LIES. LIARS ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE FACTUAL PROOF OF THEIR WORDS, ACTIONS AND PROMISES.


That is all.....

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (xmcEQ)

165 I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Posted by: Darth Barry at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (Vk2pI)

166 I'm confused ( again ): I thought the ridicule of Skeet Obama was that he was grossly exaggerating, and only maybe shot skeet--or shot a gun--once or twice for photo-ops.

Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (Dll6b)

167 ......there is no way someone won't say something nutty that might reflect bad on you.

Posted by: Mr Pink at February 06, 2013 01:21 PM (JeZFX)

----
Heck.... even if no one said something something "nutty" on our side..... they'll just make shit up to fit the narrative.

Posted by: fixerupper at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (nELVU)

168 Obama tells the truth all the time!

Posted by: Matt Lauer at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (FcR7P)

169 But where Romney saw a very smart way to put himself in the best position to win over a range of possible late-election-cycle scenarios, many conservatives saw betrayal.


Romney lost. Romney lost huge. Romney got his ass handed to him. Romney got his head put on a pike. I will modestly suggest that using Romney's strategy of an example of a smart thing to do is not particularly helpful to the points that you are attempting to make.


That being said, I will suggest that part of the frustration is that Republicans on the national stage are pretty much making no arguments at all. We're back to screaming at each other for somebody to do something, anything, for the love of God Almighty stop standing there and taking it.

Let us also factor into this equation that the other side can accuse of wanting to take food out of the mouths of babies, of wanting to push the elderly off cliffs, of being racists and of being a millisecond away from engaging in a mass killing spree with no need for any type of support and with no shame, at all, about making those statements. Of course some of us on the Right are frustrated because it is utterly frustrating. The strong form arguments are being advanced because why the fuck not? Since the statements from the Right will be misconstrued utterly by the MFM, why not just say it?


Which is not to say that you do not have excellent points. Make the strongest argument you can based off the information available. My dispute is with a contention that the Right is now in a position to have such statements reflected accurately. For pity's sake, look at Hillary and the Benghazi hearings. She actually got away with shrieking what difference does it make in a hearing that was supposed to determine what happened with what should be the obvious underlying goal of making sure it never happened again. What got the headlines in an approving manner? Hillary's statement, a statement which, in a rational world, should have led to calls for her to be fired immediately no matter that she had already resigned. Instead we were treated to glowing approbation of how she put the committee in its place. We are in a post-modern press world where actual words are meaningless.

I'm sorry, but I cannot believe that honing questions and statements to a razor's edge will make a whit of difference.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at February 06, 2013 01:23 PM (VtjlW)

170 >>>I dont know that *we* made the he never did skeet argument.

I would concede that; "we" didn't.

But I also note something else: When this photo was released, many of us acted like "we" made that argument. People started questioning the photo as if its existence were impossible and we only needed to find the ways in which it was faked.

The proper response to it was, "So what? We never said you never touched a gun. We said you lied when you attempted to manipulate public opinion by saying 'we do skeet shooting all the time.'"

But we didn't say that. We went Birther.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (LCRYB)

171 So like releasing the birth certificate a year or so ago, this is the next step, that now the President always has to back up his words with proof?"

Hey, Matty! If your beloved Preezy wasn't a lying fuckweasel who couldn't tell the truth if you paid him to, he WOULDN'T have to give us proof. But only an idiot trusts a liar's word, and despite being stupid enough to re-elect him, not everyone in this country is an idiot.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (4df7R)

172 @125 "Dropped like a stone."
Not to start a flame war or anything, but boxlock or sidelock: which is better?

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (1V6Pv)

173 150 CJ,

Me?

I'd file for divorce or get the fuck away from the "standard maker" you?

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (LRFds)

174 I don't think conservatives harp on the stupid trivialities in the argument as much as the media presents.

The media gins up " Waaah Conservatives say Mooch has a Fat ass" and gets mileage out of pumping up that meme to the HBB/LIVs who drink it up like green trailer-park koolaid bought with EBT cards.


No real argument is ever heard after the false allegation fuse is lit and the furor ignites much subsequent crying and teeth gnashing of ignorant retards .


Posted by: T. Hunter at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (EZl54)

175 We're not held to a higher standard, CJ, we're held to an impossible standard. Even our silence is attacked as racist/,obstructionist/h8!!

Regardless of what we actually say or do, the media will be there flailing at a straw version.

The only weapon we have is open, merciless mockery. The photo shops were great.

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (wsGWu)

176 155
"I smell cat piss"


Why do people keep telling me that?

Posted by: Barry Soetoro at February 06, 2013 01:25 PM (z3Lez)

177 "Where were you when Obama released his skeet picture?"

In the library, with a candlestick.

Posted by: Colonel Mustard DSO, KBE at February 06, 2013 01:25 PM (sbV1u)

178 Bush served a plastic turkey to the troops in Iraq!!!#$##$@

Posted by: The Left at February 06, 2013 01:25 PM (NTBjC)

179 Instead, we put our chips on the proposition that he never shot skeet at all, not once, not ever,

Who is "we?"

Everything I heard from conservatives was "If he really shoots skeet all the time, why haven't we heard about it before? Why aren't there photos?"

Yes, some people said, "Frankly, I'd be surprised if he'd ever done it at all- but certainly if he does it all the time I would expect there to be photos."

Now, maybe I missed someone, somewhere, who categorically stated that he'd never done it. That's possible.

What's more likely, though, is that the Media- as they are wont to do- simply ignored that important qualifier and ran the story as though we were claiming he'd never done it.

Put another way- no, we'll never have a "rhetorical slam dunk," because the Media gets to pick and choose which words to report- or at least which words are "important."

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 01:25 PM (8y9MW)

180 Again, if Obama shoots skeet all the time, where is the video of him actually shooting skeet?

Who gives a flying fuck?

Do you know a single person who would hinge their support for Obama's desired gun ban based on how often he's gone skeet shooting, or whether he lied and/or exaggerated about it?

Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 06, 2013 01:25 PM (SY2Kh)

181 Yeah but it's not like he has to back up anything with you know, proof-proof...

Posted by: Whoopie Goldbergs va-jaja at February 06, 2013 01:25 PM (GQ72I)

182 Too often Conservative critics let the Matt Lauers of the MSM paint the target.

The grosser mistake was Team Obama.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:26 PM (r2PLg)

183 >>>I'm sorry, but I cannot believe that honing questions and statements to a razor's edge will make a whit of difference.

I would say this: God grant me the strength to change the things I can change, the endurance to abide those things I can't, and the wisdom to always tell the difference.

A football team cannot control how good its opponent is. It cannot control the bias of the referees.

All a team can do is improve its own performance and hope that will be enough.

As for Romney--

Either way, denying that the BLS figured showed a barely growing economy was NOT the way to go.


Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:26 PM (LCRYB)

184 Again, if Obama shoots skeet all the time, where is the video of him actually shooting skeet?

Mock it, yes. Do this kind of crap, no. The whole gun thing is a SQUIRREL moment anyway.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 06, 2013 01:26 PM (EDjKF)

185 Why can't he do both? It's not just this stupid issue. It's the whole concept of "we must Win Big, so push the Biggest, most expansive point we can think of." And it's not scolding. This is just tactical common sense.
Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:22 PM (9KqcB)

Yes , I agree he can and should do both. I just haven't seen where it was the Right that framed the issue as Obama never shot skeet ever. I always saw it framed around Obama's statement that 'we shoot skeet all the time'. I agree the right sometimes does as ace points out, but in this case I think it was the media and the White House who took the issue and turned it to all or nothing.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 01:26 PM (m2CN7)

186 Oh and, Michelle has a fine azz! It's true.

What?

Posted by: Barry Soetoro at February 06, 2013 01:27 PM (z3Lez)

187
#29 #30,
Spot on analysis. Ace's analysis, OTOH, not so much (or Ace spends too much time on social media)

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 01:27 PM (lbiWb)

188 I was out of the loop. I thought we were making fun of the fact that mom jeans rarely did it.

Posted by: Tilikum the Killer Assault Whale at February 06, 2013 01:27 PM (uhftQ)

189 I'm offended by this whole conversation. I skeet every night

Posted by: President Obama at February 06, 2013 01:27 PM (60GaT)

190 Thank you AtC, you said it much more eloquently than me.

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 01:27 PM (wsGWu)

191 But I also note something else: When this photo was
released, many of us acted like "we" made that argument. People started
questioning the photo as if its existence were impossible and we only
needed to find the ways in which it was faked.



The proper response to it was, "So what? We never said you never
touched a gun. We said you lied when you attempted to manipulate public
opinion by saying 'we do skeet shooting all the time.'"



But we didn't say that. We went Birther.





Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (LCRYB)

I don't recall that. I recall people saying "based on this picture we can tell he doesn't hold guns all that often."I recall people saying "well he's clearly not shooting skeet."And I recall a lot of mockery over the "don't photoshop this picture."Mostly I recall the later. The two former were mostly in the context of "you don't do it all the time, this picture doesn't prove you 'get' skeet shooters or gun owners."

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (wGOqj)

192 The other thing is to make sure you know what you are trying to do with each attempt, what you hope to gain, what will be achieved--not just make an attack because trench warfare rages and attacks must be made.

Sometimes it is to make a kill when the attack was made and the opponent opened himself. Sometimes it is to foreclose paths the foe has used before, in ways not expected. Sometimes it is to show the middle what needs to be shown. And sometimes it is to throw a shot across the bow. Or into the bow. As warnings.

Posted by: Hell on the Wabash at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (RQiI5)

193 yeah, what the AllenG guy with the blog said


in the conservatory, with the knife, and Professor Plum

Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (Dll6b)

194
Next, they'll tell us that Obama knows how to ride a horse. Well, the first lady does look accustomed to a saddle, so I guess the jury's out on that one.

You don't need a saddle. Just a crate.

Posted by: Zombie Mendoza at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (ecXQ6)

195 President Michael Jackson is the finest product of the Commie-fag-junkie Complex to date. (Granted, we can't buy Soylent Green, yet.)
"Mr. President, will you provide a blood sample to prove you're not a space alien."
http://preview.tinyurl.com/b52c9oc

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (1V6Pv)

196 OT/

Hello,

I wanted to point out that the headline link in the "Wednesday Morning Link Dump" about the Baltimore stabbing has some innacuracies:

Link Headline: "A Man Was Stabbed To Death At Baltimore Super Bowl Parade"

The crime happened several blocks away from the parade route and there is no indication it was related to the victory parade. At the time of the altercation, 1:40, the parade had ended and the crowds were inside the stadium.

Also, the victim was not a man but rather a 15 years old kid.

Posted by: Serious Cat at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (UypUQ)

197 Ace, while I agree with your overall position, I must take issue with your assertion that we're playing into Obama's hands, and losing.

To begin with, I think you're focusing too much on the short game by concerning yourself with what David Poof, et al, are saying about our reactions to Fearful Leader's almost daily demonstrations of his ineptness. I could frankly give a shit about what any of those buffoons say, given that despite the yeoman's work the MSM put in in assuring his re-election, the SCOAMF didn't achieve anything close to the result he and the rest of his cock holsters had hoped for.

What that tells me is that it won't be the most vociferous or rhetorically clumsy among us who hurts us, but Barry himself, and that the colossal prick cannot nor will not be stopped until either he and the wookie board Marine One for the last time, or are removed from office for cause. The MSM, despite the occasional monkey who happens to pen the next Hamlet, isn't going to help, and while I have great respect for you and those who agree with you, I simply cannot bring myself to refrain from following the progtard's lead in hounding these clowns each and every time they step on their collective dicks.

No. I won't do it. We put up with more than a decade of their shit, and I'm far too talented (and, frankly, sick to f*cking death) of trying to play to the small percentage of idiots in this republic who only bookmark eBay, Amazon and Rachel Ray.

In the end, they're going to prove to be their own undoing. Tis always been the way with those for whom the end justifies the means, and twill be here. The difference between we here in 2013 and the tens of millions in world history who found themselves destroyed for want of a justification for their existence (or whose last names ended in -berg or -stein, etc) is that we have the power of access to information. And guns. Lots of guns.

In short, fuck 'em. Let. It. Burn.

Posted by: My Sharia Moor at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (liORJ)

198 Lying liars lie. Lying liars cover for other lying liars.

Non liars who expect accountability for telling lies?

Racists.


Easy peasy

Posted by: T. Hunter at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (EZl54)

199 This is why I find complaints about media bias in a post like this off-topic.

Yes, the media is extremely biased. Sold! You don't have to convince me.

But the media will continue to be very biased. That will not change (absent, say, a crippling boycott of NBC that puts the fear of God into other networks).

Although it's important to point out the flaws in one's opponent, it's more important to note one's own mistakes-- not to castigate oneself, but to improve performance.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (LCRYB)

200 how do you get faeces out of a keyboard?

Posted by: ergalicious at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (mi1DY)

201 #183

I agree, though clearly Obama thought this issue was important enough to

a. Lie about routinely shooting skeet, then
b. Support his lie with a stock image of him firing a shotgun (at god only knows what).

Again, Matt Lauer may be beside himself because someone called out his boyfriend for laying, but frankly I don't see how Obama was the winner of this "exchange".

Posted by: looking closely at February 06, 2013 01:29 PM (6Q9g2)

202 These trivial, bullshit sideshows are what normal people eschew when determining the fitness of the top dog. But let's challenge Obama to field strip an AR-15 on live television for kicks!

Posted by: model_1066 at February 06, 2013 01:29 PM (7xPCu)

203 yeah, what the AllenG guy with the blog said

----


Allen has a blog???

Posted by: fixerupper at February 06, 2013 01:29 PM (nELVU)

204 Vladimir Putin does far more convincing photo-ops. Why do we need to be satisfied with the lame shit Obama puts out?

Posted by: The Skeets at February 06, 2013 01:30 PM (J6hHs)

205 :::46 >>>Its painfully obvious to anyone who is a shooter, that Obama is not.

yes... but when the argument has turned from that into whether he ever fired a gun in his life, we lose on that point.
Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:04 PM (LCRYB):::

Who is it that is making these claims? He's black. Of COURSE he's fired a gun before.

Wocka-Wocka!

No, but seriously. This is like the time John Kerry gave some bizarre recounting of his practices of hunting deer:

"I go out with my trusty 12-gauge double barrel, crawl around on my stomach. I track and move and decoy and play games and try to outsmart them. Just like I did with Victor Charlie, motherfucker."

And to "prove" his obvious bullshit claim, he releases a picture of himself in blaze orange, looking like the awkward retard that he is.

The skeet picture is of a piece with that. No winners, no losers. People inclined to dislike Obama get another confirmatory point, and his fawning worshippers get to say "See? SEE?! He totally shootzes TEH assault riflez!!11!!1!"

Nothing to see here.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 06, 2013 01:30 PM (BushJ)

206 what I--me myself--said was that his Mighty Expensive Gun was being fired at a very low arc. My and myself then implied that was consistent with aiming at a target low to the ground


what you learn in the infantry stays with you, all your live-long days...

Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:30 PM (Dll6b)

207
My first reaction to this wasn't that he's never, ever shot a poor, defenseless skeet before, it was that I knew it was bullshit. As you mention, if he was a gun guy, we'd already know it as part of his political image.

I'm sure that this was pretty much everybody else's reaction too. It was just another lie in a very long history of lies that we're just expected to believe as though we're some kind of idiots who blindly believe everything we're told.

This sounds like a bit of over-analysis, much like you find in a courtroom where every single word must be parsed, turned over, and examined. And I still can't think of anyone who said TFG had never fired a gun. With the amount of guns around, many people have the opportunity to pull a trigger occasionally. Look at all the accounts of Leftards who mention they went to a range and shot and said that guns are all bangy and they didn't like it.

I'm inclined to believe that we've been set up by the MFM again. They were the ones who said we said TFG "never, ever, never" shot a firearm, not us. Don't forget, they're the ones who think and act like children. That sort of small leap is what I'd expect from them. And I'm not disappointed often.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 06, 2013 01:30 PM (+z4pE)

208 Ace , this is just the strawman "fact check!" routine from media.

Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 06, 2013 01:30 PM (AWmfW)

209
When you're losing -- and we are losing, make no mistake -- you always have to make sure that your frustration at losing isn't further compromising your performance.


OK, but to me this applies just as much if not moreso than Obama releasing a photo of himself acting all manly with a gun (and failing miserably, I might add.)

He's losing the gun control debate. Badly. The AWB is going nowhere, even dumb shit like magazine limits and background checks will be very watered down in the Senate due to the amendment process, and it's not likely they'll go anywhere in the House at any rate. So Obama gets frustrated and tries to burnish his 2A cred by talking about how he "does skeet all the time." Error #1, since no one believed that he shot "all the time" (and this was the dominant meme I noticed when he made the claim.

Then he doubled down on stupid by releasing a photo of him shooting like a nancy-boy at something that is *not* skeet (which is obvious to people who have actually done it, admittedly not a huge chunk of people out there...). Just showing a clod with a shotgun doesn't mean he's shooting skeet, and you can tell from his stance that this is probably one of a handful of times he's actually ever held a gun in his life. So error #2, showing to the informed that he's full of shit.

Of course the media was going to run cover for him, they always do. But that's not the point here, the point is that Obama got defensive enough to release that dumb picture and try to make a meme out of it. What he actually did was show he's utterly clueless about the whole thing, especially since that's probably the best picture he could find (which isn't even slightly flattering).

I don't think we should go full monty and demand video or whatever, since to my mind we already won the argument - Obama doesn't shoot skeet all the time, probably never, and he's defensive enough to try and pretend that he does.

Posted by: @JohnTant at February 06, 2013 01:30 PM (tVWQB)

210 But we didn't say that. We went Birther.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (LCRYB)
__________________

And when the Obama Admin said--

"don't photoshop Obama or else" they went Dictator.

I think the dictator rhetoric is a little more dangerous to everyone than "Birther".

Also you would think the press would be a little more on the alert for incursions on--free speech.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:30 PM (r2PLg)

211 Ther referee is just biased, he's taking a pipe to our QB's legs every chance he gets, trips up our linebackers, and gives us 15 yard penalties if we compain about it. But, soldier on, fellas.

Posted by: Jim Harbaugh at February 06, 2013 01:31 PM (YmPwQ)

212 sorry Ace, but all we have is a picture of your hero apparently holding a shotgun.

he's holding it wrong, and there is some significant doubt that it's even in use, as the smoke patterns are wrong, excessive and of a strange color, compared to what those of us who do skeet "all the time" are used to.

there is no sign of recoil forces, which ought to be there, and he's not going to hit shit with that sight line. in short, my wife could give the First Pussy lessons on the subject, yet you are ready to throw in the towel and declare our SCOMF match champion.

sorry, but there aren't any trophies for Most Congenial in competition shooting.

Posted by: redc1c4 at February 06, 2013 01:31 PM (8MasJ)

213 Ace--

I'll see your--

"We went Birther"-

and raise you a--

"They went Dictator".

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:31 PM (r2PLg)

214 >>>Yes, some people said, "Frankly, I'd be surprised if he'd ever done it at all- but certainly if he does it all the time I would expect there to be photos."

well as I conceded above I thought we were making a more limited claim... until this photo was released, and we (collectively) began reacting as if it rebutted our claim, claiming the photo must be fake and such.

hell it's going on right here in this thread.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:31 PM (LCRYB)

215 I'm not complaining about media bias--that's like complaining about getting old


I'm just noting that I'm aware of it; it's there, and It matters

Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:32 PM (Dll6b)

216 >>>sorry Ace, but all we have is a picture of your hero apparently holding a shotgun.

he's holding it wrong, and there is some significant doubt that it's even in use, as the smoke patterns are wrong, excessive and of a strange color, compared to what those of us who do skeet "all the time" are used to.

there is no sign of recoil forces, which ought to be there, and he's not going to hit shit with that sight line. in short, my wife could give the First Pussy lessons on the subject, yet you are ready to throw in the towel and declare our SCOMF match champion.

...

There you go.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:32 PM (LCRYB)

217 Mizz Lauer is clutching her pearls and fanning herself, must be Wednesday.

Posted by: gigg at February 06, 2013 01:32 PM (41VCE)

218 there are chromatic aberrations in the smoke, yes-yes?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:32 PM (LCRYB)

219 I agree, though clearly Obama thought this issue was important enough to

a. Lie about routinely shooting skeet, then
b. Support his lie with a stock image of him firing a shotgun (at god only knows what).


