Skip to main content

View Diary: Remind Me: Which President Tried to Appoint Elizabeth Warren to Regulate the Banks? (95 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  My point is that the number of people being that (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JesseCW

    extreme is small - indeed, probably as small as those who actually take them seriously enough to defend Obama from their attacks.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 06:19:31 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  All of that shit is from the Rec List. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Beetwasher, Jeff Simpson

      Going faster miles an hour, with the radio on.

      by Troubadour on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 06:21:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Your epic whining is on the rec list, too (4+ / 0-)

        Which is why it's idiotic to judge content by whether or not it's on the rec list.

        •  I noted that it's on the Rec List because (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Beetwasher

          the person I was responding to (who isn't you) claimed it was just some obscure comments by a few people.  I corrected them because they're (duh) wrong.  And now you've chimed in with this irrelevant slam.

          Going faster miles an hour, with the radio on.

          by Troubadour on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 06:31:24 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Since you've been proven completely wrong (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MadRuth, JesseCW

            that the issue of cuts to SS would come up...a person would think you'd pipe down about others being "wrong." "Irrelevant?" I guess the non-"irrelevant" thing for you to do is go in full-attack mode to cover the fact of how wrong you were about the subject over all a few weeks ago.

            The beauty of your clueslessness 3 weeks ago is matched with your outrage now at having been proved so wrong.

            America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

            by catilinus on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 06:40:15 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  What *are* you talking about? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Beetwasher

              Going faster miles an hour, with the radio on.

              by Troubadour on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 06:50:48 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You don't recall accusing folks of being (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JVolvo, MadRuth, JesseCW

                mentally ill a few weeks ago for thinking SS cuts would be in the budget?

                Surely you must recall that & now feel ashamed for having been so wrong.

                America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

                by catilinus on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 06:58:49 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No, I don't recall it. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Beetwasher

                  Please refresh my memory.

                  Going faster miles an hour, with the radio on.

                  by Troubadour on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 07:08:31 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I sympathize. When you label opponents "paranoid" (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JVolvo, MadRuth, JesseCW

                    & "delusional" on a regular basis it must be hard to recall each & ever time even over a period of a couple of weeks.

                    "...paranoid delusion of Obama with the cleaver in hand sizing up Social Security.."

                    America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

                    by catilinus on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 07:18:06 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The comment is a criticism of claims (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Beetwasher

                      that cutting Social Security is an objective of the administration rather than an ill-conceived bargaining chip.  I never claimed it wouldn't come up.  The fact is that if the administration wanted it, they could have it passed immediately by not tying it to tax increases on the rich.  Obviously they don't.

                      Going faster miles an hour, with the radio on.

                      by Troubadour on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 07:23:32 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Sure. While the cuts are proposed in the (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        JVolvo, JesseCW

                        President's budget he didn't really propose them, the Republicans did. I get that meme.

                        ...and while you claimed the idea of the president "sizing up" social security cuts was a "paranoid delusion", you were actually saying in coded language that a "Paranoid delusion" would come up after all, but that it just would be a bargaining chip & not an objective...except that this new addition of "bargaining chip" vs "objective" wasn't in the post because...I guess...conspiracy nuts removed it? or the batmobile? or something I guess.

                        In any case, you never said it was a "paranoid delusion" and it is a "paranoid delusion" to think you ever said it, because...I guess...only someone suffering from a "paranoid delusion" would think you meant a "paranoid delusion" when you said it.

                        Yeah...your explanation makes sense.

                        America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

                        by catilinus on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 07:37:29 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

          •  Whatever (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JVolvo, MadRuth

            I'm a little disappointed in you.  Once upon a time you could be counted on to post sensible, informative, sometimes insightful thoughts.

            This is nothing more than a bullshit, crybaby temper tantrum, and you know it.   That's why you're doubling-down on the snarky pissing-and-moaning.

            That's certainly your right, but you seem to be offended that the rest of us aren't all rallying around your tear-soaked flag, and that's just sad, really.  

            Carry on.   I'll be over here staying irrelevent, but with my pride intact.

          •  Another word of advice (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MadRuth

            You're not half as amusing and clever as you've convinced yourself, or been led to believe.   No matter how hard you try to push this "derangement/batmobile" thing, it's just not that funny and reflects more poorly on you than on your intended target audience.

            But again, it's your right to throw yourself boldly upon your own snarky little sword, so I'm not gonna stop you.

            Oh, and if I want more "If X, then you'd probably Y" arguments (I'm not calling it "logic") I'll go visit RedState or some other cesspool of idiocy.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site