Only if by "this issue" you mean "trying to make Republicans look stupid".

And Republicans helping.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 06, 2013 01:33 PM (SY2Kh)

220 I think the reason that the right jumps on these things is because TFG lies. He isn't as bad as Biden, with his "I've been on every important committee in Congress for 83 years" crap, but he lies.

He lied in Congress, he lied on the campaign trail, now he's lying in office. Make him prove everything. I don't care. SHOW him for the liar he is.

As for the picture, I think it's pretty obvious that he's not shooting skeet there, but that's just my opinion. I don't know that I ever saw a pic of GWB at Camp David shooting, but there wasn't a question and he was touting to the world that he did it all the time.

TFG is a liar and should be held to task EVERY. FUCKING. TIME.


Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 01:33 PM (xmcEQ)

221 I have a crazy idea for the GOP:

What if all our future candidates called out the media for the lying whore-bitch sacks of Democrat propaganda sluts that they truly are?

You know, actually declare the lying media scumbags the eternal enemy of truth and just keep smacking them across the face with a rhetorical wet-dick.




Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 01:33 PM (z3Lez)

222
Although it's important to point out the flaws in one's opponent, it's more important to note one's own mistakes-- not to castigate oneself, but to improve performance.

Here you are wrong, Ace.

Name the leader on the right who made these claims. You can't. It didn't happen.
The media is covering for Obama's lie by picking the absurdist out of the herd. The Referees are the media. You can't have this discussion without accepting, as fact, that the only rules in the game are fixed against the opposition.

Posted by: garrett at February 06, 2013 01:33 PM (ecXQ6)

223 :::215 sorry Ace, but all we have is a picture of your hero apparently holding a shotgun.

he's holding it wrong, and there is some significant doubt that it's even in use, as the smoke patterns are wrong, excessive and of a strange color, compared to what those of us who do skeet "all the time" are used to.

there is no sign of recoil forces, which ought to be there, and he's not going to hit shit with that sight line. in short, my wife could give the First Pussy lessons on the subject, yet you are ready to throw in the towel and declare our SCOMF match champion.

sorry, but there aren't any trophies for Most Congenial in competition shooting.
Posted by: redc1c4 at February 06, 2013 01:31 PM (8MasJ):::

The chromatic aberrations! TELL HIM ABOUT THE CHROMATIC ABERRATIONS!

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 06, 2013 01:33 PM (BushJ)

224 >>>I'm just noting that I'm aware of it; it's there, and It matters

of course it matters. But when you're in an abusive relationship your best bet is to change your own behavior (leave) and not so much to hold out hope that your quite-reasonable complaints will cause a change in the behavior of the other.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (LCRYB)

225 Look what happens.

1. We are teetering on the precipice of national disaster due to our debt and entitlement promises. This is the central political question of the era, and one that Obama has no answer for.

2. Instead we are distracted by a monthlong debate about guns. To be sure, Newtown happened, and it would have been news. But it was seized on by Obama precisely because it was a distraction he could use to bash Republicans as gun-nuts.

3. Even so, Obama was losing the gun argumentbecause his proposals self-evidently wouldn't have accomplished anything to stop a Newtown from happening and everyone knows it.

4. Now we have a distraction within a distraction with the "skeet shooting" kerfuffle.

Debt, debt, debt. We are skeet shooting while Rome burns.

Posted by: The Regular Guy at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (qHCyt)

226 I'm all skeeted out.

Posted by: eleven at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (KXm42)

227 I have a crazy idea for the GOP:What if all our future candidates called out the media for the lying whore-bitch sacks of Democrat propaganda sluts that they truly are?

*GASP!* But that would alienate moderates!!

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (4df7R)

228 I love it when Kal says, "Pull!"

Posted by: President Odorko at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (mi1DY)

229 Damn, ace. Way to step on my shit.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (BushJ)

230 But we didn't say that. We went Birther.


Again, who is this mythical "we?"

Once again, I did hear some people voicing concerns (mostly because of the smoke coming from the side of the barrel, and the fact the gun doesn't look like many people's conception of a shotgun) that the photo was (at minimum) faked, and at worst, photo-shopped.

But those were actually much fewer than the ones I heard explaining that staged != faked, and that, yes, that was a real gun (I've heard the model somewhere, but I don't remember it) and it had a ported barrel allowing the smoke to escape from the side (or possibly top) to help fight recoil.

That is: the VAST majority of the Right did say, "Okay, so what? All you've now proven is he has, at some point in his life, picked up a long gun of some variety and fired it down range. How does that translate into 'shooting skeet all the time.?'"

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (8y9MW)

231 "conservatives tend to put themselves in the worst possible position rhetorically"

Why do you presume they are conservatives?

Instead, we put our chips on the proposition that he never shot skeet at all, not once, not ever

Not true, not 'we', not me.


Instead of pushing the attack that was most difficult for Obama to falsify, we pushed the attack that was most easy for Obama to falsify.

And I do not think this was an accident.

Not an accident? So it was deliberate? Why would a 'conservative' attempt to advance a straw man argument that would be so easy to refute? Ah, right, conservatives are stupid. End of argument.

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (an6hv)

232

he's holding it wrong, and there is some significant doubt that it's even in use, as the smoke patterns are wrong, excessive and of a strange color, compared to what those of us who do skeet "all the time" are used to.


OK. If this guy was a Senator, or the head of the RNC, I would concede.

Posted by: garrett at February 06, 2013 01:35 PM (ecXQ6)

233 Okay I guess you are going to stay in the field of play that Matt Lauer painted for you.

Don't cross the 50 yard line --or else.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:35 PM (r2PLg)

234 " (voice crying in the dessert, specifically pudding

Voice?! You're not dipping correctly.

Posted by: bebe's boobs destroy at February 06, 2013 01:35 PM (hMqzS)

235 I taught Barry how to hold my "gun".

Looks like he never forgot that lesson of manly love.



*fap fap fap*

Posted by: Frank Marshall Davis' Corpse at February 06, 2013 01:35 PM (z3Lez)

236 What do you mean 'we', White man?????

Posted by: Tonto ( to the Lone Ranger ) at February 06, 2013 01:35 PM (Dll6b)

237 My Sharia Moor not only has a very cogent point, and an excellent handle, every time he posts I get that damn Stevie Wonder song stuck in my head for days.

Posted by: Dam Sockpuppet at February 06, 2013 01:35 PM (YmPwQ)

238
Now that I've read the whole post ;-).

This has always bothered me -- the knew jerk reaction.

IMHO, every response should be a well thought out one, with a direct connection to one of TFG's policies or actions.

We need to always have a cheat sheet on hand of what to pound O on.

They do it. What's their cheat sheet?
- racism
- war on women
- abortion
- tea party trashing
- religious fanatics
- gun fanatics
- ...and so on...

They directly attach a negative connotation (in their case with social issues as well as policy and events) to the evil conservative.

That is why the "photoshopped" image of King O shooting the Constitution was more powerful than one in rainbow colors. Rainbow colors is funny and schticky, but it gives them a full blown opening for yet another of their cheat sheet checklist items: conservatives hate gays.

Posted by: beachgoyle at February 06, 2013 01:36 PM (LpQbZ)

239 @221 residuum of choom, like most of his emissions.

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:36 PM (1V6Pv)

240 This is why I find complaints about media bias in a post like this off-topic.



Yes, the media is extremely biased. Sold! You don't have to convince me.



But the media will continue to be very biased. That will not change
(absent, say, a crippling boycott of NBC that puts the fear of God into
other networks).



Although it's important to point out the flaws in one's opponent,
it's more important to note one's own mistakes-- not to castigate
oneself, but to improve performance.





Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (LCRYB)

OK agreed, but I'm still not sure what the mistake was other than engaging the issue in it's entirety knowing it was a losing issue OR not knowing it was going to be a losing issue in the first place.Past that I'm really not seeing the mistakes your claiming outside the fringe Alex Jones style crazy conspiracy nuts.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 01:36 PM (wGOqj)

241 Nice hash EOJ.

You in the Platinum club?

Do an ampersand.

Posted by: eleven at February 06, 2013 01:36 PM (KXm42)

242 But the media will continue to be very biased... it's more important to note one's own mistakes

Do you envision a scenario in which we improve our performance while ignoring the media's bias? I see this as making sure the Titanic's deck chairs are in tidy little rows. Screw the damned chairs and get to a lifeboat (a better one than Fox).

Posted by: t-bird at February 06, 2013 01:36 PM (FcR7P)

243
*knee jerk

Posted by: beachgoyle at February 06, 2013 01:36 PM (LpQbZ)

244 A candidate who wanted to win some shit would have latched onto the "economy is growing" trick as an opportunity to decouple "GDP" and "The Economy" in the public mind, by, say, briefly summarizing what's included in GDP (which people don't know), noting its irrelevance to the people's actual standard(s) of living, and contrasting it with The Economy, the sum/set of free exchanges among the citizenry--which sum/set is in fact massively down, as almost every citizen's lying eyes (and the not-a-load-of-shit portions of GDP calculations) say.

But Romney's not smart. He's "smart," like a shirt.

Posted by: oblig. at February 06, 2013 01:37 PM (cePv8)

245 the pic was only waist up. nobody saw the pee stains
Posted by: Bigby's Cold Dead Hands
***

I just peed my tank laughing!

Posted by: Tilikum the Killer Assault Whale at February 06, 2013 01:37 PM (uhftQ)

246 Saying "whatever, it looks like a staged photo" isn't "zomg ,birther!!11!"

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 01:37 PM (wsGWu)

247 >>>The media is covering for Obama's lie by picking the absurdist out of the herd.

well that is true. In fact I wanted to do a post about this, Apples and Oranges -- they only quote official Democrats and thinkers for the "Democrat position," but they ignore our official thinkers and politicians and go to internet comment areas for the "conservative position."

And I do realize it's absurd to say something like 'Not a one of us can ever say anything weird or provocative, ever."

But I don't think it's *just* the crazies doing this. I think otherwise smart and reasonable people are doing it. I know, because I've heard them start making down-the-rabbit-hole arguments.

I do think that what I'm talking about, our strong preference for the Strongest Possible Form of an Argument (and usually the rhetorically weakest) is damaging us.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:37 PM (LCRYB)

248 Not surprising that people go " Birther" when the Free Press sell every Obama turd like it's filet mignon.

Conclusions may be off and/or wacky but they are trying to figure out the facts that the press won't give them.

Should they shut up and nod?

Posted by: T. Hunter at February 06, 2013 01:37 PM (EZl54)

249 I have a crazy idea for the GOP:

What if all
our future candidates called out the media for the lying whore-bitch
sacks of Democrat propaganda sluts that they truly are?

You know,
actually declare the lying media scumbags the eternal enemy of truth
and just keep smacking them across the face with a rhetorical wet-dick.






Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 01:33 PM (z3Lez)


That won't work because they will be called whiners. When you have 85% of the media against you, you're just straight up fucked. That's why we're in the state we're in as a country now.

The left is winning the war, and HELL YES Breitbart was right. It IS a war, and they're winning.

Ace had mentioned in the past that the right needed to buy up some media outlets and start pressing, but it will never happen because other than the cash amount, who wants to be under the vile and hate fest that is the Koch family?

That's where it comes down to. They fight guerrilla warfare, and we're still all Geneva Convention n shit.

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 01:37 PM (xmcEQ)

250 230
"GASP!* But that would alienate moderates!!"


Yeah.

Terrible, ain't it.



Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 01:38 PM (z3Lez)

251 Talk all you want about how bad the economy is--the MFM won't


hence, there is almost no awareness of how bad the economy is.


The only thing worse than being f*cked is being f*cked while not knowing you're being f*cked

Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:38 PM (Dll6b)

252 >>>Allen has a blog???

AllenGofSpades HQ

Posted by: No Feet Johnson at February 06, 2013 01:38 PM (KHo8t)

253 Lets talk endlessly about ammo and ammo related accessories, tools and prices.

This never comes off as slightly crazy.

tags: Sand Point, Idaho

Posted by: 13times at February 06, 2013 01:38 PM (h6XiD)

254 Hey,

At least with the "He Ate a Dog" charge that is 100% factually correct with the singular, only known instance of dog eating. We got that one right.

Posted by: Serious Cat at February 06, 2013 01:38 PM (UypUQ)

255 but I'm still not sure what the mistake was other than engaging the issue in it's entirety knowing it was a losing issue

The frustrating thing is that every issue is a losing issue.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at February 06, 2013 01:38 PM (ZKzrr)

256 258
but I'm still not sure what the mistake was other than engaging the issue in it's entirety knowing it was a losing issue

The frustrating thing is that every issue is a losing issue.


Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at February 06, 2013 01:38 PM
What she said...



Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at February 06, 2013 01:39 PM (9+ccr)

257 He's simply using misdirection, grow a conspiracy, then watch it burn. If birthergate taught us anything there are a lot of people out there who will run with the smallest stupidest shit. I don't care about a birth certificate, I care about his policies. I don't care if he's ever shot skeet before, I care he knows nothing about gun rights. He knows there are a lot of paranoid people out there, and he's taking advantage of it. BTW they said don't photoshop it, why are conservatives NOT Photoshopping it for shits and giggles have we lost our comedic edge. If we've got to the point when were more angry at him than making fun of him we've already lost.

Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at February 06, 2013 01:39 PM (NzBQO)

258 I just peed my tank laughing!

Posted by: Tilikum the Killer Assault Whale at February 06, 2013 01:37 PM (uhftQ)


i piss myself all the time laughing at you evangelical knuckleheads

Posted by: ergie at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (mi1DY)

259 I don't think we should go full monty and demand
video or whatever, since to my mind we already won the argument - Obama
doesn't shoot skeet all the time, probably never, and he's defensive
enough to try and pretend that he does. Posted by: @JohnTant at February 06, 2013 01:30 PM (tVWQB)

To what end, approved pictures of the perfect little metrosexual, Obama, were released of him wearing Mom jeans and a helmet while riding a girl's bicycle and no one cared. A photo was released of him unable to figure out how to get the umbrella he was holding over Mooch's head through a gate, while she looked just as confused, and no one cared. He is a fraud with so many flaws and so many lies in his life, but no one cared. The battle with him and over him was lost. We need to figure out how to brand and sell Conservatism for 2014 and beyond.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (kXoT0)

260 There you go.


----

I hear what your saying Ace..... but ONE post out of 215 does not a meme make.

To be honest..... on the skeet thingy..... I actually thought we won the argument.... that Obama is a poser..... he looks fuckin stupid shooting the gun with bad form and Stevie Wonder shooting glasses.

Friend of the sportsman indeed. <<spit>>


We legitimately get our asses kicked on a lot of stuff lately. I would only further postulate we (collectively) look for the ass kicking when it really isnt there.

Skeet-gate is one those instances.

Posted by: fixerupper at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (nELVU)

261 Okay, I must be a little m moron, but what the fuck does Zero having shot a shotgun have to do with taking away my fucking rights under the second ammendment?

Posted by: Invictus at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (OQpzc)

262 Although it's important to point out the flaws in one's opponent, it's more important to note one's own mistakes-- not to castigate oneself, but to improve performance.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:28 PM (LCRYB)

__________________

Good point--that's the only thing we have control over.

Still Republican critics could plow their own fields instead of following the MSM by constantly reacting to their cues.

When you do that--they keep control.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (r2PLg)

263 The fact still remains that BOTH birth certificates released by Obama are forgeries. I don't know where he was born, but I know that those are not his birth certificates.
And for those that are skeptics? Come visit me and I will SHOW you why they are forgeries. It only takes a few moments. (And it isn't from the stuff displayed all over about the stupid layers on the second Birth certificate, it is much more fundamental then that.)
As for the recently released shot of Obama holding a smoking shotgun in his hands. That photo is NOT a fake, or at the least we can not tell it is a fake. However, from the positon of the shotgun and how he is holding it - he hurt himself when he fired it, which probably means it was the first time he ever fired it.
And yes, I have shot skeet a few times (and even hit about half of them) and used to be onrifle and pistolteams. (Qualified Expert with an M16 back in the day).

Posted by: Mycrfot at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (MtA8f)

264 I will give the president this: he appears to operate a shotgun more competently than an umbrella. Or a ladies' bicycle.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (BushJ)

265 YES YES YES YES YES YES.......

We should have said, now the president authorizes drone strikes that kill children ALL THE TIME...

shooting skeet probably not so much. but thanks for the photos!!!

Can we see the photos in the "decision room" every time a drone strike is launched!!! hahahaha.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (tVTLU)

266 252 "That won't work because they will be called whiners."


Insults from a liar are simply lies. Next.


See how this works.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 01:41 PM (z3Lez)

267
1. Matt Lauer is trying to get away and push a meme that we shouldn't question the veracity of the POTUS. F that, its our job as citizens and his job as a "journalist" if he wasn't blowing Oblabber every day.

2. We're boned as a country so don't spend too much time on #1. Take care of yourself and family.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 06, 2013 01:41 PM (p/cQy)

268 change your own behavior (leave) and not so much to
hold out hope that your quite-reasonable complaints will cause a change
in the behavior of the other.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (LCRYB)


very Zen-like, ace-san. Life is a tree, and I'm just a squirrel looking for a nut

( stolen from Boyd Crowder )

Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:41 PM (Dll6b)

269 So just out of curiosity should we have just let this one slide all together?...Strange game, the only way to win is not to play.

It could be done, but we have to be more careful. Certainly more careful than the other side. If this was Bush saying he “plants trees all the time” to kiss up to environmentalists, MSM would focus on the “all the time.” The late night comedians would have fun with it. Daily Show, etc.

But we don’t have that. Never did. We’ve done alright without it, considering.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:42 PM (9KqcB)

270 So who exactly was saying that he "never" shot skeet?


How hard was this being pushed?


Why is it that this gets a response but Fast and Furious and Benghazi don't?

Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 06, 2013 01:42 PM (4c71i)

271 Saying "whatever, it looks like a staged photo" isn't "zomg ,birther!!11!"

Now, now, you're embarrassing our betters.

Say, did you catch that new episode of Rich Urbanite Sluts With Graduate Degrees last night? I could totally relate to Main Characters misgivings about doing a Keokuk Kazoo on the guy who refused to eat the cruelty-free hummus.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at February 06, 2013 01:42 PM (ZKzrr)

272 Posted by: Mycrfot at February 06, 2013 01:40 PM (MtA8f)

--Enough with the damn birth certificates.

Posted by: logprof at February 06, 2013 01:42 PM (mi1DY)

273 @Ace

When the pic came out people came here and argued "it's photoshopped!"

And many more people pointed out that idea was silly.
Staged Photo op maybe, likely even. But staged photo ops are the hallmark of any political campaign, (and that goes to argument 2 anyway: He doesn't do it often.)

I see no problem mocking his holding of the gun, his stance or the angle since that gets to the part about "all the time" being a lie. You'll always have fringe lunatics arguing the thing that most violates Occam's Razor. How do we battle them?

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 01:42 PM (wGOqj)

274 This would be an opportunity for pundits to repeat all Obamas lies , and say "this is why we dont trust him".

Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 06, 2013 01:42 PM (AWmfW)

275 Give him the skeet bullshiit. Who cares?

Him speaking does not give his sorry ass the right to take my rights under the first. And the WoT should never have taken my rights under the fourth.

Posted by: Invictus at February 06, 2013 01:42 PM (OQpzc)

276 >>>What if all
our future candidates called out the media for the lying whore-bitch
sacks of Democrat propaganda sluts that they truly are?

I have no idea why we don't do this. I don't see it as a Strong Issue for us, but neither do I see it as something that hurts us.

People don't like the media. They know they're biased.

I don't see how a conservative loses by talking about this, and accusing these guys to their faces. It looks strong, I think. It establishes a premise.

The only problem I see is *dwelling* on it, running on the issue as if it's the most important issue in people's lives -- which it is not.

But hitting the issue frequently? Telling media people to their faces they are liberal and misrepresent facts to mislead the public, whom they have no respect for, and feel they must lie to in order to keep them from doing Bad Things, as if they're children who need to be told Santa will leave coal in their stockings if they're not good?

I see no downside to that. Limited upside, but still upside. And no real downside.

What, are the media going to be MORE biased?


Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:43 PM (LCRYB)

277 @256
Lets talk endlessly about ammo and ammo GREEN ENERGY related accessories, tools and prices.

This never comes off as slightly crazy.

tags: Sand Point, Idaho Humanity is a Virus, banned plastic bags


FTFY



Posted by: T. Hunter at February 06, 2013 01:43 PM (EZl54)

278 259 258
but I'm still not sure what the mistake was other than engaging the issue in it's entirety knowing it was a losing issue

The frustrating thing is that every issue is a losing issue.


Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at February 06, 2013 01:38 PM
What she said...



Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at February 06, 2013 01:39 PM (9+ccr)

How come someone hasn't noticed that I'm dead?

Posted by: Morrissey and Marr at February 06, 2013 01:43 PM (mi1DY)

279 236
Okay I guess you are going to stay in the field of play that Matt Lauer painted for you.



Don't cross the 50 yard line --or else


Ouch, stop that! Stop hitting me!

Posted by: Straw man at February 06, 2013 01:43 PM (YXmuI)

280 My approach to the "goes skeet shooting all the time" line is to say something like "If he's played golf 112 times and shoots skeet all the time, that implies he might be ignoring other things, wouldn't you agree?"

Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 06, 2013 01:43 PM (Qxe/p)

281
As for Romney--

Either way, denying that the BLS figured showed a barely growing economy was NOT the way to go.


Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:26 PM (LCRYB)



I'm not disagreeing with you that it is important to recognize the facts as they exist. I am trying to point out that you are inadvertently undercutting the positive aspects of your argument by using an example of a strategy that lost as an example of a strategy to use. Saying look Romney was correct in doing this because excellent reasons invites the instantaneous response that he lost and lost big.

Or, you know, I'm picking at nits.


All a team can do is improve its own performance and hope that will be enough.


Agreed. But I believe you and I are talking past one another. Your position is that it is necessary to present questions and arguments in such manner that those questions and arguments can be backed up. Absolutely. Conceded. So stipulated.

My position is that the Right can do that all it likes and the accusations will still be made that the Right is saying something completely different. Hell, someone brought up the plastic turkey. There's also the claims about statements James Watt allegedly made that are point blank false. It is obvious that it is irrelevant to much of the Media and the Left as to what the actual words are that are being said. It's about presenting things how the Left wishes them to be and then acting as if that is true.


You appear to be hopeful this can be overcome. I am not.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at February 06, 2013 01:44 PM (VtjlW)

282 Another fine example of anti-purist puritanism!
.
You people are purists, therefore you must purify yourselves of your puritanism to be pure enough!
.
You can contradict a dishonest meme arrayed against you, or you can ignore it, or you can mock it. Signing on, grabbing your giant papier-mache head and Going To Town?
.
Probably not the best move.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's mobile at February 06, 2013 01:44 PM (fKyp3)

283 So we should hold out for the big lies, Ace? We did that with Ocare and Benghazi and Fast and Furious, etc. What happened with those?

When the MFM is nothing but a propaganda arm for dictator, the results will be the same no matter if the untruth, however it's stated, is large or small.

Posted by: Soona at February 06, 2013 01:44 PM (xYb7L)

284 I'm just a squirrel lookingfor to bust a nut

( stolen from Boyd Crowder )


Posted by: DOA in Scrambletown, FLA at February 06, 2013 01:41 PM (Dll6b)


That's how I say it, anyway....

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 01:44 PM (xmcEQ)

285 Here's the simply truth:

If you want to defeat the media- simply mock them relentlessly.

After all, there is a rich reservoir of material to mine from these hypocritical state controlled whores.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 01:44 PM (z3Lez)

286 What, are the media going to be MORE biased?

And stop doing "debates" on DEMTV for fucks sakes.


Posted by: eleven at February 06, 2013 01:45 PM (KXm42)

287 BTW they said don't photoshop it, why are conservatives NOT
Photoshopping it for shits and giggles have we lost our comedic edge.


The internet called to say hi.
http://is.gd/d9kAi1

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at February 06, 2013 01:45 PM (ZKzrr)

288
"we have to remain at the tables, and ride this grim run of horrible luck out until exhaustion."
You're confusing Bush levels of ineptness and self abuse with "luck".

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 01:45 PM (lbiWb)

289 remember when SKEET ULRICH was shot by SHOTGUN on JERICHO?

Posted by: No Feet Johnson Plover at February 06, 2013 01:45 PM (KHo8t)

290 282 236
Okay I guess you are going to stay in the field of play that Matt Lauer painted for you.



Don't cross the 50 yard line --or else

Ouch, stop that! Stop hitting me!
Posted by: Straw man at February 06, 2013 01:43 PM (YXmuI)

__________________

Oh bullshit.

There are so many pundits critiquing Republicans right now--the Malkin Model that it's as stale as you schtick.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:45 PM (r2PLg)

291 Ace, your prescription is seems impossible to fill because you haven't described the situation where rangy attacks on the Preeze are ineffective. Are you are asking for the millions of conservative voices on the internet to moderate themselves? Best of luck with that.

Or are you warning against using mocking and harsh speculation in personal conversations with fence-sitters?

There is more than one audience for everything. Asking righties to stand down on the internet is um, well, dumb. There was no hyperbolic, venomous public attack on Bush and the Right that has ever cost the Left. It was the repeated and constant shit-cannon fire that stained Bush and the GOP permanently.

In personal conversations designed get more votes? Sure. In public, online forums? A wise man once wrote, "Fuck you."

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 06, 2013 01:45 PM (NTBjC)

292 Go flame yourself.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 01:46 PM (r2PLg)

293 Yes, friends, I agree this is minutia, but where else do they talk about it freely? (Btw, thanks again, Ace, for an excellent blog!)
The gleanings, er, the wheat from the chaff make a larger picture, a mosaic of understanding of how the Left works, and how we, each of us, can counter, then defeat them.
Maneuver.

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:46 PM (1V6Pv)

294 Still and all- I think we really missed the point with the "he shoots skeet" thing (whether we focused on the "all the time" or not.)

I think the correct answer would have been (and I did hear it some, not as much as I would have liked, I didn't even say it as much as I should have), "Wow, that's cool, I never knew that. What the fuck does that have to do with 'A well regulated militia being necessary to a free state, the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed'?"

Remember- the point of his ludicrous statement was, "See? I like hunting and shooting sports, too. I'm just like you. Don't be scared because I want to take away your right to self defense."

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 01:47 PM (8y9MW)

295 That gun looks as natural in Barry's hands as a pair of work-gloves.

Hey, it could happen

Posted by: Barry's Mommy Jeans at February 06, 2013 01:47 PM (z3Lez)

296 Obama killed Osama but not with a shotgun.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 06, 2013 01:47 PM (eEfYn)

297 We need to send in Spurlock undercover as Lauer's hairdresser so he can discover how NBC gathers top-notch-gumshoe journalistic talent like this.

Posted by: CNN Program Director at February 06, 2013 01:48 PM (bGlsD)

298 It was the repeated and constant shit-cannon fire that stained Bush and the GOP permanently.



Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 06, 2013 01:45 PM (NTBjC)Throw in Rove's advice to GWB to puss out and pretend that shit-cannon wasn't having any effect, and you're right.

Posted by: My Sharia Moor at February 06, 2013 01:48 PM (liORJ)

299 >>>I hear what your saying Ace..... but ONE post out of 215 does not a meme make.

eh, I see this a lot. When Todd Akin made his legitimate rape comment, a lot of people said, "We can win on this, by proving it's true."

it shows its face frequently, I think. If you disagree, I guess we have to agree to disagree. I do see it a lot. Or what I'd define as "a lot." (Maybe you'd say that's the equivalent of Obama's "we do skeet shooting all the time," with "a lot" or "all the time" meaning "infrequently at best.")

There's just a lot of this going 'round.

Here's something else: I don't know what Limbaugh said about it, as I didn't hear him. But I saw a comment about it, above.

Now, let's say that Limbaugh was making the case the photo proved our point, because it's clear from the photo Obama is not even a casual shooter, but a raw beginner.

To what extent did some people (some, not you) seize upon his statements to find credibility in the claim that the picture was p-shopped?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:48 PM (LCRYB)

300 298 That gun looks as natural in Barry's hands as a pair of work-gloves.

Hey, it could happen

Posted by: Barry's Mommy Jeans at February 06, 2013 01:47 PM (z3Lez)

--He handles a gun as naturally as he handles female breasts.

Posted by: logprof at February 06, 2013 01:48 PM (mi1DY)

301 I agree the right sometimes does as ace points out, but in this case I think it was the media and the White House who took the issue and turned it to all or nothing.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 01:26 PM (m2CN7)

I would agree, except when I read the unfolding silliness I read it as "he never shot skeet." And when I posted comments, one of the answers was "If shot skeet the White Housewould have a photo of it" - alleging that the photo didn't exist. It's just not smart, tactically. Can't throw a bomb on every single play.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:48 PM (9KqcB)

302 I get Aces point, but I still say that Barry shot himself in the foot, so to speak, with his wimpy photo and his snide ,petulant remarks. The proof is in the reactions from his adoring media desperately trying to prop him up on this. People really are laughing at this...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at February 06, 2013 01:49 PM (9+ccr)

303 The only problem I see is *dwelling* on it, running
on the issue as if it's the most important issue in people's lives --
which it is not.



But hitting the issue frequently? Telling media people to their
faces they are liberal and misrepresent facts to mislead the public,
whom they have no respect for, and feel they must lie to in order to
keep them from doing Bad Things, as if they're children who need to be
told Santa will leave coal in their stockings if they're not good?



I see no downside to that. Limited upside, but still upside. And no real downside.



What, are the media going to be MORE biased?







Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:43 PM (LCRYB)


*WE* can dwell on it. Politicians should not do so.

Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 01:49 PM (bb5+k)

304 289
"What, are the media going to be MORE biased?"

"And stop doing "debates" on DEMTV for fucks sakes."


THIS

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 01:49 PM (z3Lez)

305 >>>>When you have 85% of the media against you

Then you thank God for the most favorable media environment for the GOP in about 30 years.

Posted by: Bigby's Punch Bug Blue at February 06, 2013 01:50 PM (3ZtZW)

306 Matt Lauer proves again he is no journalist. When the President states a fact, the journalist should verify it. Whether it's a basic almanac fact, or one that requires original reporting to verify, the journalist's first and last instinct should be to check it out. Lauer is incurious and does his position of influence injustice.




Posted by: bonhomme at February 06, 2013 01:50 PM (QC/6C)

307 >>>Ace, your prescription is seems impossible to fill because you haven't described the situation where rangy attacks on the Preeze are ineffective. Are you are asking for the millions of conservative voices on the internet to moderate themselves? Best of luck with that.

It does sound very quixotic.

No, I don't think I'm saying that, as I recognize its impossibility. I suppose I'm saying "Let's not the rest of us encourage them, eh?"

>>>Or are you warning against using mocking and harsh speculation in personal conversations with fence-sitters?

>>>There is more than one audience for everything.

Sure, but let's realize any of the arguments we make to the Zealous will immediately become grist for the proposition that Moderates Should Keep Away From Us Because We're All Crazy.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:50 PM (LCRYB)

308 "I smell cat piss"
Why do people keep telling me that?
Posted by: Barry Soetoro

Huh, we smelled shit.

Posted by: The Flies what land on TFG's face at February 06, 2013 01:50 PM (hMqzS)

309 You appear to be hopeful this can be overcome. I am not. Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at February 06, 2013 01:44 PM (VtjlW)

THIS ^ times a Billion Trillion. I have watched the lies of feminism triumph over the natural interests and inclinations of women since my teens. Feminism lies to women, helps the Left oppress them just as efficiently as Sharia law, and yet otherwise intelligent and savvy women will parrot back those lies and use them to make voting decisions. I am absolutely not advocating that women lose the vote, but, once propaganda becomes accepted fact, it is very hard to overcome because any opposing proof proffered to the brainwashed is viewed with suspicion and disbelief.

This same brainwashing is now going on with illegal immigrants to co-opt them permanently for the Left.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at February 06, 2013 01:50 PM (kXoT0)

310 How could you believe me when I said I love you when you know I've been a liar all my life?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q2fTSo8aoY

Posted by: huerfano at February 06, 2013 01:51 PM (bAGA/)

311 303 "--He handles a gun as naturally as he handles female breasts."


So he touches us. Sue him.

Posted by: Barry's Moobs at February 06, 2013 01:51 PM (z3Lez)

312 And the "Birth Certificate" which he has released is quite dubious, and were it even genuine, is not necessarily proof of birth within the state because of Hawaii's weird law that allows them to issue birth certificates to people not born in the state.




But there is no further political benefit from speculating on this.




Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 01:51 PM (bb5+k)

313 I have always pointed out that the scenario in the media is as follows.

The right can say the exact words but everyone knows that they meant something else. The left can say the exact words but that was not what they really meant.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 01:52 PM (m2CN7)

314 ace, while I respect your opinion, can you say in all honesty that it's only "conservatives" who do this? Latch on to the most extreme variant of an argument and push it for all its worth? because I would say no, it isn't; and it's certainly not the mainstream position of conservatives. You say "Birther" and I say "Truther," and we're both standing in the same place (my own beliefs on the Birther issue not withstanding).

This is why I find it curious that you'd say that talking about "media bias" is off-topic in a thread like this. Most conservatives -- myself included -- were saying that it was clear from the photo that it was staged, and that if he'd fired the gun at all he'd clearly been shooting at something other than skeet. That's the extent of the MAJORITY opinion. It's the media who have attempted to take the "Skeeter" argument mainstream, as if every conservative is sitting at home with magnifying glasses and ultraviolet CSI lights, trying to find the Photoshop seams.

Expand that image to every single scandal that (should have) rocked the White House during this idiot's regime and voila - you have the MFM's distilled image of what a conservative is: some squinty-eyed, suspicious whackjob. The MFM may or may not believe that this is how conservatives think; it doesn't matter to them what the truth is. All that matters is making OTHERS believe that this is how conservatives think, including -- and this is important -- OTHER CONSERVATIVES.

Make us doubt ourselves and the whole thing falls down.

Yes, the media is biased. Yes, they're not going to change. No, we shouldn't expect any better. But why do we have to look at ourselves and say, "Gosh, we need to change this," when what they're telling us we did wrong is something that, quite frankly, 95% of us don't do?

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at February 06, 2013 01:52 PM (4df7R)

315 Hairy Reed didn't have to back up his statements about Romney's tax returns with proof. Why should Owebama?

Laurer's got a point.

They're winning.....

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 01:52 PM (xmcEQ)

316 heh, fact check.org. (didn't know it was run by the annenburg foundation!)

dec 2009 in response to email circulation then.


We’ve received many queries about this chain e-mail, which refers to a
proposed United Nations treaty to regulate the global trade of
conventional weapons.

Much of what this e-mail claims is simply false. A "complete ban on
all weapons for US citizens" isn’t possible under our Constitution,
according to the Supreme Court, which held just last yearthat:


District of Columbia v. Heller,26 June 2008: (T)he
enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy
choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of
handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.


Furthermore, if an arms trade treaty ever materializes, the
administration won’t be able to "bypass" Congress, as the e-mail
maintains. All international treaties require the approval of two-thirds of the Senate before they are considered ratified and in effect.------------------------------

Furthermore, since taking office, Obama has not pushed any of his
promised gun control measures. Asked about assault weapons at a press
conference with Mexican President Felipe Calderon in the spring, he
said:

Obama, April 16: I think none of us are under any
illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy. And so, what we’ve
focused on is how we can improve our enforcement of existing laws

Posted by: ette at February 06, 2013 01:52 PM (nqBYe)

317

One bright spot, we are learning to meme it across conservative media outlets.

Now, just finessing the messages, and we are on our way.

Posted by: beachgoyle at February 06, 2013 01:52 PM (LpQbZ)

318 We're not held to a higher standard, CJ, we're held to an impossible standard. Even our silence is attacked as racist/,obstructionist/h8!!

Lauren, I don't know how old you are, but this has been the way it's been for a half-century. And that was before we had ANYTHING. No talk radio, no Fox News, no blogs....nothing.

The fact that we ever win elections speaks volumes about the strength of our ideas, given the lopsided standards. We're never going to win over the Matt Lauers of the media world. But we sure as hell can cut our losses among his viewers by being smart. And make no mistake, we don't win without some of those viewers pulling the GOP lever.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:53 PM (9KqcB)

319 i piss myself all the time laughing at you evangelical knuckleheads
Posted by: ergie
****

I'm agnostic, genius.

Posted by: Tilikum the Killer Assault Whale at February 06, 2013 01:53 PM (uhftQ)

320 >>>Asking righties to stand down on the internet is um, well, dumb.

actually I don't think so.

If I don't like dumbness on the left, I'm supposed to, what, moderate my own opinions on dumbness on the right?

Whether the dumb (or gullible, or Far Too Inclined To Believe Anything That Helps Their Ideological Position) will change their thinking or not, what is the harm in my telling them their thinking is off?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:53 PM (LCRYB)

321 But when you're in an abusive relationship your best bet is to change your own behavior (leave) and not so much to hold out hope that your quite-reasonable complaints will cause a change in the behavior of the other.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:34 PM (LCRYB)

Pearls of widom. Give it a reasonable chance, then bail to end the misery.

Posted by: Count de Monet at February 06, 2013 01:53 PM (BAS5M)

322 Dear GOP:

Here's how you slap the media with a rhetorical wet-dick.

Watch. Listen. Learn. And Nut The Fuck Up.

You fucking pussies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFIU4NhXUtU

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 01:54 PM (z3Lez)

323 Do Obama's supports even believe for a minute that he regularly goes clay shooting? I doubt it.

Posted by: fb at February 06, 2013 01:54 PM (JVEmw)

324
"There was no hyperbolic, venomous public attack on Bush and the Right that has ever cost the Left. It was the repeated and constant shit-cannon fire that stained Bush and the GOP permanently. "
This needs to be repeated, loudly, time time again

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 01:54 PM (lbiWb)

325 >>>ace, while I respect your opinion, can you say in all honesty that it's only "conservatives" who do this? Latch on to the most extreme variant of an argument and push it for all its worth?

Good God, no. I said above in a comment that this reminds me of the everyone out-lefty-each-other confabs of the left.

I note that crap all the time. My tone is mocking.

On the right, I note it, but my tone is "Let's change this, huh?"

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:55 PM (LCRYB)

326 @301!
I say bring back the Birther movement. Impeach him on a thousand counts (should be easy). Wear high-waist dresses and two pillows strapped on back everywhere, even the guys. Change the name of every school in America to Sidwell Friends. Hire armed guards.
Waterboard everyone who even knew him. Run with the dirt. All of it. Even that repugnant stuff from Pock E-stahn.
Put them back on their heels, and watch them try to dance.

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:55 PM (1V6Pv)

327

The fact that we ever win elections speaks volumes about the strength of our ideas, given the lopsided standards.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:53 PM (9KqcB)



That is why this election hurt so much. The other side had removed the veil of deceit, and yet people still voted in a totalitarian, anti-American figure.

Posted by: beachgoyle at February 06, 2013 01:56 PM (LpQbZ)

328 Listen up morans, Ace is fucking exactly right.

What we should have done is mock the "all the time" line....

Zero kills babies, all the time.
Zero arms child soldiers, all the time.
Zero pushes food stamps, all the time.
Zero hides evidence, all the time.

Zero shoots skeet, not so much, and only talks about it when he's trying to take your rights to a gun away....


hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

See the motherfucking distinction.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 06, 2013 01:56 PM (tVTLU)

329
Yes, the media is biased. Yes, they're not going
to change. No, we shouldn't expect any better. But why do we have to
look at ourselves and say, "Gosh, we need to change this," when what
they're telling us we did wrong is something that, quite frankly, 95% of
us don't do?

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at February 06, 2013 01:52 PM (4df7R)

We should do what Breitbart did, and expand on it. PJMedia is working to develop conservative themed entertainment. I think mocking them with successful YouTube videos is another tactic that can help. I think constantly accusing them of being inbred democrat liars is a way of undermining their credibility.

We have to use Alinsky style tactics on them, but one way or the other, we have to destroy their ability to make Joe Stupid vote for the Democrats.



Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 01:56 PM (bb5+k)

330 Sure, but let's realize any of the arguments we make to the Zealous will immediately become grist for the proposition that Moderates Should Keep Away From Us Because We're All Crazy.
Posted by: ace


As others have noted above, they already do that regardless.

We need to break through the media lock* and attack as much as the Left does IF we are talking about the public forum. No velvet glove shit is going to work. Nor has it ever worked in politics.

Again, private one-on-one conversation? Yes, of course, play to the intelligence of the listener.

In public? Are you nuts?

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 06, 2013 01:56 PM (NTBjC)

331 CAKE GIRL

Posted by: 2 x 4 answers at February 06, 2013 01:56 PM (OXbvI)

332 o/t *excuses himself to grab some food*

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:56 PM (1V6Pv)

333 CJ,

Me? I'd file for divorce or get the fuck away from the "standard maker" you?

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 01:24 PM (LRFds)

I would but until we can implant our conservative ideas directly into the brains of voters, we can't divorce the media. It's like one of those peaceful muslim countries where if a woman tries to divorce her husband they cut her head off.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:57 PM (9KqcB)

334 :::322 i piss myself all the time laughing at you evangelical knuckleheads
Posted by: ergie :::

Admitting that you piss yourself all the time strikes me as the first honest thing you've posted here, erg. Thanks for sharing, I guess.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 06, 2013 01:57 PM (BushJ)

335 This main blog post is so cogent, so rational, so informed, so plainly correct, so well written, it doesn't belong on a conservative blog. Seriously. It's a waste of good work. It largely if not almost entirely will be lost on its audience.

Posted by: Tsar Nicholas II at February 06, 2013 01:58 PM (pmsMR)

336 Another really big problem we have is the fact that we don't have a common ground.

The left has common ground. Libs, die hard libs, the left, Democrats, RINO's......they ALLLLLLL stand as one with big government nanny state shit as their ultimate goal.

The right? We've got RINO's, TEA Partiers, right of center ists, libertarians, constitutionalists, conservatives......no common front on which to forge an attack from a centralized location.

Until the right can unify a strong offensive front, we're fucked.

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 01:58 PM (xmcEQ)

337 He handles a gun as naturally as he handles female breasts.

Ya might want to slather some Purell on those hands. Just saying.

Posted by: Egyptian Prime Minister at February 06, 2013 01:58 PM (BAS5M)

338 People really are laughing at this...


Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at February 06, 2013 01:49 PM (9+ccr)
------One can hope I would be surprised if very many normal people are even aware of any comments at all related to Obama and skeet shooting.
I do know some people concerned about losing their health insurance coverage.I do know some people excited about a chance to obtain immigration amnesty.I do know quite a few people who are aware that a power problem occurred at the Super Bowl.In any case, please send me the appropriate talking points on the next projected Obama stupidity so I do not make any comments that will serve to aid Obama's coverage in the media. Thank you.



Posted by: RioBravo at February 06, 2013 01:58 PM (eEfYn)

339 Watch. Listen. Learn. And Nut The Fuck Up. Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 01:54 PM (z3Lez)

Yep, that was epic, but, Newt could not get traction with the GOP because of Callista's mere existence, not to mention her awful helmet hair. I voted for him in the Oklahoma primary because Perry had dropped out by then.

I have a dream that if we ever get another Pubbie POTUS, they have Newt as Press Secretary with the backroom motivational deal being that every time he makes a reporter cry, $25,000 gets deposited in Callista's Tiffany account. Those would be good times.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at February 06, 2013 01:58 PM (kXoT0)

340


We don't bet on red, we don't bet on black. We bet on GREEN!

Spin the wheel, baby!

Posted by: imp at February 06, 2013 01:58 PM (UaxA0)

341 >>>"There was no hyperbolic, venomous public attack on Bush and the Right that has ever cost the Left. It was the repeated and constant shit-cannon fire that stained Bush and the GOP permanently. "

but you understand that's because of the media?

There is something Kaus calls "Undernews." I will adapt that term for my own use and call something "undermeme." Memes under the radar.

Now, politics consists of both over the radar and under the radar stuff.

The difference is, our UNDER the radar stuff will not remain under the radar... not, at least, when the media sees an opportunity to hurt us with it.

So sure, the left can call for assassinations of high constitutional officials and play footsie with Truthers and have Secretary of State Albright endorse a conspiracy theory that OBL was actually captured but Bush was holding him to trot him out just before the election.

And the media won't say anything, because they APPROVE of under-the-radar messages which help persuade fence-sitters to the Demcoratic cause.

The minute we make an under-the-radar argumetn that looks silly or crazy it's on the news at 5.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:58 PM (LCRYB)

342 Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 06, 2013 01:57 PM (BushJ)



That IS a membership quality hash, my friend.

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 01:59 PM (xmcEQ)

343 But we didn't do that, or at least enough of us didn't do that that the slam dunk eluded us. Instead, we put our chips on the proposition that he never shot skeet at all, not once, not ever, and now the media is basically running with the story "Obama wins again; Obama told the truth."

Reminds me of the old saying: "Accuse the Jesuits of killing 3 men and a dog, and they will triumphantly produce the dog alive."

Posted by: OregonMuse at February 06, 2013 01:59 PM (9GaPd)

344 And the media won't say anything, because they APPROVE of
under-the-radar messages which help persuade fence-sitters to the
Demcoratic cause.



The minute we make an under-the-radar argumetn that looks silly or crazy it's on the news at 5.




Burn the media first.

MFM delenda est.

Posted by: EC at February 06, 2013 02:00 PM (GQ8sn)

345 Here's something else: I don't know what Limbaugh said about it, as I didn't hear him. But I saw a comment about it, above. Now, let's say that Limbaugh was making the case the photo proved our point, because it's clear from the photo Obama is not even a casual shooter, but a raw beginner. To what extent did some people (some, not you) seize upon his statements to find credibility in the claim that the picture was p-shopped?
Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:48 PM (LCRYB)


----------------------------------------------------


Do what the Alinskyites do. Isolate, question, and, yes, even riducule the subject whether it's true or not. They did it with Bush and they certainly did it with Palin. Do it with everything they say and do.

I look at our responses to the WH claims as more ridicule than whether or not there is any truth or not. If there's one truth that came out of this, whether he always shoots skeet or not is that he is not comfortable with guns. That fact is fucking obvious.

Posted by: Soona at February 06, 2013 02:00 PM (bu1Rs)

346 I think you are being unfair to us Ace. We don't get to choose which argument we are making. By that I mean, if you look at the community, as a whole, you get aggregate argument that falls somewhere between.

1. He never shot skeet.
2. He's done it once. (e.g. I've tried skeet but have not pursued the sport)
3. He's done it between two to half a dozen times in his life. (I seldom if ever shoot skeet)

All of those statements are within the boundaries of arguments I've heard over skeetgate. The truth probably being either 2 or 3. Obviously the picture of Obama shooting skeet is fakey but that being neither here nor there.

All of things 1,2,3 get said by somefolks. Which one becomes the "conservative argument"? The one the media picks. You can't expect ALL of us not to be extreme. And the media chooses the argument not most reasonable and intelligible, but most beneficial to their narrative.

You can ask the extreme folks to tone it down and be reasonable (Which is what I think you did) BUT extreme statements are going to get made by somebody. The best we can do is ask our more prominent pundits Rush/Hannity/Glenn/Levin/Kraut/Ingram/ et al. To keep it reasonable.

What you can ask of us is to not push our pundits into being extreme on winnable issues. But even then. Extreme people are always going to be out there. And they call, and write, and do all of those things to pressure pundits.

So if there is a need to be the "adult in the room" on taking the reasonable line on things, it has to be our established media traditional pundits, what have TV and Radio shows and Columns. They have to take the initiative to put winning political points ahead of fan service and establishing a winnable conservative media narrative.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 06, 2013 02:00 PM (0q2P7)

347 What Ace is pointing out is a key distinction that needs to be attacked/recognized here.

We are playing against a stacked deck. Breitbart has been preaching this forever.

Therefore, you need to understand the battlefield, and know what the leftists are going to do.

That is why you NEED candidates whose very fucking existence destroy their usual bullshit in the media they use to run our candidates down.

Lower/middle class background; war hero; immigrant; etc., etc., etc. THAT IS HOW YOU WIN.

The country has heard forever by these fucking parrots in the media that the GOP is nothing but old stodgy richwhite dudes who hate everyone else.

Throw it right back in their fucking faces. No speeches necessary. Here is my FACE. Now, let's talk about the fucking debt.

We need to learn not to "question" but MOCK. MOCKERY IS THE ULTIMATE WEAPON.

Do you truly think that anyone with a fucking brain believes this commie shoots guns "all the time"....

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 06, 2013 02:00 PM (tVTLU)

348 And if we don't say it, they say that we did via "dog whistle s"

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 02:01 PM (wsGWu)

349 My dispute is with a contention that the Right is now in a position to have such statements reflected accurately. For pity's sake, look at Hillary and the Benghazi hearings.

That was indeed one of the most glaring examples of partisan journalism in memory. The question is: What is our response? To go full retard? Forget the gatekeepers, we still need a way to get to the voters behind the gate.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:01 PM (9KqcB)

350 denied Warming



Math genius erg, who demonstrably can't do subtraction, lecturing others on complex sciency stuff being decided by one fucking compound. I blame public schools.

Posted by: Captain Hate at February 06, 2013 02:01 PM (LDHhw)

351 I say bring back the Birther movement. Impeach him
on a thousand counts (should be easy). Wear high-waist dresses and two
pillows strapped on back everywhere, even the guys. Change the name of
every school in America to Sidwell Friends. Hire armed guards.

Waterboard everyone who even knew him. Run with the dirt. All of it. Even that repugnant stuff from Pock E-stahn.

Put them back on their heels, and watch them try to dance.

Posted by: Thorvald at February 06, 2013 01:55 PM (1V6Pv)

One of my arguments has always been that smear is an effective tactic. Something doesn't HAVE to be true to make it work. Of course it's not enough to overcome the Media's efforts to help him win. Matt Drudge's "Gay" rumors didn't even help.



Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:02 PM (bb5+k)

352 The Media are a pack of lying scumbag political whores.

Treat them as such.

If you treat disrespectful lying brats with respect- then all you will get in return is more lying and more disrespect.

Stop trying to persuade the fucking talking-head propagandist, and start persuading the dumb-ass populace.

How? Treat the media as a punching-bag of stupid and mock them for that hypocritical lack of credibility, because they ain't your fucking friend to begin with.

And they never will be. So cash in on the rivalry.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:02 PM (z3Lez)

353 353 denied Warming



Math genius erg, who demonstrably can't do subtraction, lecturing others on complex sciency stuff being decided by one fucking compound. I blame public schools.

Posted by: Captain Hate at February 06, 2013 02:01 PM (LDHhw)

--I liked how ergmcmuffin accused us of blowing Benghazi into a second 9/11 . . . when the Benghazi attack actually *happened* on 9/11.

Posted by: logprof at February 06, 2013 02:03 PM (mi1DY)

354 332 Diogenes lamp,

Scoop the bastards.

Use John Boyd's OODA loop and study of their message building to deliver their new story before they do.

Have a youtube broadcast with "breaking news spin" zapped out quickly to counter spin the SOBs.

Make a humorous website that is 4 parts pop culture deconstruction with 1 part news bias deconstruction....

host and pick "youtyubes of the week" from readers with a 50 dollar prize....

all kinds of ways we can make mocking the fucking M$M fun and something kids would get into....

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:03 PM (LRFds)

355 In a book I read recently the author tries to claim that by suggesting the CRA was extremely bad policy that conservative pundits were blaming the poor for the 2008 financial collapse.

Utter and complete bullshit that avoids dealing with the actual subject at hand.

I don't recall anyone claiming that Obama never fired a gun or engage in particular gun-related activities in his life. What was put forward was intense doubt that Obama was an experienced gun using and participant in gun sports. A doubt that has strong evidence to back it.

Ace, what you've done here is let the opposition set the ground rules and then bound yourself to them. Talk about a losing game.

Obama and his bunch lie as easily as they breathe. This has been deeply documented, as this site has noted many, many times. The correct answer to Lauer, to any Obama surrogates, and to Obama himself, is to call them on their lies. If someone lies constantly, then yes, their every utterance requires verification. That this is the case is something that should never be allowed to rest as it can be a wonderful weapon.

But not if you let a fool like Lauer shame you so easily. Is not a failure to engage in open confrontation the source of our greatest frustration with the GOP these days? How can we complain if we do the same?

Posted by: epobirs at February 06, 2013 02:03 PM (kcfmt)

356 Again from @benk84. Matt Lauer is just beside himself.

***

There's no problem a bit of Bieber can't cure.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 06, 2013 02:04 PM (piMMO)

357 erg and Matt Lauer: Sucking cocks by choice

Posted by: Captain Hate at February 06, 2013 02:04 PM (LDHhw)

358 Soona and my other fellow Okies, we need to hold Coburn's feet to the fire with regards to working with Schumer on gun control with regards to Universal Background Checks.
------------------
My letter to Tom:

I would urge you, Senator Coburn, to exercise the utmost caution with
regards to Universal Background Checks for guns. I trust NONE of the
Democrats in general with regards to this and I trust Sen. Chuck Schumer
not one whit on any issue at any time. The only thing one can trust
about Democrats is just like rattlesnakes--they will bite you. The last
two Democrats that I would ever trust were my late parents, who truly
did not understand what the Party of FDR had become.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at February 06, 2013 02:04 PM (kXoT0)

359 I'm not sure if weft-cut loop and others are saying this, but it seems sort of implied.

So here's my question: If, as seems implied, you are saying both "it doesn't matter what our more strident people say online" AND "you shouldn't call out our more strident people because that hurts the cause..."

Isn't that a bit inconsistent? The more strident people have no effect on our political position, but if I put up a post knocking them, I'm sabotaging the cause?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:04 PM (LCRYB)

360 342 "Yep, that was epic, but, Newt could not get traction with the GOP
because of Callista's mere existence, not to mention her awful helmet
hair. I voted for him in the Oklahoma primary because Perry had dropped
out by then"


I'm not selling Newt, I'm selling the tactic.


Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:04 PM (z3Lez)

361
I would but until we can implant our
conservative ideas directly into the brains of voters, we can't divorce
the media. It's like one of those peaceful muslim countries where if a
woman tries to divorce her husband they cut her head off.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 01:57 PM (9KqcB)

We can beat the hell out of them. How does that fit into the divorce analogy?

They want to sleep with the other side? We beat the shit out of them for doing it.


Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:05 PM (bb5+k)

362 That IS a membership quality hash, my friend.

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 01:59 PM (xmcEQ)


Speaking of hash, I'd be interested in AllenG's opinion on this:
http://tinyurl.com/a5cfabc

Goes to the Boulder Daily Camera, front page article about the bill Jared Polis (D -- openly gay) is proposing.

An openly gay Democrat proposing a bill on marijuana as a tenth amendment issue -- and I approve of the concept.

Strange day.


Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 06, 2013 02:05 PM (Qxe/p)

363 more people have been killed by Ted Kennedy's car, then skeet have been killed by Obama.

Posted by: VIA, on the tiny keyboard at February 06, 2013 02:05 PM (IHAqe)

364 The minute we make an under-the-radar argumetn that looks silly or crazy it's on the news at 5.


So we have to be perfect, and they don't.
And when we fail to be perfect it's our fault. "You shouldn't make me so bad, baby."

No. I refuse.

There are some things that conservatives glom onto that are patently ridiculous (or, at least, political non-starters regardless of their veracity), and those things should be mocked (magic vay-jay-jays, for instance). But (with very, very few exceptions) the mocking of Skeeter was not one of them.

I think where you're losing me, ace, is that you seem to be suffering from cognitive dissonance: You hold, on the one hand, that "we" cannot say anything ridiculous or crazy because the media will excoriate us. On the other hand, you're seeming to say that the media is going to find some way to excoriate us anyway.

I don't mind saying to conservatives, "Drop it" when what they're saying really is crazy. I do mind telling conservatives that we have to make sure we approach every single situation 100% correctly, and if the Media can find a way to misreport/twist what we said, that's our own fault.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (8y9MW)

365 If your strategy begins with 'if only people would,' you have already failed. Try coming up with a plan that begins with 'because people do.'
.
Because you can't really control people, but you can create conditions where thier responses serve your purpose.
.
Ironically this is a key capitalist idea and cornerstone of conservative policies, but our strategy largely ignores it. And the left as a matter of policy ignores it but their strategy employs it.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's mobile at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (fKyp3)

366 Has anyone on the Right responded to Lauer?This is where Palin shined except that she may have spent toomuch time responding to every slight. But god bless her, she did respond.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (m2CN7)

367 The social cons are like this about issues as well. The all or nothing thing.

All Abortion is Wrong Even When Dad Has Raped His 12 Year Old Daughter!

Posted by: Eaton Cox at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (q177U)

368 Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 06, 2013 02:00 PM (0q2P7)

The other thing of course is the problem of language.
Even if I say "He's never shot skeet." I may not be using that in strict negative sense of the word, but more generally. But the media will pick that up and apply it strictly.

If we were in an open dialogue and you said "you've never done [x]" and I responded "well that's not true, once I tried it and failed." Your likely response would be: "Sigh, my point was not "never ever" and you knew that."

Language is inherently imprecise, we all know this and we don't often hold ourselves to high semantic standards (and playing semantics usually means you've lost the argument.) EXCEPT when it's not a dialogue (as in what's happening now, with us v. Media.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (wGOqj)

369 >>>Ace, what you've done here is let the opposition set the ground rules and then bound yourself to them. Talk about a losing game.

this is what I mean, an example of what I was just saying.

The proposition seems to be "You don't have to chide the strident, as their opinions do not hurt us" but ALSO "if you call out the strident, you're sabotaging the cause by propagating a meme helpful to the left."

How come it's only the Voice of Reason that's in danger of harming the cause by propagating a bad meme? Why do I take shit and the stridents get a pass?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (LCRYB)

370 "Skeet-gate was not all that important. No one will ever ask "Where were you when Obama released his skeet picture?" Yes but will they ask you where were you when obama launched killer drones on US citizens, and you did not question?

Posted by: Bufalobob at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (x+7qA)

371 349 Mike the Moose,

Pretty much dead on, and add in Ace's own self admission he doesn't want to play "follow the leader" WRT Limbaugh et al and it is a bottom to top phenomena.

They can pick anyone from a Luap Nor zealot to Todd Akin to make GOP standard bearer....

it is a rigged game unless i get to toss Kos around their neck.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (LRFds)

372
>>>Isn't that a bit inconsistent? The more strident people have no
effect on our political position, but if I put up a post knocking them,
I'm sabotaging the cause?

What I'm telling you is the more strident folks are always going to be there. You can call them out if you want (Look how much calling out happened on birther part II and III) but they won't go away, AND, the media will ALWAYS pick them to represent us. So what's your real solution?

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 06, 2013 02:07 PM (0q2P7)

373 "So here's my question: If, as seems implied, you are saying both "it
doesn't matter what our more strident people say online" AND "you
shouldn't call out our more strident people because that hurts the
cause..."


Uhm, the "cause" is being mocked and misrepresented by the lying scumbag media:

Stop trying to impress them and start fucking attacking them on all fronts.

There is nothing left to lose and everything to gain.

My God man! This isn't rocket science- it's brain surgery!

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:07 PM (z3Lez)

374 O/T, Hi Rons. No shit there I was at the grocery store. Any way, it's a small store with one checkout girl. An 80-90 year old woman in front of me shits her pants, no depends. It runs down her leg an puddles on the floor. It stunk so bad, it would have made a billy goat puke. She pretends or does not know it happened. She pretends it never happened and completes her transaction. Walks out the door with shit dripping all the way. I Never felt so sorry for another human being while at the same time, been so disgusted. Another day in the life of OSP.

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 06, 2013 02:07 PM (l86i3)

375
The minute we make an under-the-radar argumetn that looks silly or crazy it's on the news at 5.





Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 01:58 PM (LCRYB)


Truth.

Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:08 PM (bb5+k)

376 So some of our pawn pieces made some mistakes of style that caused their castle and queen pieces to make some real errors--let's not capitalize on that.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 02:08 PM (r2PLg)

377


Offense.

Posted by: beachgoyle at February 06, 2013 02:08 PM (LpQbZ)

378 >>>The other thing of course is the problem of language.
Even if I say "He's never shot skeet." I may not be using that in strict negative sense of the word, but more generally. But the media will pick that up and apply it strictly

of course. However, I'd say there's also a method of speaking which preserves options, that is, being vague about your claim so that you can cover a wide variety of claims with your vague statement.

I do think "he never shot skeet" was one of those kept-by-vagueness possible claims a lot of the time.

And I'd say it probably shouldn't have been, again, knowing they'd take that as our Chief Argument and knowing also it is easily falsified.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:08 PM (LCRYB)

379
"I don't recall anyone claiming that Obama never fired a gun or engage in particular gun-related activities in his life. What was put forward was intense doubt that Obama was an experienced gun using and participant in gun sports. A doubt that has strong evidence to back it.

Ace, what you've done here is let the opposition set the ground rules and then bound yourself to them. Talk about a losing game"
Game. Set. Match.

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 02:08 PM (lbiWb)

380 "What I'm telling you is the more strident folks are always going to be
there. You can call them out if you want (Look how much calling out
happened on birther part II and III) but they won't go away, AND, the
media will ALWAYS pick them to represent us. So what's your real
solution?"


Mock them relentlessly.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:08 PM (z3Lez)

381 I Never felt so sorry for another human being while at the same time, been so disgusted. Another day in the life of OSP.


*clears throat*

"CLEAN UP ON REGISTER #1"

Posted by: EC at February 06, 2013 02:09 PM (GQ8sn)

382 I forgot to mention: And then, having placed so many chips on a
proposition you can't afford to lose, you are then virtually compelled
into denialism. When you lose a bet you can't afford to lose, you then
have to argue with the Pit Boss that the dealer was cheating. ***

It doesn't help that your ostensible friend and neighbor who came with you sides with the dealer, despite the fact that he also knows the dealer was cheating.

Posted by: Klawnet at February 06, 2013 02:09 PM (ePxxX)

383 So here's my question: If, as seems implied,
you are saying both "it doesn't matter what our more strident people say
online" AND "you shouldn't call out our more strident people because
that hurts the cause..."



Isn't that a bit inconsistent? The more strident people have no
effect on our political position, but if I put up a post knocking them,
I'm sabotaging the cause?





Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:04 PM (LCRYB)

My argument would be slightly different.It does matter what our more strident people say online, so we have to be louder than them. (Render it unimportant)
But calling them out won't help because you're not going to change their mind, and all you're doing is setting up the political version of the Streisand effect.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (wGOqj)

384 Ace doesn't want to play dirty. The dems/marxists always play dirty. Dirty wins.

I say question and ridicule everything they say and do. P-shop questions, as far as I'm concerned, are as "in play" as everything else.

Posted by: Soona at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (bu1Rs)

385 >>>Stop trying to impress them and start fucking attacking them on all fronts.

and this is where it always goes: Stop trying to "impress" the left and start making the same arguments as the Nutters. Embrace the Nutters as part of the coalition and defend them, and make their arguments your own.

Offer rejected.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (LCRYB)

386 Speaking of hash, I'd be interested in AllenG's opinion on this:
http://tinyurl.com/a5cfabc


Interesting.

I'll say the same thing I say about pot decriminalization anyway- we've got bigger fish to fry.

I really don't care about the "War on Drugs." I think it's expensive, and not especially affective, but I also understand that the reality is we'll be supporting those who get hooked, and I'd druther not thankyouverymuch.

That said, I don't have much problem with it- but pot (really: drugs in general) are not JUST a State issue. Certainly, any pot grown here in the US would remain a State issue as long as it remained within that state's borders. However, not all pot smoked here is grown here. That's even more true of harder drugs. That makes it, legitimately, a Federal Issue- at least when it comes to crossing state borders and importing from outside the US.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (8y9MW)

387 I reduce the deficit , ALL THE TIME!

I'll be here for four years , try the Soylent Green.

Posted by: Barack Obama at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (AWmfW)

388 377 OSP,

It's a brave new world buddy...

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (LRFds)

389 >>>It doesn't help that your ostensible friend and neighbor who came with you sides with the dealer, despite the fact that he also knows the dealer was cheating.

There you go. You'd win this, if only people like me weren't stabbing you in the back at every turn.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (LCRYB)

390 Come on back to me, twenty two. Just come on back.

Posted by: red sweater at February 06, 2013 02:11 PM (oATMN)

391
"Treat the media as a punching-bag of stupid and mock them for that hypocritical lack of credibility, because they ain't your fucking friend to begin with"
but but but but then they'll "unfriend" me on myfacetweet...

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 02:11 PM (lbiWb)

392 382

"I don't recall anyone claiming that Obama never fired a gun or
engage in particular gun-related activities in his life. What was put
forward was intense doubt that Obama was an experienced gun using and
participant in gun sports. A doubt that has strong evidence to back it.


The Response:

No, Barry obviously never fired a gun. And if he had, then why didn't we see this staged photo before now? Were you media scumbags hiding the photo then, or are you lying now? Which is it?

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:11 PM (z3Lez)

393 >>>Ace doesn't want to play dirty. The dems/marxists always play dirty. Dirty wins.

Dirty wins, Dumb loses.

Can you tell the difference?

Or is any claim about Obama that seems sort of negative a winning bet?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:12 PM (LCRYB)

394 Isn't that a bit inconsistent? The more strident people have no
effect on our political position, but if I put up a post knocking them,
I'm sabotaging the cause?





Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:04 PM (LCRYB)


I stick with the truth. Isn't that we are supposed to do here? Comment on the truth, what's really happening? Knoock whomever needs knockin. As long as its the truth.

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 06, 2013 02:12 PM (l86i3)

395 Speaking of hash, I'd be interested in AllenG's opinion on this:
http://tinyurl.com/a5cfabc




Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 06, 2013 02:05 PM (Qxe/p)


You really should convince him to start a blog or something.

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 02:12 PM (xmcEQ)

396 Stop trying to persuade the fucking talking-head propagandist, and start persuading the dumb-ass populace.

How? Treat the media as a punching-bag of stupid and mock them for that hypocritical lack of credibility, because they ain't your fucking friend to begin with.

How do you reach the consumers of mainstream media when you've made those outlets your enemy and won't engage with them?

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:12 PM (9KqcB)

397
All of things 1,2,3 get said by somefolks. Which
one becomes the "conservative argument"? The one the media picks. You
can't expect ALL of us not to be extreme. And the media chooses the
argument not most reasonable and intelligible, but most beneficial to
their narrative.




Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 06, 2013 02:00 PM (0q2P7)


Exactly what they did with the "birthers." They took the goofiest and most ridiculous statements by the most amateurish of commenters and made them the face of the entire group. "Conspiracy" was one of the main pejoratives used.

You can't make the kooks be quiet, and you can't make the media not pay attention to the kooks. (When that's who they are specifically looking for.) Remember the Tea Parties? They would always look for the racists so they could make them the face of the group.


Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:12 PM (bb5+k)

398 It's like the Blackadder episode where Blackadder tasks General Melchett if the plan was to march in a straight line towards the machine guns.
When asked where he learned the secret information Blackadder states that it is the plan they used the last 14 times.

Baaa.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - there on Thunder Island! at February 06, 2013 02:13 PM (hLRSq)

399 Gabe's plastic bag ban gets Instalanched!

Posted by: EC at February 06, 2013 02:13 PM (GQ8sn)

400 >>>No, Barry obviously never fired a gun. And if he had, then why didn't we see this staged photo before now? Were you media scumbags hiding the photo then, or are you lying now? Which is it?

there you go.

I see a lot of this sort of thing, given that many are arguing it is a tiny, tiny fraction of us scarcely worth thinking about.

We now have a series of claims that anyone who doesn't support this Winning Strategy is Stabbing Conservatives in the Back, just trying to Cozy Up to the Left, etc.

All the pushback seems against me-- where's the pushback against this crap?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:13 PM (LCRYB)

401
If we were in an open dialogue and you said "you've never done [x]" and I responded "well that's not true, once I tried it and failed." Your likely response would be: "Sigh, my point was not "never ever" and you knew that."


Yep, it's the game of rationalization my children play.

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 06, 2013 02:14 PM (l86i3)

402 Well, I hesitate to criticize anyone, but here is something that might help.

When Obama says some of this stuff that is patently ridiculous, I believe it is a carefully crafted plan to lure us in so that he can say, "Here is my birth certificate." Or "Here is my picture shooting skeet."

For the recent controversy, I wondered why he would says something so ridiculous. In fact, at the time, I wondered here if they just tried to see what ridiculous stuff the media would pass on without comment.

Looking back on this, I think these statements are bait for traps. I think many of his actions are. They are designed to make us look nutso, and meanwhile, he is saying "This will mess with their heads."

It's a difficult call on much of this stuff, because he chooses things which are easy for the general public to understand. Policy questions like sequestration go over the heads of most voters. So naturally, we are tempted to go after what we believe is low-hanging fruit.

Frankly, almost everything they do operates under this strategy. It is probably why many of the people in Congress have become paralyzed, since they never know when a justifiable question will be turned into a mockery of the GOP.

I don't know the answer, except that we have to quit fighting amongst ourselves.


Posted by: Miss Marple at February 06, 2013 02:14 PM (GoIUi)

403
if only people like me weren't stabbing you in the back at every turn.

brb

Posted by: Barney Frank at February 06, 2013 02:14 PM (HIlEw)

404 What are you talking about, Ace?

Obama's strategy is very clear and simple. There are three hundred million plus people in America. There will always be at least one person who says something truly ridiculous. By responding to the claims that are easiest for Obama to refute, he makes it look like all his critics are that ridiculous.

This is a variation of the straw-man argument called a "red herring". Obama is distracting from legitimate criticism by focusing on the stupid criticism.

Our response can only be to repeat the legitimate criticism. That's what we should be focusing on anyways. You can't control every idiot.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 06, 2013 02:14 PM (Tt6ky)

405 >>>I say question and ridicule everything they say and do. P-shop questions, as far as I'm concerned, are as "in play" as everything else.

of course you would say that. You don't discriminate, and in fact you seem to think that discrimination is a weakness.

Any negative statement about Obama, now matter how easily falsified, looks like a Winner to you.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:15 PM (LCRYB)

406 Isn't that a bit inconsistent? The more strident people have no effect on our political position, but if I put up a post knocking them, I'm sabotaging the cause?
Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:04 PM (LCRYB)


I can't speak for others, ace, but I would say that in this situation it shouldn't be a post knocking the "strident people." It should be an eye-rolling post mocking the media for calling the most extreme comments made by conservatives "mainstream."

You're never going to change all the commenters. There will always be those out there who go to the extreme; sometimes they're even right, but that's neither here nor there. Rather than try to change the behavior that you're going to get in any large group, what we need to do is work together to utterly destroy any remaining credibility the MFM and their left-leaning cohorts on the internet, in academia, and in Hollywood may have. It's not easy, but it's what needs to be done.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at February 06, 2013 02:15 PM (4df7R)

407
"Stop trying to impress them and start fucking attacking them on all fronts.

and this is where it always goes: Stop trying to "impress" the left and start making the same arguments as the Nutters. Embrace the Nutters as part of the coalition and defend them, and make their arguments your own."
If your viewpoint is that attacking one's (idealogical) enemies is equal to "embrace the Nutters as...", then well, you're dead wrong. And going to lose.

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 02:15 PM (lbiWb)

408 388 Ace,

Ace, I'm not going to simply say, "you're wrong," but I do want to offer you something to ponder.

Your main argument seems to be that with the proper set of aerobatics, using a dogfight as a metaphor, we'll get on the moderates' six and land a decent enough volley of fire to knock 'em down(IOW grab their vote) but what if the media ITSELF has them so locked in that no aerobatics can get on their tail?

We were beat not simply by a combination of lies of commission and omission but a set of lies so blatantly transparent that they should have been self-defeating.

I mocked it for a week, "Thank God we can't destroy tampons another 4 years."

At what point do you just blow up the video game rather than play?

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:15 PM (LRFds)

409 We need to learn not to "question" but MOCK. MOCKERY IS THE ULTIMATE WEAPON.



Do you truly think that anyone with a fucking brain believes this commie shoots guns "all the time"....

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 06, 2013 02:00 PM (tVTLU)


Laughter rocks the highest throne. Their weapon is mockery, it should also be our weapon. Make them look stupid and foolish, and they will have a conniption fit. That only helps.



Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:16 PM (bb5+k)

410 The Democrats figured out the simple uncomplicated truth long ago:

The public has a collective IQ of 20. We need to play down to them by attacking the media with ridicule and slander.

This ain't fucking chess, it's war. It's Jerry Springer War.

After all, we're trying to sway a bunch of mindless pop-culture drones who spend 10 hours a day watching tv and farting into the same couch cushion.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:16 PM (z3Lez)

411 ace I think the problem is you are looking and commenting on the 'strident' on the Right as if they were the rulerather thanthe exception.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 02:17 PM (m2CN7)

412 That said, I don't have much problem with it- but pot (really: drugs in general) are not JUST a State issue. Certainly, any pot grown here in the US would remain a State issue as long as it remained within that state's borders. However, not all pot smoked here is grown here. That's even more true of harder drugs. That makes it, legitimately, a Federal Issue- at least when it comes to crossing state borders and importing from outside the US.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (8y9MW)


One of the core elements of his argument is to federally regulate (as in alcohol, tobacco) growing the stuff. That allows states to grow it, and applies interstate commerce laws to it.

I don't disagree with your sentiments at all, but if you apply Federal regulations you also provide a mechanism to nail illegal drugs and dealers coming in across the border Al Capone style. You just make the profit-to-risk calculation not worth the effort.

Rush is currently laughing at this whole idea (as I type this).

Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 06, 2013 02:17 PM (Qxe/p)

413
Gabe's plastic bag ban gets Instalanched!


I read somewhere that Gabe doen't disinfect his sac.

Posted by: garrett at February 06, 2013 02:17 PM (+hhmk)

414 if only people like me weren't stabbing you in the back buttfucking you at every turn.

brb

Posted by: Barney Frank at February 06, 2013 02:14 PM (HIlEw)


Corrected for accuracy in Barney's world....

Posted by: © Sponge at February 06, 2013 02:17 PM (xmcEQ)

415 Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:13 PM (LCRYB)

In the previous thread about the picture. After that thread I've mostly taken to ignoring them.

Interesting question though. On "why haven't we seen this photo before!" One line of attack I saw was "clearly we haven't seen this picture yet because he wanted to pander to the left." (By not letting them see him with a gun.)

I feel like this is a valid critique if the questions are linked as such since it hits on that idea that he's trying way to hard to manage his image, but I'd be curious to hear your take.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 02:17 PM (wGOqj)

416 408 Any negative statement about Obama, now matter how easily falsified, looks like a Winner to you.

Works for the Left doesn't it?

Why? Because the media is their "reality"

So start attacking their "reality"

Man the fuck up Ace.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:18 PM (z3Lez)

417 >>>There are three hundred million plus people in America. There will always be at least one person who says something truly ridiculous. By responding to the claims that are easiest for Obama to refute, he makes it look like all his critics are that ridiculous.

it's about 10% in this thread.

I suppose we can argue about whether 10% is a big enough fraction to care about. It's on the edge, so we could have a big semantic argument about it. It is both a nontrivial fraction and also not nearly a majority.

So let's avoid the semantic argument which would be fruitless, as we're dealing with a pure semantic judgment call.

That said, I still dont' see much pushback agaisnt this 10% -- I see pushback against the 50% who think this crap is dumb and harmful.

Once again the "More Extreme" position is privileged in conservative circles. It is asserted that there's no real problem with these claims, but if I pushback against them myself, it IS a problem, either because I'm harming a constituency, dividing the base, playing to the left, endorsing the left's memes, etc.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:18 PM (LCRYB)

418 We can beat the hell out of them.

I've been doing that for years. The media that is, not women. But we still need their readers and viewers.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:18 PM (9KqcB)

419 >>>Man the fuck up Ace.

And then of course comes the Internet Braveheart who confuses his ability to pop off stupidly in a blog's comment area with physical courage.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:19 PM (LCRYB)

420

Ace doesn't want to play dirty.


Yikes! He's saying play it smart.



Posted by: beachgoyle at February 06, 2013 02:19 PM (LpQbZ)

421
all kinds of ways we can make mocking the fucking M$M fun and something kids would get into....


Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:03 PM (LRFds)

I have been thinking along these lines myself. YouTube is about the only way we can get videos past the News Media. If we can make them entertaining enough, we can ridicule the press with them.

Make them a laughingstock and you can destroy their credibility. I personally like pointing out how inbred (Real blood and family ties) they are to the Democrat Party officials.

A lot could be done with Incest jokes about the Media.



Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:19 PM (bb5+k)

422 Ace, FYI I recognized that the make of shotgun he was firing in the photo was featured on the science channel's "How It's Made" program. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMmau4lSDuY

The company's name is Holland and Holland company, and I believe they made a special edition shotgun for the POTUS.

Posted by: Chairman LMAO at February 06, 2013 02:20 PM (9eDbm)

423
"When Obama says some of this stuff that is patently ridiculous, I believe it is a carefully crafted plan to lure us in so that he can say..."
"Carefully crafted"? No. "Hey, let's toss something out here after prepping the talking points"? Yes.
It's called "churn", and the Republicans are stupid enough to keep it up. Anyone (ok, pretty much anyone) who's ever done PR work laughs @ the national "R" party pretty much, well, all the time lately.

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 02:20 PM (lbiWb)

424 It should be an eye-rolling post mocking the media for calling the most extreme comments made by conservatives "mainstream."


This.

I think this may be the best summation of what a lot of us are trying to say.

Ace- you're never going to get the idiots to shut up. It's not going to happen, so why waste your breath (pixels)? You're never going to get the media to treat you fairly, so why waste the pixels? Complaining that "that's not fair," sounds like whining, so why waste the pixels.

On the other hand, vicious, mocking laughter drives the Media (not to mention TFG) nuts. It makes them respond- and those responses actually tend to be good for us.

A post saying, "Oh, well done Matt Luar, you have debunked something 12 Internet Tough Guys said!" might be more appropriate than, "Hey, you 12 Internet Tough Guys, shut up!"

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 02:20 PM (8y9MW)

425 @323
If I don't like dumbness on the left, I'm supposed to, what, moderate my own opinions on dumbness on the right?



Whether the dumb (or gullible, or Far Too Inclined To Believe
Anything That Helps Their Ideological Position) will change their
thinking or not, what is the harm in my telling them their thinking is
off?



...

Posted by: 61 Million "Dumb" Americans who voted for Obama at February 06, 2013 02:20 PM (EZl54)

426 >>>This ain't fucking chess, it's war. It's Jerry Springer War.

and Dumb shall be your salvation

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:20 PM (LCRYB)

427 So here's my question: If, as seems implied, you are saying both "it doesn't matter what our more strident people say online" AND "you shouldn't call out our more strident people because that hurts the cause..."
Posted by: ace


Do what you want. But why is it necessary to play meter-maid for everything in the Dextrosphere ?

I'd never say you're 'sabotaging' anything but the DailyKos et al don't apologize for the wild attacks of Sinistrosphere.

Message discipline is for companies and candidates, not 20 million internet users.

Serious question; suppose if for once the right shuts up for a few seconds, then what? What did we win? What's the upside? Can you describe in detail what we get out of that?

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 06, 2013 02:20 PM (NTBjC)

428 My head hurts... I was told there would be no thinking in this thread... .

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at February 06, 2013 02:20 PM (9+ccr)

429 Stop trying to "impress" the left and start making the same arguments
as the Nutters. Embrace the Nutters as part of the coalition and defend
them, and make their arguments your own.

Ace, can't we keep them "in the fold," so to speak, while not necessarily embracing them? My mother, bless her heart, has a raging fem-on for the Tea Partiers (don't ask, I dunno why), and can't stand them, yet doesn't seem to grasp the necessity of keeping them close for the purposes of remaining unified.

I may be completely wrong or misguided, so please feel free to correct me. I"m seriously interested in hearing what you have to say.


Posted by: My Sharia Moor at February 06, 2013 02:20 PM (liORJ)

430 >>>All the pushback seems against me-- where's the pushback against this crap?

Fine...

>>>No, Barry obviously never fired a gun. And if he had, then why didn't we
see this staged photo before now? Were you media scumbags hiding the
photo then, or are you lying now? Which is it?


[Stamps hoof]

Hey fuckass! Your statement is superficially stupid, and impossible to score with on a broader audience. I can't believe your so F*king dim that you can't see that you won't win with fringe absolutes. Turn ANGRY down to 7 and revise like.
"Well he's got worse form than my 10 yo niece, if he really does shoot often tell him to order a drone strike on whoever coached him because that guy made him look like an idiot"
See funny and topical and still gets the rebuke in.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 06, 2013 02:21 PM (0q2P7)

431 >>>ce- you're never going to get the idiots to shut up.

and certainly neither will you, as all you seem to be saying is that I shouldn't tell the idiots to be a little quieter, but should just work around them and let them speak without pushback.

So I have to modify my speech... but not they theirs.

Forgive me for not understanding WHY.

Why do I have to defer? I'm right.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:21 PM (LCRYB)

432 429 Ace,

You own idiocracy?

I finally broke down and watched the damned thing it is without a doubt the Media/Education/Low Info Voter complex writ large.

I bought two copies I'll send you one chief.

Dumb sure as shit did win this cycle.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:22 PM (LRFds)

433 >>>Message discipline is for companies and candidates, not 20 million internet users.


again, all your effort is directed towards establishing the proposition that *I* shouldn't say something.

Why should I have to shut up?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:23 PM (LCRYB)

434
"A post saying, "Oh, well done Matt Luar, you have debunked something 12 Internet Tough Guys said!" might be more appropriate than, "Hey, you 12 Internet Tough Guys, shut up"
Yep.
#433 ..."See funny and topical and still gets the rebuke in"
Hire this guy. Yesterday.

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 02:23 PM (lbiWb)

435 ::::and this is where it always goes: Stop trying to "impress" the left and start making the same arguments as the Nutters. Embrace the Nutters as part of the coalition and defend them, and make their arguments your own.

Offer rejected.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:10 PM (LCRYB)::::


Here's vinegar in your eye, kid.


****spray spray spray****


Posted by: Doktor Ron Paul at February 06, 2013 02:23 PM (BushJ)

436 The social cons are like this about issues as well. The all or nothing thing.



All Abortion is Wrong Even When Dad Has Raped His 12 Year Old Daughter!

Posted by: Eaton Cox at February 06, 2013 02:06 PM (q177U)


Give it a break. Most SoCons do not believe this.

Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:23 PM (bb5+k)

437 420 "I suppose we can argue about whether 10% is a big enough fraction to
care about. It's on the edge, so we could have a big semantic argument
about it. It is both a nontrivial fraction and also not nearly a
majority."

That's your problem Ace, you're going for demographics (as if the demographics are set in stone and immovable) The real game should be the messaging that redefines and re-establishes new demographics.

Snark and mockery works. And the media are a sitting duck just waiting for a good wet-dick slapping.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:24 PM (z3Lez)

438 #395

And you simply cannot prove that, making it a losing bet. There is a vast difference between saying Obama has zero knowledge or experience of guns and saying he has at best a passing acquaintance with firearms and has no business playing the 'I'm one of you' game. (For all we know Barry plugged a rival dealer back in the day, considering how much of that portion of his life has proven to be synthesized.)

Confronting the left's bullshit doesn't mean you should set yourself up for a fall by making definitive statements you cannot back up with evidence.

Lauer asked if everything the Presidents says is subject to being questioned on its veracity. The correct response to this is say, "Yes, when you're dealing with someone whose tendency to simply make stuff up is so well documented, any new claims must be questioned."

See the difference there? It doesn't matter if Obama is lying or not IN THIS INSTANCE. The point to press is that the man has proven so untrustworthy that it cannot be taken as given if he says the sky is blue without looking out a window.

Posted by: epobirs at February 06, 2013 02:24 PM (kcfmt)

439 One of the core elements of his argument is to federally regulate
(as in alcohol, tobacco) growing the stuff. That allows states to grow
it, and applies interstate commerce laws to it.


That might work, though I worry at giving the Federal Government any additional power.

I'm sure there are ways to make it work, but, as I said initially- we have so many bigger fish to fry, pot legalization is so low on my priority list that it may as well not be there.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 02:24 PM (8y9MW)

440 436 Ace,

Kind of a circle eh boss?

Look I get it, and I happen to agree. Hell Ace were it up to me I'd kill for 50% of the amount of control of public perception of our image as the donks have....of course then we'd be as corrupt in all likelihood as the donks. I don't think you can be made to shut up unless you ban yourself again.

regards,
sven

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:25 PM (LRFds)

441 A post saying, "Oh, well done Matt Luar, you have debunked something 12 Internet Tough Guys said!" might be more appropriate than, "Hey, you 12 Internet Tough Guys, shut up!"

This X 100

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 02:25 PM (wsGWu)

442 >>>again, all your effort is directed towards establishing the proposition that *I* shouldn't say something.



>>>Why should I have to shut up?

No, I think you mistake. I'm not saying *shut up* I'm saying "So what? How do we fix it?"

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 06, 2013 02:25 PM (0q2P7)

443
"Forgive me for not understanding WHY"
Want to know how I know that you've never dealt w/a room full of six year olds?

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 02:26 PM (lbiWb)

444 >>>"A post saying, "Oh, well done Matt Luar, you have debunked something 12 Internet Tough Guys said!" might be more appropriate than, "Hey, you 12 Internet Tough Guys, shut up"
Yep.

Why would it be more appropriate? Why do I have to walk on eggshells around the Internet Tough Guys?

Why do I -- or we, or you -- have to show deference to them?

Why is it that there is this implicit privilege, that I (who you seem to concede as reasonable) have to modify my speech while stridently defending theirs?

Why?

Why does this privilege attach to their speech? Why doesn't it attach to mine?

Is it just because it's "MOAR CONSERVATIVE?"

Why is dumb "moar conservative"?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:26 PM (LCRYB)

445 Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:18 PM (LCRYB)

Because you see yourself as part of that 50% and feel you get push back the 10% doesn't get , you develop the victim mentality. Its natural and rarely accurate. For example , every supporter of every candidate believed their candidate was unfairly criticized the most.

Believe me, the kooks don't get more support than the reasonable. They may just be louder.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 02:26 PM (m2CN7)

446 :::And then of course comes the Internet Braveheart who confuses his ability to pop off stupidly in a blog's comment area with physical courage. :::

As someone who is 47-0-1 in Internet Comment Cage matches, I find your words depressing and hurtful.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 06, 2013 02:27 PM (BushJ)

447 433 "Hey fuckass! Your statement is superficially stupid, and impossible to
score with on a broader audience. I can't believe your so F*king dim
that you can't see that you won't win with fringe absolutes. Turn ANGRY
down to 7 and revise like.
"Well he's got worse form than my 10 yo
niece, if he really does shoot often tell him to order a drone strike on
whoever coached him because that guy made him look like an idiot"
See funny and topical and still gets the rebuke in."

Hey fucktard, the broad audience IS superficially stupid- dumbass.

And take notes fuckstick: my approach attacks BOTH the media AND Obama.

You stupid turd pirate.


Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:27 PM (z3Lez)

448 "See the difference there? It doesn't matter if Obama is lying or not IN
THIS INSTANCE. The point to press is that the man has proven so
untrustworthy that it cannot be taken as given if he says the sky is
blue without looking out a window."

Back in the day when I was a lying, degenerate drunk, I had proven myself so thoroughly untrustworthy, I was barely believed when I said I had to go take a leak. Any former drunk can attest to this. Personally, as I progressed in my sobriety, I learned not to resent this, and to accept it as the natural result of having once been a lying, degenerate drunk.

Again, with all due respect to your argument, Ace, why does Captain Kickass deserve any different treatment?

Posted by: My Sharia Moor at February 06, 2013 02:28 PM (liORJ)

449 The Left love love love their wackos/kooks/freaks.

Every four years, pats them on the back, put them on the bus, help them vote twice.

If they want to wear their " Sarah Palin is a c**t " t shirt it's all good --

Cry all you want about " those who sat at home" and "Dumbness!!" conservatives will NEVER pull off those numbers.



Posted by: T. Hunter - let it burn at February 06, 2013 02:28 PM (EZl54)

450 I'm sure there are ways to make it work, but, as I said initially- we have so many bigger fish to fry, pot legalization is so low on my priority list that it may as well not be there.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 02:24 PM (8y9MW)


Agreed.
It's a big time local issue here in Colorado, though.
Several towns are trying to figure out how to implement moratoriums because of the bill (now part of the damn Colorado Constitution!) without getting sued because of the part in parentheses.

Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 06, 2013 02:28 PM (Qxe/p)

451 of course you would say that. You don't discriminate, and in fact you seem to think that discrimination is a weakness. Any negative statement about Obama, now matter how easily falsified, looks like a Winner to you.
Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:15 PM (LCRYB)


--------------------------------------------------


Most everything about Dear Leader is false as we've learned over the last 4+ years. And almost all of those falsehoods were first exposed by people who everyone thought was a fringe wacko just trying to make noise.

IMHO, we still haven't vetted this POS.

Posted by: Soona at February 06, 2013 02:28 PM (bu1Rs)

452 Why should I have to shut up?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:23 PM (LCRYB)

This is of course the trickiest question.I actually would like very much to not have you shut up. To call the fuckers out on the carpet, and chase them away sniveling.But we live in a world where the Streisand effect is real and apparently, so one wonders what the best course of action actually is.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 02:28 PM (wGOqj)

453
That is nothing more than a staged photo and as such should be viewed from that standpoint.


I would dearly love to see a wide angle of it, though.

Probably provide a good deal more laughter.

Posted by: irongrampa at February 06, 2013 02:28 PM (SAMxH)

454
Ace is right on this, don't argue the thing easily most proven against you. Even if you know 100% sure from your secret service friend that they flew to Camp David secretly, he shot one shot for the camera and left. It won't help to say it.

Make fun of his "all the time" lie. Mock that. Mock Lauer for being such a potus kiss ass.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 06, 2013 02:29 PM (p/cQy)

455 You don't have to shut up, ace. We're just saying that going after the internet tough guys is counterproductive.

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 02:29 PM (wsGWu)

456 Why would it be more appropriate? Why do I have to walk on eggshells around the Internet Tough Guys?



Why do I -- or we, or you -- have to show deference to them?
----
As Secretary Clinton would say - What difference does it make?

Posted by: RioBravo at February 06, 2013 02:29 PM (eEfYn)

457 again, all your effort is directed towards establishing the proposition that *I* shouldn't say something.

Why should I have to shut up?

Posted by: ace


Again, do what you want.

Waste your time as you see fit but asking for conformity on the Internet is more than quixotic.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 06, 2013 02:29 PM (NTBjC)

458


Hehe, Ace is funneling this thread into a pinpoint.

Posted by: beachgoyle at February 06, 2013 02:29 PM (LpQbZ)

459 That said, I still dont' see much pushback agaisnt this 10% -- I see pushback against the 50% who think this crap is dumb and harmful.

ace, what's the point in pushing back against them? All it does is make them feel even more alienated and outside the discussion, which just makes them more apt to be even LOUDER the next time an issue like this comes up. Why not just let them say what they want to say, nod, and say, "Interesting point, but too far-fetched for me."

People have spent decades trying to prove the moon landing was real, because they're pushing back against the minority that believes the moon landing was fake. Neither side is going to budge, and both sides just become MORE entrenched as a result. It's a losing proposition.

I think my one problem with your post is that it should really be two posts. The first should be about the idiots in the media and on the left (BIRM) who have made Hypocrisy the most fashionable accessory since Paris Hilton's purse dog.

The second post, then, should be a discussion about the tendency of ideologies -- and as you agreed up thread, not just conservatives, but across the board -- to fling out these extreme arguments whenever possible as a way of thumbing their nose at the opposing side. "You think our President was senile? yeah? Well, we think your President is GAY!"

The way these two topics are combined in this post makes it seem -- SEEM -- like you're giving the media a pass on its hypocrisy, and blaming the conservative mainstream for the actions and words of its more fringe elements, as if we should be ashamed that we can't control the mindthoughts and fingerwords of others. I'm not terribly ashamed by that, but YMMV.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at February 06, 2013 02:30 PM (4df7R)

460 >>>You don't have to shut up, ace. We're just saying that going after the internet tough guys is counterproductive.

Why? It's exactly as counterproductive as ALL OTHER speech intended to change someone's mind is.

Why is there a special defense of this?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:30 PM (LCRYB)

461
I think we need to revisit Obama's poetry.

Posted by: garrett at February 06, 2013 02:31 PM (jboGR)

462 Ace, a little lesson from the distant past.

Back in the late 90's, when I was new to the internet, I signed on with Free Republic. I was thrilled to find people interested in the same political things I was.

However, as the years went by, the place seemed to attract more and more strident types, until eventually those types had most of the posts. So I moved on.

Any site that allows posting without moderation, or only minimal moderation, is going to attract those types. I am wiser now and recognize a certain amount as false flag posters, as well as an occasional true extremly extreme extremist.

But you do attract what I believe are some of the false flag types, those who post in the parlance of what they BELIEVE someone on the right would say. I can't prove it, it just seems that way to me.

So that 10% is probably not interested in moderating their posts, because their goals are to make conservatives look nutty andalso to incite the same sorts of posts from those who answer them.

Don't know what to do about it unless you want to institute registration, which I think you said one time you didn't want to do.

Posted by: Miss Marple at February 06, 2013 02:31 PM (GoIUi)

463 nice we're OVER THE WATERFALL!

CBO admits over the next decade 53% of US spending will be entitlements and Obamacare....


Congrats donks you did it....

hats off congrats.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:31 PM (LRFds)

464
"Why do I -- or we, or you -- have to show deference to them"
Er, WTF?Cutting someone/group out whilstattacking the other sideis "deference"?
Ok, we've crossed into the f'ng surreal. Time to wave byby for a while...

Posted by: Jess1 at February 06, 2013 02:32 PM (lbiWb)

465 >>>ace, what's the point in pushing back against them? All it does is make them feel even more alienated and outside the discussion, which just makes them more apt to be even LOUDER the next time an issue like this comes up.

I kind of feel alienated, too. I'm not just making that up -- I start to wonder "What am I doing here? Why are all these people so convinced that Dumb is the Way, and why would I want to sign up for that team?"

As I keep asking: Why do they get special considerations the rest of us don't? Why is it assumed they must be deferred to and coddled, whereas I get some pushback?

What is this Privilege that always attaches to the most strident possible statement, with those expressing a more considered course being told to shut up for the good of the party?

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:32 PM (LCRYB)

466 I understand what's being said on both sides [play it smart, play it as war, message discipline vs none, etc] but really don't care much about any of it. What are you defending? The GOP? They won't defend themselves. Are you defending yourselves? Why are you writing here?

Posted by: Bigby's Opposable Thumbs at February 06, 2013 02:33 PM (3ZtZW)

467
Love ya, but you've go to get to the point in fewer words. my eyes glaze over.
Yeah - the GOP walks into things.

Obama is not a gun enthusiast. No matter how much Matt Lauer pimps him.
end of story.

Posted by: Fresh at February 06, 2013 02:33 PM (O7ksG)

468 GOP politicians should flood the Sunday talk shows with increasingly ridiculous Skeet-Shootin' Barry Photoshop Pics, and just mocking the holy fucking hell out of the Barry AND the press.

See how that works, you whiny asses?

THAT'S how you make a lasting impression into the mindless pop-culture.


Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:33 PM (z3Lez)

469 Don't shut up, Ace.

Get us kooks energy focussed on the important stuff.

Like you already do.

Posted by: T. Hunter - let it burn at February 06, 2013 02:33 PM (EZl54)

470
After all, we're trying to sway a bunch of
mindless pop-culture drones who spend 10 hours a day watching tv and
farting into the same couch cushion.


Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:16 PM (z3Lez)

The Game is not "Debate." The Game is "Playing the Dozens."


"Your momma is so fat that if she falls over, she rocks herself to sleep trying to get up. "

Audience Cheers.



Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:33 PM (bb5+k)

471 462 MWR,

I could see where some might get your vibe on "well yeah the game is rigged but let's play it anyway!'

I don't think that was his intent, but what is maddening is the left embraces their worst actors and the media never notices but we're 100% responsible for every drop of sweat off every right of center let alone GOP person's actions....

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:34 PM (LRFds)

472 No one can go to war with the army they want instead of the ay they have.
.
But anyone can shatter their esprit de corps by constantly bitching about how much their army sucks.
.
There is a point past which criticism becomes bitching, and on the issue of 'must present a perfect front to mollify the MFM' we have long passed that point.
.
Perfwction is not attainable, please focus fire on the enemy, kthxbai.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's mobile at February 06, 2013 02:34 PM (fKyp3)

473 >>>Why are all these people so convinced that Dumb is the Way

Becoz the GOP is the Stupid Party. And you aren't Evil so you can't be a Dem. If you want Smart you need another option.

Posted by: Bigby's Opposable Thumbs at February 06, 2013 02:34 PM (3ZtZW)

474
We already know"the media" are part of The Obama administration.
Perhaps we should start there - and stop walking into things and acting like every time it happens it's a bigsurprise.

Posted by: Fresh at February 06, 2013 02:34 PM (O7ksG)

475 #447

Because if you can only fire one shot, which is the most useful target? The enemy or some ill-behaved louts who are vaguely on your side?

Recall the trial scene in Animal House? Recall what a waste of time it was for Hoover to ask Boon to quiet the boisterous Deltas in the audience?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROxvT8KKdFw


Posted by: epobirs at February 06, 2013 02:34 PM (kcfmt)

476 Why do I have to walk on eggshells around the Internet Tough Guys?


For the same reason that the Media responding to us is not in the media's best interest.

Short list (give me enough time and I'll come up with more)
1) It amplifies what they're saying (not as in: "hey, I agree, but tone it down" but as for the same reason we say "don't quote the trolls.")

2) It legitimizes them- if we respond to them, we make it look like they're worthy of response.

3) It takes our eyes off the real targets- TFG and the media.

It's like this- when some idiot (even a fairly well known idiot) on the left says something stupid, others on the left just tend not to repeat it and pretend it wasn't said. Then, when someone on the right says, "How do you respond to that?" they say, "I don't. I didn't say it. I said 'x.'"

We're not saying you're wrong, we're saying (well, I am) that we disagree with your method of addressing it. There's also a huge difference between some Internet Tough Guy in the comments, and if (say) a Jonah Goldberg, or Rush, or Hannity said something stupid.

If I'd heard any of the Conservative "Leading Lights" say this, I'd be right there with you telling them they're not being helpful and would they shut their traps, please. But the only people I've heard say anything like this (and not very many of them) are Internet Tough Guys.

Case in point: how much exposure do you think the MFM, DKos, etc. are going to give to Chris Rock's rather creepy "[SCOAMT] is our daddy," comment? Assuming they give it any, what tone do you think it will take?

I think they'll give it none, if they can. If they can't, I suspect (just like Benghazi and so many other things) they'll try to turn it around and blast Conservatives for taking exception to it. They certainly aren't going to turn on Chris Rock and say, "Dude. Shut. Up."

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 06, 2013 02:34 PM (8y9MW)

477 469
"I understand what's being said on both sides [play it smart, play it as war,"


Fighting it as war IS playing it smart.

Because this IS war.

Here endeth the lesson.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:34 PM (z3Lez)

478 "A post saying, "Oh, well done Matt Luar, you have debunked something 12 Internet Tough Guys said!" might be more appropriate than, "Hey, you 12 Internet Tough Guys, shut up"

Of course, everyone thinks the silly "Internet Tough Guy" is someone else, while they themselves are just "passionate." No one wants to take responsibility for the meme that backfired.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:35 PM (9KqcB)

479 You've gone full victim now and woe is me. Snap out of it.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 02:35 PM (m2CN7)

480 What is this Privilege that always attaches to the most strident possible statement, with those expressing a more considered course being told to shut up for the good of the party?
Posted by: ace


Missing the point entirely.

No one is asking you to shut up so drop the victim act.

Tell us: what do you or the Right gain by wasting time on every opinion on the Internet?

What's the best possible result?

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 06, 2013 02:35 PM (NTBjC)

481
I've been doing that for years. The media that is, not women. But we still need their readers and viewers.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:18 PM (9KqcB)


And the only way you're gonna get them is through entertainment, not through preaching or lectures.

Rush always said nobody responds to that "green eye-shade" lingo.



Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:36 PM (bb5+k)

482 "When you're losing -- and we are losing, make no mistake -- you always have to make sure that your frustration at losing isn't further compromising your performance. It happens to everyone. Professional football players start making stupid frustration-penalties when their team can't get anywhere. People can't get out of their own heads and start missing easy lay-ups.
I think this is where we are, as a group. And I think Obama is planning on just this -- he's planning on being so obnoxious and loathsome to us that we start racking up penalties and putting ourselves further behind.
We should resist it.
Skeet-gate was not all that important. No one will ever ask "Where were you when Obama released his skeet picture?""

this.

Posted by: Fresh at February 06, 2013 02:36 PM (O7ksG)

483 Baaa.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - there on Thunder Island!
***

Are you hiding a sheep in your room?

Posted by: Tilikum the Killer Assault Whale at February 06, 2013 02:36 PM (uhftQ)

484 "he isn't shooting skeet, look at the angle of the barrel, blah, blah, blah."
It's like we are stuck trying to find that one big "gotcha" moment by picking nat-shit out of a field of elephant crap.
When the media has already shown their willful ignorance of anything regarding firearms with the exception of that they are bad, once you start arguing beyond a 15 second clip, the story is over. No one gives a shit. Same with birtherism and all these other red-herrings. If you cannot get enough ammo (pun intended) on this guy just based on how shitty the economy is, lack of jobs, and general attitude of "nothing is my fault," your media wing sucks, and your messengers are useless.
Seriously it's like people are more interested in nitpicking the stupidest shit instead of pounding away at the stuff that actually matters. No wonder the left has been kicking the shit out of us for the last 6 years. We don't go for the easily digested sound bite, we try to actually explain this shit to people who don't care. Like a joke, if you have to spend a column explaining it, it sucks. Let the Wonks argue over the details, and press a strong, quick message.

Posted by: kotter at February 06, 2013 02:36 PM (F937F)

485 "by the GDP figures at least"

well that is the definition.

nitpicking i know

Posted by: JDP at February 06, 2013 02:37 PM (60GaT)

486 >>>Er, WTF?Cutting someone/group out whilstattacking the other sideis "deference"?

there you go. I get told I'm trying to "impress the left" with this post, that I'm not being manly enough (I need to man up), etc., and those aren't attacks; but if I tell people they need to discard losing arguments, I'm "attacking" them.

MOAR CONSERVATIVE!!! always gets its special Privilege for being more Conservatively Correct.

And that's what the hell I'm talking about here.

This phenomenon of always privileging the most strident possible case pushed by the guy who's trying to distinguish himself by being Teh Most Conservative. It always gets that Privilege. His claim is beyond dispute, whereas mine, of course, is endlessly disputable.

And of course my motives are also questioned.

Because whereas the MOAR CONSERVATIVE guy's heart is clearly in the right place, geeze, maybe my motives are self-interested and perhaps even traitorous.

I suppose that's similar to Mr. Pink's assessment that Mr. Blonde could not possibly be the traitor, because he's a kill-crazy maniac.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:37 PM (LCRYB)

487
Why do I have to walk on eggshells around the Internet Tough Guys?

Because, walking on the cruchy figs keep everyone in the underwater grotto up?

Posted by: garrett at February 06, 2013 02:37 PM (jboGR)

488 Because while you are yelling at your players about form and the re is looking intently at your playbook, the other team is moonwalking into the end zone. Again. Perhaps it's time for some bounties.

Posted by: Libtardo at February 06, 2013 02:37 PM (YEo73)

489 @Ace,

I see you point, and even though I keep trumpeting the Streisand effect as the reason to ignore it, I am open to the argument that you (and similar others) are in a unique position to go after the whack jobs.

Briefly, you (and some others) are in a unique spot, fairly popular amongst conservatives but relatively ignored by the main stream media such that you might not trigger any fall out (i.e. the Streisand effect) by calling them out.

Of course if my initial concern was right...

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 02:38 PM (wGOqj)

490 What also comes to mind is the Ron White line: "You can't fix stupid."

Posted by: epobirs at February 06, 2013 02:38 PM (kcfmt)

491 It's counterproductive because it's accepting and propagating the media's narrative about What Conservatives Say. All this does is further cement that narrative. Reject their premise.

Remember the Breitbart interview where some MSNBC punk was trying to paint him as racist and brought up some person out in California printing monkey Obama money? Breitbart didn't miss a beat. He said "That's awful, but has nothing to do with me. Now, please respond to the question I just asked"

He didn't get diverted into apologizing for some random woman in California for 10 minutes. That was their goal, and he didn't bite.

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 02:38 PM (wsGWu)

492 I'll say anything and stab Conservatives in the back, just so I can attend a Georgetown cocktail party!

Cocktails - did you hear me? Cocktails!


sob, sob, sarc

Posted by: Mikey NTH - there on Thunder Island! at February 06, 2013 02:38 PM (hLRSq)

493 >>>You've gone full victim now and woe is me. Snap out of it.

You can call it the Victim Card if you like.

This is a common phenomenon I see every god-damned day.

Everyone else has to shut up because the MOAR CONSERVATIVE crowd either will get angry, or because we can clearly see they are trying their best and that shouldn't be criticized.

I (and the people who agree with me) aren't necessarily trying our best, though. We just might be Trying to Impress the Left.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:39 PM (LCRYB)

494 You own idiocracy?

I finally broke down and watched the damned thing it is without a doubt the Media/Education/Low Info Voter complex writ large.

I bought two copies I'll send you one chief.

Dumb sure as shit did win this cycle.


Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:22 PM (LRFds)



Idiocracy is a documentary.


Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:40 PM (bb5+k)

495 :::there you go. I get told I'm trying to "impress the left" with this post, that I'm not being manly enough (I need to man up), etc., and those aren't attacks; but if I tell people they need to discard losing arguments, I'm "attacking" them. :::

And tuck your shirt in, you sloppy bastard. You look like a Goddamn hippie.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 06, 2013 02:40 PM (BushJ)

496 You struck on something that's been nagging at me but I couldn't articulate, and you did it by using the poker analogy: we keep playing their game, and their game is largely semantic, a matter of reframing. Someone on here has already pointed this out, but since when did 'taxes' become 'revenues', and since when did 'spending' those 'taxes' become 'investing' those 'revenues'. By changing a few words and manipulating connotations ever so slightly, they've altered perceptions so that discussion of the issue is weighted in their favor. This shit must stop. We've got to stop playing along. Taxes remain taxes, spending remains spending. Words matter.

Posted by: troyriser at February 06, 2013 02:40 PM (vtiE6)

497 Isn't this a variation of what David Frum does? "I'm totally conservative, but I agree with Obama that some of those people are ridiculous extremists. Let's push back against them instead of pointing out liberals' own extremism."

Posted by: JohnJ at February 06, 2013 02:41 PM (Tt6ky)

498 It's always amusing when ass, er, "Ace", gets up on his useless "way to go, losers!" hobby horse. He's SOOOOO much smarter than everyone else!

He never has the chance to prove it, of course. Except in hindsight.

" maybe my motives are self-interested and perhaps even traitorous. "

You've admitted as much, asshole. You've admitted your real interest is getting a conslutting gig with a campaign.

Posted by: Ace's Anus at February 06, 2013 02:41 PM (ZJ/un)

499 Idiocracy is a documentary.


We're all fucked up and talk like a tard.

Posted by: EC at February 06, 2013 02:41 PM (GQ8sn)

500 >>>What is this Privilege that always attaches to the most strident
possible statement, with those expressing a more considered course being
told to shut up for the good of the party?


Eh. Unreasonable people are unreasonable. Tell them to shut up for the good of the party and they get louder. Tell them to step aside because they've just guaranteed a WIN for the Dem, and they suddenly are on a mission from God. We have rebuked them here (On Birther II and III and IV especially) they don't go away, they don't get quieter, they don't change their mind.

More people read your blog then comment on it. Thick skinned folks with *I Care* turned up to 11 are doing the commenting. So you get blowback because a lot of them are Pure® Brand Conservatives. You discount those in your readership who are reasonable (I'm not claiming to be, but there are others) many of whom you can't see.

Also everybody disagrees from time to time. Just because you've on occasion disagreed with everybody here doesn't mean everybody here disagrees with you.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 06, 2013 02:41 PM (0q2P7)

501 496 Ace,

The game is rigged, any time you beat their ass and it has not gone totally viral around their ability to jam it they will not let you win.

They are still pissed off that Tony HotDog crank pics to teens went over the top epidemic viral....

Not saying MOAR dumb or anything just saying maybe we need to make Menendez the designated villain.

You ever wonder if Baldilocks or Zombie would go to work for the HQ as an investigative reporter?

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:42 PM (LRFds)

502 Who's the primary enemy:

Democrats: Politicians and Media

Who's the primary target:

An increasingly dumbed down society.

What's the most obvious strategy?

Beat them at their own game: Appeal to the stupid masses by mocking the fuck out of the ridiculously dishonest hypocrites in the Democrat Party and their little media trolls.


Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:42 PM (z3Lez)

503 "I (and the people who agree with me) aren't necessarily trying our best"

Oh, I would hope not....

(smiling, smiling, it's said with a smile)

Posted by: Falcon Eye at February 06, 2013 02:42 PM (tICRp)

504 Ace, I must have missedsome kook meetings because I didn't hear anyone saying he'd never shot skeet. Just that he was anything but a gun rights supporter and shooting skeet once in a while didn't give him 2nd Amend cred.
Perhaps someon the rightwere saying he was lying. They were obviously wrong. Even if they hadn't said it, the media would claim they did. Heads they win tails we lose. I don't disagree with thumping those that said it upside the head. Perhaps they will learn from their mistake.

Posted by: Tilikum the Killer Assault Whale at February 06, 2013 02:42 PM (uhftQ)

505 Mmm. Yes.

Posted by: Mika at February 06, 2013 02:43 PM (Tt6ky)

506 You can't win if the MFM makes a big honking deal about file folders (Romney has women in binders eleventy!!!!)

It doesn't matter if 99 out 100 rolled their eyes over the 'all the time' it will be MFMized to mean they all said 'never' if even one outlier said he never shot a gun.

Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at February 06, 2013 02:43 PM (UU0OF)

507 really all that's needed is for a candidate to be good enough that the "Republicans are Nazis" talk, which is always gonna be there to some degree, doesn't matter.

Romney likely convinced a lot of people, even some Obama voters, that he wasn't a heartless corporate raider or w/e but beyond that he didn't do enough. i.e., he dispelled some of the negative perceptions of him but didn't do enough to replace it with a positive image, something that Reagan and Bush-43, whatever their faults, did.

this whole "smash the media" mentality is good venting i suppose but if you've got a good enough candidate, all the MSNBC blabbing in the world isn't gonna matter.

Posted by: JDP at February 06, 2013 02:43 PM (60GaT)

508 502 EC,

Damn near.

Look we here at the Horde call ourselves morons, but wade deep enough into a thread about cake Girl and you'll find Tolstoy or Adam Smith being discussed.

Go to DU and it is either Marx or honey boo not a lot in between.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:43 PM (LRFds)

509 Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:39 PM (LCRYB)

There are more than a few people making a subtly different argument.
But yeah the argument you presented is totally moronic and should be treated as such.

The only exception might be the more "more angry" part, and only if making them more angry makes them harder to drown out (which to me is the most important part. Criticize them or not, we have to drown them out.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at February 06, 2013 02:44 PM (wGOqj)

510 As I keep asking: Why do they get special considerations the rest of us don't? Why is it assumed they must be deferred to and coddled, whereas I get some pushback?

I don't know who is telling you to shut up, ace. That's certainly not coming from me. And I'm certainly not saying you should defer to or coddle anyone. I agree that extreme comments can be counterproductive, and whatever you choose to write about is entirely up to you. But it feels like you're trying to compartmentalize a problem that can't be compartmentalized. You're turning the tendency of individuals who post with anonymity on the internet to say incredibly outlandish things into an ideological problem that can be solved if only we tell people often enough to stop. I don't care that you say it, but I DO care that any of us questioning your position are now tarred with the same brush as the fringe commenters.

I happen to believe that it doesn't serve any purpose to come out and try to refute or chastise the extremists -- all it does is make us look like we're trying to hide something, and it's damned exhausting. You happen to believe differently than I do. I'm happy to believe one thing while you believe the other, but just as I haven't called you a rabble rouser "against the cause" for voicing your opinion, I don't like the implication that I'm an enabler or a coddler simply because I don't see the point in telling them off.

But this is what discussion is all about. So, again, YMMV.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at February 06, 2013 02:45 PM (4df7R)

511 well one thing that's definitely counterproductive is that I haven't posted in hours so I just corrected that.

I'll have to abandon this argument, not because it's boring but because I find it too interesting.

Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:45 PM (LCRYB)

512 #494

Bingo.

Does anyone really believe that everybody on the left smiles and nods approvingly at the behavior of groups like Code Pink? There is a lot of cringing and wishing they'd go away but how much energy is given to their suppression instead of staying focused on the real target?

Posted by: epobirs at February 06, 2013 02:46 PM (kcfmt)

513 Instead of concentrating on the photo op, why hasn't anybody shrugged it off and asked what Obama's score was?

Worked on the bowling dust up.

Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 06, 2013 02:46 PM (Qxe/p)

514 Valid points. I believe this problem is also linked to an issue from apost last week: that is the left's double standard of accepting as absolute truth any statement by the left thatcontains even a kernal of truth. At the same time they ("they" includes the media) require courtroom standards of proof for every aspect of any statement coming from the right. And if the tiniest thread of the right's statement is not irrevocably verifiable by hard evidence, then the entire statement must be tossed on the trash heap and considered a flat out lie.

IMO, conservatives are so frustrated by this double standard, that anytime there appears to be a chink in the left's armor, there is the tendency to go for broke.

If a Republican president was in the same postion as Obama on skeet shooting, the press would be editorializing on how the photo proves he is inexperienced, and that this demonstrates how he cannot betrusted onanything. The late night comics and Jon Stewart would be having an absolute field day with that photo, night after night. But since it's Obama, any attempt to use the picture and Obama's assertions about skeet shooting to discredit him are spun as desperation and hypocrisy.

No wonder conservatives try to score a touchdown when a field goal is the right call.

Posted by: RM at February 06, 2013 02:46 PM (TRsME)

515 I absolutely refuse to agree that we should let Obama decide which of his critics he will respond to. We have to focus on getting the good criticism out there. Wasting energy fighting against the illegitimate criticism actually (1) gives it more power, and (2) is a waste of energy that could be used to point out the more legitimate criticism.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 06, 2013 02:46 PM (Tt6ky)

516 you think you're better than me!?!?

Posted by: JDP at February 06, 2013 02:47 PM (60GaT)

517 How do you beat the "Party of Ideas"?

Co-opt unthinking voters who don't like "Ideas" but love free shit.

Game . Set. Match. Dems.

How long does it last ? Till the free shit runs out.

Posted by: T. Hunter - let it burn at February 06, 2013 02:48 PM (EZl54)

518 Ace, I'm not saying that.you're wrong that conservatives should make smart arguments and avoid stupid ones.

I'm just saying that no matter what we say, the Media is going to claim we made a stupid RACIST argument.

When they do, instead of chastising the conservative movement for their STUPID(!!!) Argument, challenge the media for twisting words and hammer your points to.hell.

Posted by: Lauren at February 06, 2013 02:48 PM (wsGWu)

519 And the only way you're gonna get them is through entertainment, not through preaching or lectures.

Actually you need both. But we're a long way from reaching them via entertainment. It just makes it all the more important to think about how we portray our ideas and try not to be so fucking stupid.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:49 PM (9KqcB)

520 Regarding "knife-fighting" decisions--In general, I try for the most damage I can, with the least possibility of counter-stroke, or for something that sets up something later on. So you have to know what the counter-stroke might be, or what attack might be opened up later. That means I might pass up a shot, or not go for the fullest damage possible.

Not that it matters--I can win all these little things I desire, the media will never swerve from the course, know that they realize they can get away with it. It will have to be the Megan McArdles who save or lose the Republic, by finally ratifying the method, or no.

Myself, I think they will lose it. Too big of a jump for them, too much challenging of worldviews. But perhaps I am wrong.


Posted by: Syntax challenged mentor at February 06, 2013 02:49 PM (tICRp)

521 520
How do you beat the "Party of Ideas"?


Simple: Mock their ideas.

Because their "ideas" are so painfully fucking stupid.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:50 PM (z3Lez)

522 429.

I wasn't aware it was an either/or option.

Posted by: Syntax challenged mentor at February 06, 2013 02:50 PM (tICRp)

523 "I'm just saying that no matter what we say, the Media is going to claim we made a stupid RACIST argument."

but if conservatives present themselves better this type of framing will lose power.

the media's hated a lot of Republicans over the years. not all of them have lost.

Posted by: JDP at February 06, 2013 02:50 PM (60GaT)

524 This is a common phenomenon I see every god-damned day. Everyone else has to shut up because the MOAR CONSERVATIVE crowd either will get angry, or because we can clearly see they are trying their best and that shouldn't be criticized. I (and the people who agree with me) aren't necessarily trying our best, though. We just might be Trying to Impress the Left.
Posted by: ace at February 06, 2013 02:39 PM (LCRYB)

You're preaching to a Romney supporter and a GW Bushadvocate and defender.Embracethe debate with the MOAR CONSERVATIVE CROWD or as I call them, the High Maintenance Conservatives. But your debate should be conducted as though as within a family not like they are the enemy. Playing a victim card is most unattractive.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 02:51 PM (m2CN7)

525 Ace, really this isn't any big deal as an intra-party thing.

We have always - always - been a Party that argues tooth and nail then forms up when we reach a consensus. Thats how our Primaries always have worked, for one thing. If some are dumb, then thats just the Retard Strong talking. If you're making a good, cutting argument then others will accept it as the winning one. Or maybe not.

As a success-in-political-world thing, its a bigger deal. Not the arguing, though. The forming up. We can no longer reach any consensus as a Party. Thats our trouble right there.

Posted by: Bigby's Opposable Thumbs at February 06, 2013 02:51 PM (3ZtZW)

526 When your policies and positions are crafted so as to cater to the beliefs and concerns ofthe dumbest, craziest, and most irrational people your polices are then what?


Everybody - take your time in answering this - this is actually something institutions find themselves doing.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - there on Thunder Island! at February 06, 2013 02:52 PM (hLRSq)

527 I'm just saying that no matter what we say, the Media is going to claim we made a stupid RACIST argument. When they do, instead of chastising the conservative movement for their STUPID(!!!) Argument, challenge the media for twisting words and hammer your points to.hell.

Holy shit, half of Ace's posts is dedicated to just that.

Maybe because he has a somewhat prominent blog he's a little more sensitive to having to defend stupid shit. His credibility as a writer is on the line. It's the same for the commenters who knock on doors and make phone calls and bust their ass to win elections - they have to defend the stupid shit. People whose only engagement in the war of ideas is to post anonymous blog comments don't have to worry about that.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:53 PM (9KqcB)

528 429
and Dumb shall be your salvation



And "intelligent" will be your Pyrrhic Victory!


Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 02:54 PM (z3Lez)

529 this whole "smash the media" mentality is good
venting i suppose but if you've got a good enough candidate, all the
MSNBC blabbing in the world isn't gonna matter.


Posted by: JDP at February 06, 2013 02:43 PM (60GaT)

A Reagan comes along once (maybe not even that often) in a lifetime. Looking back through History we had W. Bush, George HW Bush, Nixon, Eisenhower, Hoover, Coolidge, and Teddy.

Not many Reagans in there.

You are asking for a lotto win as a strategy.



Posted by: DiogenesLamp at February 06, 2013 02:55 PM (bb5+k)

530 Ace -

>>>Everyone else has to shut up because the MOAR CONSERVATIVE crowd
either will get angry, or because we can clearly see they are trying
their best and that shouldn't be criticized.



>>>I (and the people who agree with me) aren't necessarily trying our best, though. We just might be Trying to Impress the Left.


I've stayed out of this thread up until now for the simple reason that I figured my participation in it would do more harm than good. But I do want to make one observation that you seem to have danced around here (and in the past) but aren't putting a finger on.

This is all about anger. Really nothing more. And you can't reason with anger -- in fact, attempting to reason with anger often only inflames the anger to greater heights. Right now the base wants only MOAR CONSERVATIVE because they're ever-more-estranged and angry and terrified about the direction of the country and the feelings of powerlessness.

And in their anger they're increasingly unable to distinguish between "conservatism" and "self-destructive stupidity." And if you point it out to them, they make whatever excuses or rationalizations are necessary, because -- and this is the key -- it's not about achieving a practical outcome with these folks; at its root, it's about making themselves feel better. They want the temporary 'hit', the wash of pleasure that comes from taking the most extreme position and saying "here I am, come and get me liberals!" and don't even give a rat's ass about any potential long-term consequences. Or even want to hear that the things they say out loud CAN have such consequences. ("Why are you trying to harsh my mellow, dude?!")

This isn't a rational debate. It's an emotional instinct.

Posted by: Jeff B. at February 06, 2013 02:55 PM (6nNdM)

531 In a weird way, the whole incident made Obama look silly as well. It came off very thin-skinned, and the actual picture looks like Urkel shooting a shotgun for the first time.

The reason conservatives often times lose these battles is they're usually done on liberal MSM turf. Not one elected Republican came out and made a serious challenge on whether Obama has ever shot skeet. It was more of just a mocking tone conservative opinion makers that Obama was some big sportsman and suddenly the MSM acted like this was the GOP's biggest issue.

The worst part is that this Administration IS the most corrupt in history, but we've wasted our ammunition on things like birth certificates and skeet shooting, the real stuff is now going to be tuned out.

Posted by: McAdams at February 06, 2013 02:56 PM (kJVkM)

532 527 CJ,

This loss and Romney's idiocy on GotV probably cured me of my door knocking for life.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:57 PM (LRFds)

533 Like I said in the gun thread on Sunday, the best response was something along the lines of "nice shotgun" instead of taking Plouffe's conspiracy bait hook, line and sinker.

Posted by: Andy at February 06, 2013 02:57 PM (C/NnJ)

534 Playing a victim card is most unattractive.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 02:51 PM (m2CN7)

Cheap shot, poly. The guy invests more time and credibility in this than his readers do. He has more to lose. That's just reality, not playing victim.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:57 PM (9KqcB)

535 "Posted by: Mikey NTH - there on Thunder Island! *** Are you hiding a sheep in your room?"

General Melchett - if you have seen Blackadder you'll realize he's barking mad.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - there on Thunder Island! at February 06, 2013 02:58 PM (hLRSq)

536 Crap, and I come into the thread just as Ace is leaving it.

Well, whatever. There it is. #300 is the explanation. It's why "DUMBER! HARDER! FASTER! LET IT BURN!" is so popular. Even around here.

Posted by: Jeff B. at February 06, 2013 02:59 PM (6nNdM)

537 534 CJ,

It's his ballgame and his security and reputation.

There are some shady fellas on the other side of that line with bad hobbies like swatting.

I don't begrudge him any anxiety.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 02:59 PM (LRFds)

538 This loss and Romney's idiocy on GotV probably cured me of my door knocking for life.

I hope that passes. Election losses and inferior candidates are part of democracy.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:00 PM (9KqcB)

539 "In case no one noticed, jobs aren't any more plentiful or any better paying than they were in 2010. Maybe, possibly, how's-about we go back to the jobs theme for a while, the theme that actually brought in votes, and shut the fuck up about all this other peripheral stuff that doesn't bring in votes?"

Oh they've got a vocal position on US jobs, all right:

"The birthrate in this country has fallen below the level necessary to sustain the population at the very time that millions of Americans are leaving the workforce and expecting retirement benefits. The nation needs energetic young workers to spur the economy and support an ever-increasing social-welfare burden.

The only alternatives to increased immigration are mounting debts or reduced social services. A practicable system of work-based immigration for both high-skilled and low-skilled immigrants—a system that will include a path to citizenship—will help us meet workforce needs, prevent exportation of jobs to foreign countries and protect against the exploitation of workers.

America especially needs high-skill workers. The K-12 education system is not producing nearly enough graduates with the skills needed for a vibrant 21st-century economy. This country has attracted, and still does attract, the best and brightest from throughout the world to its universities and businesses. But once here, even the most talented students are not assured that they will receive visas enabling them to work following graduation, and high-skill workers and entrepreneurs have no sure path to citizenship.

Other nations—including Canada, New Zealand and even China—are luring away students, workers and entrepreneurs with more sensible and welcoming immigration policies. If we do not adapt, we will be increasingly unable to compete."
Jeb Bush, WSJ 1/24/13

Posted by: Chris Balsz at February 06, 2013 03:00 PM (2x2j3)

540 Cheap shot, poly. The guy invests more time and credibility in this than his readers do. He has more to lose. That's just reality, not playing victim.
Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 02:57 PM (9KqcB)

You don't know anything about what I do outside of this blog.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 03:02 PM (m2CN7)

541 The good news is the photo made Obama look stupid.

Posted by: Fresh at February 06, 2013 03:03 PM (O7ksG)

542 529

you don't need "a Reagan," just some who's more appealing than a Romney.

Posted by: JDP at February 06, 2013 03:04 PM (60GaT)

543 538 CJ,

No it's not them so much as me I couldn't do my usual volunteering because I wanted it too much.

I've done well enough in sales to know anxiety ain't a good aftershave....

well that and Narwhal....

but "yeah"

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 03:05 PM (LRFds)

544 When I wrote "#300" I meant "#530," of course.

Posted by: Jeff B. at February 06, 2013 03:05 PM (6nNdM)

545 "you don't need "a Reagan," just some who's more appealing than a Romney."

I checked Amazon and E-Bay. They're all out of Reagans.

Now - a plan that does not invovlve waiting for a savior to descend from the heavens or loud, inarticulate screaming and cursing would be appreciated.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - there on Thunder Island! at February 06, 2013 03:06 PM (hLRSq)

546 Posted by: Jeff B. at February 06, 2013 02:55 PM (6nNdM)

I think it's about two groups: Those who demand the GOP to be more conservative. And those who want to be seen demanding that the GOP be more conservative. There's a certain amount of performance art going on.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:08 PM (9KqcB)

547 It must be time for the semi-annual Ace Martyrdom play. Hits are probably way down since the election. Substitute "Palinbot " for "Internet Tough Guy" and this is the same movie we've seen several times before. Ace will wig out, ignore the mostly reasonable commenters and/ or lump them them in with the fringers, trolls will provoske him, others will fellate him. There will be several threads of pointless bickering. Ace will declare that everyone here are hopeless wingnuts, threaten to end the blog, and disappear for a few days. Hobos will be slaughtered, cobs will bore us with puppy pics. And thell. all will be right again.

Until Obama's next ridiculous photo op....

Posted by: Libtardo at February 06, 2013 03:09 PM (1MXyW)

548 Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 03:02 PM (m2CN7)

No I don't know what you do outside this blog. I just know that the stupid shit said on this blog won't affect your credibility, as it does with Ace.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:10 PM (9KqcB)

549 546 CJ,

The problem is the GOP is so off the rails that even someone like me who has caved to the leftward tilt for years is finally...I mean Cantor yesterday...

at some point you have to ask "why am I in this party?"

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 03:10 PM (LRFds)

550 529 "A Reagan comes along once (maybe not even that often) in a lifetime.
Looking back through History we had W. Bush, George HW Bush, Nixon,
Eisenhower, Hoover, Coolidge, and Teddy.

Not many Reagans in there."


The man is only fitting for his time. This current lifetime would never appreciate a Reagan. So stop looking for one.

Posted by: Newt's Underwear at February 06, 2013 03:13 PM (z3Lez)

551 " They want the temporary 'hit', the wash of pleasure that comes from taking the most extreme position and saying "here I am, come and get me liberals!" and don't even give a rat's ass about any potential long-term consequences. Or even want to hear that the things they say out loud CAN have such consequences. ("Why are you trying to harsh my mellow, dude?!")"

If a coach decided that his defense was just so much more effective than his offense, that he should give up on what doesn't work, won't work, can't work, and punt on 2nd down, every time, to get the defense back on the field...That guy will have a lot of time to psychoanalyze the bigoted freaks who got him fired.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at February 06, 2013 03:14 PM (2x2j3)

552 There are some shady fellas on the other side of that line with bad hobbies like swatting. I don't begrudge him any anxiety.

It's not just that sven. Just being associated with stupid claims impacts his credibility as a writer. I've long wondered about what appears to be the growing gap between his carefully argued posts and the comments.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:14 PM (9KqcB)

553 "No, conservatives didn't say he never shot skeet. That's the message that the media is attributing to Republicans. And Ace is simply playing along with it."

No. They're playing rope-a-dope with us. They have the narrative already written and they're using the media to goad conservatives into acting out our part. They're positioning themselves inside our OODA loop.

See, first, we're defending the 2nd Amendment against blatantly unconstitutional and dishonest rhetoric. Then, suddenly, we felt compelled to change the subject and start disputing whether Obama has ever fired a rifle. Why does this matter? It doesn't. It was a stupid and completely irrelevant point which was designed to change the subject. It worked. They release a photo and, ta-da! And, hey, look! Some of those stupid wingnuts think it's a photoshop! Haw haw!

And then they win. Because we get angry and storm off the field.

Posted by: GalosGann at February 06, 2013 03:14 PM (T3KlW)

554 >>>If a coach decided that his defense was just so much more effective than
his offense, that he should give up on what doesn't work, won't work,
can't work, and punt on 2nd down, every time, to get the defense back on
the field...That guy will have a lot of time to psychoanalyze the
bigoted freaks who got him fired.


Yeah, but you know what's also true? A coach who, when faced with a weak offense, tells his QB "hey man, just throw a bomb down the field, don't worry about whether your man is open, or if there are even any receivers -- just turn your mind off and chuck it as far as you can" is going to get his ass fired too.

And his team is also going to end up throwing a ton of interceptions as well.

Posted by: Jeff B. at February 06, 2013 03:20 PM (6nNdM)

555 552...well, with then, with all due respect to Ace and other bloggers, if the comments are so darn crazy insane, disable them. Delete the ones that you find most objectionable/hurtful/just plain stupid.
And 553 and others, PLEASE stop with the "we" bullshit. I thought this issue was just another drive-by (pardon the term) thing, in the rear view mirror, until this post came along. Collective punishment isn't cool.
Leftists aren't laughing at us...well maybe some of them are, but that's what they do...they've moved on to the next atrocity, which is probably way worse than this.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at February 06, 2013 03:22 PM (YmPwQ)

556 at some point you have to ask "why am I in this party?"

Because you care and there is no better vehicle for your views on how the country should be governed.

When my incredulous aquaintences sometimes ask "Why are you a Republican?" I say, "Because it's hard." Honestly, that's why. I was born into an urban Democrat family and didn't bother changing parites until I was nearly 30. I changed for lots of reasons, but mainly because I could see that all of the natural forces were set up to make government bigger. (Greedy voters, media, academia, etc.) Someone has to take the less popular position and say "No."

It will always be a harder sell. Especially when most voters don't feel the tax pain of liberal policies. Politicians, left or right, don't like hard, so they are more quick to bail on a conservative approach.
Cantor is no different. And he doesn't matter ultimately. I just keep in mind the words of Milton Friedman: "The way you solve things is by making it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right things."

Cantor et all will do the right thing when the rest of us make it politically profitable for them to do so. Just my humble thoughts.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:23 PM (9KqcB)

557 Newt's underwear.

Oh gawd--I can't stop laughing at this handle.

Posted by: tasker at February 06, 2013 03:24 PM (r2PLg)

558 well, with then, with all due respect to Ace and other bloggers, if the comments are so darn crazy insane, disable them. Delete the ones that you find most objectionable/hurtful/just plain stupid.

That takes a lot of time. I think he enjoys writing more.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:25 PM (9KqcB)

559 well, with then, with all due respect to Ace and other bloggers, if the comments are so darn crazy insane, disable them. Delete the ones that you find most objectionable/hurtful/just plain stupid.


I agree.

Posted by: CharlesFuckfaceJohnson at February 06, 2013 03:26 PM (7ObY1)

560 No I don't know what you do outside this blog. I just know that the stupid shit said on this blog won't affect your credibility, as it does with Ace.
Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:10 PM (9KqcB)

Stupid things said on this blog is not the point. It is ace claiming that he is unable to post what he believes to be reasonable opinions without being attacked by the 'fringe' or 'strident' or 'moar conservative' . Unfortuantely that is the consequences of being a pundit or opinion writer.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 03:26 PM (m2CN7)

561

I kind of feel alienated, too. I'm not just making that up -- I start to wonder "What am I doing here? Why are all these people so convinced that Dumb is the Way, and why would I want to sign up for that team?"

Whoa. I'm late to the game, here, but never take this stuff too personally.

You do not know who is on the side of the keyboard.

And, you do not know who the silent readers/watchers are and what they think.

Many folks are always in bitch mode/defensive mode. Just turn that off.

You know why you're here. And, you feel it when your thoughts and fingers start flowing.

Don't stop.

Posted by: beach space at February 06, 2013 03:27 PM (LpQbZ)

562 It is ace claiming that he is unable to post what he believes to be reasonable opinions without being attacked by the 'fringe' or 'strident' or 'moar conservative' . Unfortuantely that is the consequences of being a pundit or opinion writer.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 03:26 PM (m2CN7)

You'll admit it's strange to be attacked by your own readers - readers who otherwise enjoy the free content.

I think the gap between Ace's approach to political battles/debatesand that of a lot of the commenters has grown. There is a disconnect.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:30 PM (9KqcB)

563 556 CJ,

No your point on Cantor lines up directly with Milton Friedman, but so much of the idiocy is no structurally baked into the cake they are isolating themselves from our ability to impact profit and loss without defacto pulling the plug which is my biggest fear as what the Ohio GOP did.

The Hill seems to think lurch left is the answer but what if the 2012 win was punishment by the tea partiers for not standing strong.

I happen to think the TRUCon/Tea party wing has wildly unrealistic expectations of Boehner's relative power in the regulatory quagmire Congress has created but the combination of Roberts' Jedi Hand Wave on Obamacare coupled with the gunshy nature of the GOP on the fiscal cliff and a fear amongst too many in the base of facing King Math's edict may mean we're doomed.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 06, 2013 03:32 PM (LRFds)

564 We want "Moar Conservative" because we cannot rely upon the establishment to lie in our favor.

The reason the establishment won't lie in our favor is due to media pressure. If a republican sells himself as a moderate in order to broaden your appeal, the media will push him liberal. Not so with democrats; just look at the "moderate" Obama turned out to be.

It will not be "profitable" for the "wrong people to do the right thing" until we cripple the Leftist media. Hence, the calls for Moar "right people".

yeah, it's a shit sandwich, but them's the cards.

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at February 06, 2013 03:35 PM (Y5I9o)

565 Hey, he can't have it both ways. If mostly unfettred commenting is allowed, chances are that there will be some disagreement. If he feels these comments are "hurting his credibility", then he needs to deal with that as he sees fit, such as going the Little Red Boogers route.If he feels that arguing over a photograph is inviting a Swatting, shut the damn comments down, then.
I love this place but sometime molehills transform into mountains very quickly.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at February 06, 2013 03:35 PM (YmPwQ)

566 How dare anyone question his majesty Barry. We should all blindly follow him just like the MFM does

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 06, 2013 03:36 PM (1Jaio)

567 You'll admit it's strange to be attacked by your own readers - readers who otherwise enjoy the free content. I think the gap between Ace's approach to political battles/debatesand that of a lot of the commenters has grown. There is a disconnect.
Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 03:30 PM (9KqcB)

Its the internet and everyone gets attacked whether friend or foe. You need a thick skin and a quick wit to survive as a blogger with open commentsand ace has done very well.Better than most. I am just providing my opinon that he needs to keep putting on the skin thickening lotion.

Posted by: polynikes at February 06, 2013 03:39 PM (m2CN7)

568 You'll admit it's strange to be attacked by your own readers - readers who otherwise enjoy the free content. I think the gap between Ace's approach to political battles/debatesand that of a lot of the commenters has grown. There is a disconnect.
-----
I agree. But the disconnect comes from both sides..not every argument is an attack on Ace.

I can imagine that it's very frustrating to see carefully crafted arguments degenerate into virtual shouting matches. But I contend that the "attacks"are few and far between. I also hate to see what should be logical arguments go off on crazy tangents.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at February 06, 2013 03:43 PM (YmPwQ)

569 "It does not prove he shoots SKEET; not even once, let alone multiple times. "

Remember how the media seized on a senseless act of mass murder to dishonestly argue that the President loves shooting skeet? And how conservatives leapt into action, forcing the media to focus on how often, exactly, the President REALLY shoots skeet?

Yep. If it hadn't been for us, the world would never have known that there's a reasonable suspicion that the President almost certainly does not often shoot skeet. But we wouldn't let them get away with that whopper! Stopped 'em right in their tracks. It was glorious.

Posted by: GalosGann at February 06, 2013 03:43 PM (T3KlW)

570 All the AM show talk show hosts are cheerleaders for Obama and the dems.

Posted by: Fresh at February 06, 2013 03:48 PM (O7ksG)

571 No your point on Cantor lines up directly with Milton Friedman, but so much of the idiocy is no structurally baked into the cake they are isolating themselves from our ability to impact profit and loss without defacto pulling the plug

I can see how it looks like that. But we're just one month into the new Congressional session and just three months from an eleciton loss. Too soon to draw any serious conclusions, I think.

The GOP will find courage when voters start paying the bill for Obamacare and the rest of the government. Until then, Dems are in a no-lose situation (which can't last.)

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 04:00 PM (9KqcB)

572 Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at February 06, 2013 03:43 PM (YmPwQ)

You're right the "attacks" are not too frequent. It's just overall approach to political debate in which the divergence is growing. Even between Ace and some of the cobs.

Most of this can be chalked up to the tensions that following losing.

Posted by: CJ at February 06, 2013 04:07 PM (9KqcB)

573 Fuck, our side is idiotic. I mean Ace's side. Whoever proclaimed "never, ever, ever, shot skeet".

New York Conservatives, maybe.

Posted by: nip at February 06, 2013 04:24 PM (11Tdq)

574 I listened to Hannity saying for two years running up to the election how "Obama promised us unemplyoment would go down but it's still above 8%" and cringed every time, because he was setting the bar at 7.9%, a number that could certainly be fudged by election time. And so it was. These guys just can't seem to think a step ahead. The mainsteam face of conservatism is just plain dumb.

Posted by: Beef at February 06, 2013 04:27 PM (mb1uj)

575 It's a picture of Zero "holding" a gun. The smoke is obviously photoshopped. He never fired it.

Posted by: TexBob at February 06, 2013 04:30 PM (4WuWQ)

576 Distrust, it's earned, one lie, falsehood or omission at a time. Or perhaps you think you heard the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, Mr Lauer?

Posted by: MarkD at February 06, 2013 05:26 PM (+xUiW)

577 yes matt you hairless lesbian...when a man who lies all the time says something, proof is usually required that he is not lying...but you would know that if your sole purpose in life wasnt to be a balding walking life support system for an oral man vagina slavishly devoted to the polishing of Obama's rather unimpressive rod.

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright's Sock Puppet at February 06, 2013 06:23 PM (+OTLF)

578 My suggestion for the next White House pic--the JEF in mom jeans and UGG boots operating a chainsaw at Camp David just to prove his manly bona fides.

Posted by: Northern Lurker at February 06, 2013 06:37 PM (GLIve)

579 why so quick to release a photo of Obama shooting and not his birth certificate?

Posted by: tedcanswim at February 07, 2013 08:47 AM (txSxc)

580 Lauer: Affirmative action for the mentally retarded!

Posted by: burt at February 07, 2013 12:35 PM (/QJXp)






Processing 0.08, elapsed 0.3329 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.2584 seconds, 589 records returned.
Page size 368 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat