Who has the best lights in town? Vote now for your favorite in our holiday lights contest.
Shot by Dan
“Success is that old ABC — ability, breaks, and courage.”
View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem
I still want to know why GDAD won’t criticize Dan for his “juvenile idiocy” in claiming that Rachael Maddow is hot. Dan should be more mature( and a better judge of good looking women)
I think we all know whodunit!!
Terps, I used the term “attractive,” a perfectly mature word, to describe Maddow, not “hot.” That’s what you and others have twisted it into.
The entire “Who’s got the hottest anchors” bit is too monumentally stupid for one thread, far less three.
hey dano, I’m told that females think Peyton Manning is hot. I betcha some think the same of maddow. “attractive”, “hot”, what’s the big diff?
How are the Rachel Maddow swimsuit posters selling?
#1 Terps, I answered your idiocy back on the previous thread. Go look.
Why the hell are you dragging this juvenile pre-K crap onto yet another thread? You’re turning into another MMM.
Comment by Suzie — November 28, 2012 @ 10:59 am
While I haven’t seen one, my guess is that they are selling better than the SuzieQ Swimsuit Calendars.
The reason that you did not say that Rachael Maddow is hot is because she is not hot. She tries to look like a man.
The Republicans continue to shoot themselves in the head.
Did y’all read the commentary by former teacher, broadcaster and business owner Glenn Rose today on the op-ed page? Holy smoke, he absolutely destroys the dumb RWer meme that has been echoed so many times on this blog: “When the citizens realize they can vote themselves money from the public treasury, that nation is doomed.”
1. It wasn’t written by an American patriot, as it’s been so widely alleged.
2. It apparently came from an anti-Democratic British monarchist and aristocrat who feared Democracy.
3. It supposedly dates to years before the U.S. ever became a nation.
4. It draws entirely wrong conclusions about the end of Democracy in Athens.
In other words, the RWers who use that line are wrong in just about ever “fact” they believe they know surrounding it.
#1 And as Dan points out, he didn’t use the word “hot.” Seems like you’re regressing to the days of your Elmwood Park prevarications.
If today’s Republicans are not paying attention to this, they will go the way of the dinosaur.
#9 Gee, then why did you lie and claim he used the word “hot,” terps?
Rachael Maddow needs a swimsuit poster wearing those goofy black manglasses. Even GDAD would think that’s hot.
Terps, I don’t know what your issue is with, Rachel Maddow, but I will say I think she is very attractive. To stoop to your level on this; she iz hot yo! On da real, she would be one of my baby mommaz any day! What do you have next period?
I think ladies with short hair like that is really cute!
What’s the difference between hot and attractive? Maturity? Is this blog designed for a nursing home or something?
You libs won. Cheer up a little bit. If someone is hot, call them hot. You may actually begin to emerge from the grumpy funk.
Maddow wears a minimum of makeup and purposely keeps her hair cropped so she is not seen as another vacuous bimbo. She wants her words to speak for her. I personally think she is attractive but who cares what she or Chris Wallace looks like?
Distressing news about the rate of sea level rise. Sea levels are increasing at a rate of 3.2mm (.126 inches) a year instead of the previous estimate of
2mm/yr. In fact the conservative estimate was that of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an agency which many deniers claim is alarmist.
Rachel Maddow is smarter, better educated, and makes a lot more money than most people on this blog. These facts can render poorly endowed men insecure.
All right, folks, we’re done with the attractive-anchor stuff. It’s getting B O R I N G. For those of you who have been wallowing in that, how about you write some comments that are worthy of a 17-year-old, at least. This 13-year-old schoolyard banter is over.
And again he whines! We are perfectly cheerful terps, we are not the ones making a spectacle of ourselves, you are. As long as you are here behaving like a tween, we cannot help but be in a “grumpy funk”. Grow up or go away.
Let’s get back to mature subjects like wealth redistribution. Oh God it has to be depressing to be a liberal.
Please stop feeding the Trolls!! This is ridiculous.
It is indeed depressing, terps. The reason being that we have to keep reading your ridiculous crap. Don’t you have some money to go count?
Can one of you libs admit that it felt good for one day to talk about something other than hating the rich. You all claim to not be depressed, but Dan is the only one who even attempts to be lighthearted and funny. You all view the word as an unfair, racist, homophobic place run by greedy white males who need to be punished. It is impossible to be happy with that world view. You can elect democrats every day for the next hundred years and none of you will be happier.
Why? Because envy and revenge never bring happiness.
“For those of you who have been wallowing in that, how about you write some comments that are worthy of a 17-year-old, at least.”
Check out my post at 12:11 p.m., nobody here commented on it, including you.
Best and worst run states:
1. North Dakota
49. Rhode Island
46. New Jersey
Yes… Yes, terps. Let’s talk about wealth redistribution.
It’s easy to be a “well run” state if you don’t have any people living there. That’s my take-away from JohnW’s statistic.
#26 See what happens to his mood when terps has to buy a guy a couple of lunches?
“Can one of you libs admit that it felt good for one day to talk about something other than hating the rich. You all claim to not be depressed, but Dan is the only one who even attempts to be lighthearted and funny. You all view the word as an unfair, racist, homophobic place run by greedy white males who need to be punished. It is impossible to be happy with that world view. You can elect democrats every day for the next hundred years and none of you will be happier.”
–Comment from Terps
Passage in today’s Washington Post from a piece written by Stuart Stevens, Romney’s chief campaign strategist:
“On Nov. 6, Mitt Romney carried the majority of every economic group except those with less than $50,000 a year in household income. That means he carried the majority of middle-class voters. While John McCain lost white voters under 30 by 10 points, Romney won those voters by seven points, a 17-point shift.”
So there is some hope and optimism for you, Terps! Actually you guys won! The only caveat to that is, oops, there are a hell of lot more people who live in households with under $50,000 in income than there are in households with more than $50,000. And THAT has been driven by conservative policies enacted by the GOP.
So, it only has itself to blame. Trickle-down didn’t work!
It was a big fat lie, that you fooled yourselves with just like you fooled yourselves into believing Romney was ahead when he wasn’t. And now the chickens have come home to roost!
“Dan is the only one who even attempts to be lighthearted and funny” comment by terps
terps, you continue to be as wrong as a sore loser can be. For instance read comment #64 on this thread, then click the link at the end:
“It’s easy to be a “well run” state if you don’t have any people living there. That’s my take-away from JohnW’s statistic.”
Yep, when all you’ve got to manage is corn and cows (or an oil boom as in N.D.) it’s REAL easy.
I clicked on Justin’s link and heard Romney’s 47% bit for the first time. It sounded a lot worse than I’d imagined it did. Tough to get elected by a country when you openly express hatred and scorn for half of it. Can’t believe that strategy didnt work out for him.
The 5 best run states you mentioned have a combined population of 8.900,582 in the 2010 census. Of the five worst, New Jersey alone has 8,807,501. Smallness has its advantages.
I wake up happy that Obama won every single day. Then, at some point, Boehner and McConnell wander into my field of sight and they make me even happier about it. And now Reid’s going after the phantom filibuster and the Senate republicans are wetting themselves over it… and that also makes me happy. As a democrat, I’ve got a lot to be happy about.
#30 Something that one of our trolls has said before when talking about countries. So I’m sure she would agree when it comes to states.
I think because he is so miserable, terps assumes the rest of the world is. If we saw the world as you right wingers present it here, that would indeed be cause for despair. That you keep getting beaten back on the national level gives us all hope and encouragement. Long may you rant and offend. I just wish you did it somewhere else so we could enjoy this blog.
You see those median incomes in all of those states? That is why people consider 250K and up to be “the rich”. Like Dan says, the vast majority are not and never will be.
It appears Cuccinelli has secured the GOP nomination for Governor. I sure hope the Dems run somebody worthwhile. I would rather vote for a candidate than against one, but I can’t see how any choice could be worse than KC. If it seems close, I will probably vote for whomever is running against him. If it looks like a solid Dem victory , I might just skip it. I’m still not sure how I feel about McAuliffe, byt better him than KC.
Governor McAuliffe it is.
There are grumblings out of DC that the Obama camp wants to raise taxes now, then work on spending cuts in 2013. If true, we will plummet off the fiscal cliff for sure and I wouldn’t blame the GOP, although I’m sure many on this board will.
Side Note: If you take the unfunded entitlments vs. projected revenue for the next 50 years, we are actually $87 trillion in debt.
dobbs, I can remember voting for Chuck Robb for Senator in the 90′s after I had sworn him off. A guy named Ollie North made me do it.
I hope you can open this link. It gives some historical perspective on fiscal cliff management in U.S. history.
I wake up happy that Obama won every single day.
Translation: Keep them goodies rollin’ in.
I mean sure, the takers are always going to be glad Democrats win. They are satisfied to trade their freedom for government subsistence. These kinds of people have no concept of real achievement and the rewards that come with it. They don’t think that way. Seventy years of slow conditioning has gotten people to this point. It’s probably the saddest consequence of this takeover.
Cooch in 2013!
It’s very easy to see the plan. 0bama wants the fiscal cliff. He knows the media will blame the GOP. He’s happy to let the Bush tax cuts sunset, because he’ll get the tax hikes and military cuts he wants. Then in a magnanimous showing, he’ll propose to ‘cut’ income taxes for some groups, just not the rich. Meanwhile everyone’s taxes will have risen substantially because of 0bamacare and other taxes, but the far-left media won’t mention any of that.
And this was all possible because Boehner folded his pair of aces a year and a half ago. The Tea Party House voted to cut $4 trillion without tax increases. Boehner should have stopped negotiating at that point. He would have prevailed.
Girl has been correct on everything so far including the election when you discount the cheating.
I wanted to repeat this post, because it’s important and needs to be read. It’s from a thread from several days ago that I just responded to:
Those candidates who uphold the word of God and condemn abortions will prosper in the end. Those who decide to placate the evil elements and go with the pro-abortion view will lose.
You can’t go wrong by doing the right thing. The two people most likely to be canonized saints in my lifetime, Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II, both spoke out vehemently against abortion at every opportunity. There is absolutely no doubt God sees abortion as a grievous abomination.
It’s time everyone here to open your eyes and see this hideous act for what it is.
“It’s very easy to see the plan. 0bama wants the fiscal cliff. He knows the media will blame the GOP. He’s happy to let the Bush tax cuts sunset, because he’ll get the tax hikes and military cuts he wants.”
. . . And, the GOP is going to help him drive that bus over it!
Rachel Maddow is smarter, better educated, and makes a lot more money than most people on this blog.
Smart people don’t believe in an ideology that has never succeeded in the history of the world in bettering mankind. Intelligent people look at history, observe the systems that have produced prosperity. Communism has only produced misery.
That’s why inherently, no liberal can be called intelligent.
I certainly don’t look for any backbone from Boehner now. America is going to have to go through a lot more misery before people begin to see. Once they understand, it will be too late. Russia had to live with it’s error for 70 years. Cuba is at 53.
You people who think you won, what is it you’ve won? Can any of you name one single thing 0bama has done for capitalism? For the private sector? How long before you figure this out?
It’s easy to be a “well run” state if you don’t have any people living there.
This is the same chick that blabs about Iceland and Luxembourg being so much better run than America.
Six posts in 25 minutes. The Suz is posting in full-auto mode!
And like most full-auto fire, it misses the mark more often that not.
#55, JW, it’s understandable that you’d choose the analogy you did, but you miss the point. Full auto firing allows one to make everything a target, and thus declare 100% accuracy everytime. This is why the consistently wrong poster #54 claims to be always right, and why makers of fully automatic weapons, or those that can be easily converted to full auto, will still claim that they save lives, because they distort definitions to suit themselves.
Bruce Bartlett censored by Fox News for GW Bush views.
Which posts was I wrong on, John W.? The one where I agreed with you about best-run states? Or the one in which I implied Rachel Maddow wasn’t a beauty queen?
What is it that Wall Street seems to know that the conservatives on here seem to deny??
I love how everything I post, I get to see twice.
“Let’s get back to mature subjects like wealth redistribution. Oh God it has to be depressing to be a liberal.”
Comment by Terps at #23
Fellow bloggers, I must admit that Terps may be right. My happiness crumbled this afternoon as my Liberal world was shaken to its core by news more shocking than the dearth of Republican votes in the Melrose Precinct; more egregious than banning concealed carry at your favorite local watering hole; more piercing than Warner Dallhouse’s pomposity; more catastrophic than … SOCIALISM! That is what proposed Rule 14b advances – an international socialist agenda! Those commies at the Royal and Ancient and the USGA devised this shameless scheme to redistribute wealth on professional golf tours around the world. I mean, in the past two years, three – THREE – entrepreneurs using belly putters won three of golf’s richest prizes, thereby creating thousands of jobs world-wide (not really, but mentioning job creators is so vogue).
By now, you all realize I am speaking of Rule 14b (effective in 2016 – the delay in implementation is modeled after the ACA) will ban the practice of anchoring a club against the body to make a stroke. I think this is #101 on Alinsky’s list of … what was that list for? Anyway, no more long putters for aging capitalists who no longer possess the requisite gravitas to putt like a real man or woman. Doomed I am (even Yoda feels the sting of this rule change), as my ability to putt conventionally vanished about the same time cashiers started asking, “Are you eligible for a senior discount, sir?”
So Terps, I bow to your prescience. I am indeed, depressed!
“Which posts was I wrong on, John W.? The one where I agreed with you about best-run states? Or the one in which I implied Rachel Maddow wasn’t a beauty queen?”
All of them!
I see that many spent an inordinate amount of time on the irrelevant topic of attractiveness of professional women. Not surprised. It’s a complete double standard of course. For some reason we value a bikini more than brain.
This was elegantly illustrated to me by accident this week. In the course of designing a student activity, I sought some images on web to use as illustrations. In particular, I wanted images of children fishing: a boy, and a girl.
So, bear in find we have safe searches for images in an elementary school and the first image search term I used was “boy fishing”.
The returned image search was just what I wanted.
The next search term was “girl fishing”
It was not what I needed. You should try the same search. Promise it’s not pornographic. But it does illustrate something about our culture.
#49 Ah yes, other than troll’s horrendously wrong election prediction, let’s fondly recall some of the other gems (and this is just from memory; think how long the list would be if I had kept track):
–The Giles 10 Commandments case would play a huge role in the election.
–Obama would step in to settle the Chicago teacher strike and hog all the credit.
–The MSM would overwhelmingly attack and demean coaches Boeheim and K simply because they are conservative Catholics.
Just a few examples of the troll’s accuracy.
Scott W, I had just moved back from California in the fall of ’94, and since I was planning to go back, I kept my voter registration on Marin County, mainly due to being disappointed in Robb. Voting for Ollie was never gonna happen. I consider him to be a criminal. So, I turned in an absentee ballot. Turns out I’ve never been back to California, but at the time I thought I eventually would.
I did the fishing search, Mike Scott. What it illustates about our culture is not good.
–The Giles 10 Commandments case did not play a huge role in the election because of election fraud.
–Obama did not step in to settle the Chicago teacher strike and hog all the credit because of election fraud.
–The MSM did not overwhelmingly attack and demean conservative Catholic coaches Boeheim and K simply because of election fraud.
Re: Dan Casey @ 11:20 am
Exact quote vs. sentiment?
As to one version often misattributed to Jefferson, “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” see: http://tinyurl.com/3ecxz9b
Although it cannot be found in his works (as documented by this site) note the statement,
“It bears a very vague resemblance to Jefferson’s comment in a prospectus for his translation of Destutt de Tracy’s Treatise on Political Economy: ‘To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, —the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, & the fruits acquired by it.’” — Lipscomb, Andrew A. and Albert E. Bergh, eds. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson. 14:446; Washington, D.C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association of the United States, 1903-04. 20 vols.
Similar variations and “vague resemblance” can also be found in other writings of the FFs — albeit, to the best of my knowledge, not the exact wording of “When the citizens realize they can vote themselves money from the public treasury, that nation is doomed.”
There are a number of James Madison quotes (particularly about Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1) that have echos of the sentiment.
There are some Franklin quotes that have something of the sentiment in them, e.g., “I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it.” – On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor, November 29, 1766.
IMHO, to point out that the exact words cannot be found does not establish that the sentiment was missing among the FFs.
That’s right Dan. I think I heard somewhere it was Bush’s fault.
Well, Dave Hicks, just because you can’t prove Jefferson DIDN’T say, “Half the lies they tell about me aren’t true,” doesn’t suggest that he said it.
That was Yogi Berra, btw.
#67 And rampant communism.
From whom is it we “take from” “because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much“? When did wanting the wealthy to pay their proportionate and progressive share become abhorrent to Jefferson?
“Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise.” –Thomas Jefferson to J. Madison, 1785.
“My observations do not enable me to say I think integrity the characteristic of wealth.” –Thomas Jefferson to E. Pendleton, 1776.
And why is that seen as because they “acquired too much” as opposed to simply fair?
Just flipping through the “Rate My Professors” site and decided to see what Paul Krugman’s students thought of him.
On the whole, not much. “Lazy, unprepared, boring, terrible lecturer, unintelligent, and not open to discussion” are among the descriptions. The few who said positive things by and large added politically partisan comments.
So this is at a liberal university, folks, a so-called renowned genius. Yet those who know him first hand don’t like him. So he’s wrong on everything AND he’s a load. This is why my nephews didn’t go Ivy, people. They wanted a real education.
Werent you the band manager /bass player
for a 3 piece band in Silver Spring..
Grumpy Funk and the Righteous Terp.
I think I saw a band poster when I was in
service….whatever happened to Grumpy and Funk?
Re: Dan Casey @ 9:37 pm
Don’t believe that I attributed the Yogi Berra’s “sentiment” to Jefferson or to any of the FFs. So, what’s the point of your straw-man?
(BTW, just because Yogi Berra said something doesn’t mean other BB players didn’t think it, either.)
My suggestion was that to point out that albeit the exact words cannot be found does not establish that the sentiment was missing among the FFs — particularity as there are other recorded quotes that have a “vague resemblance” to an exact spurious quotes in question and there are still others, which express somewhat parallel sentiment.
FWIIW, there are many, many points upon which the FFs were not in total agreement. Hence, the high likelihood that some FF or FFs disagreed with others on virtually any point.
FWIIW2, I dislike spurious quotes. I applaud exposing them. OTOH, it is a stretch to assume that exposing a spurious quote proves that there was not such a sentiment.
IMHO, that is rather like the Argumentum ad Logicam fallacy (a.k.a. the Fallacy fallacy):
Argument A for the conclusion C is fallacious.
Therefore, C is false.
No. Whatever the truth-value of a conclusion is not proven or disproven. Just that one argument for it is disproven.
Likewise proving a given quote is spurious only proves it is spurious.
Fallacious arguments and spurious quotes only establish that the opposition in a debate have failed to make their point. Neither fallacious arguments and spurious confirm the the truth-value of a conclusion or the existance of a sentiment.
However, the existence of other documented quotes do, OTOH, have probative value as to the existence of the sentiment.
Do unto others.
#67 Actually, Dan, I’m looking forward to the explanation as to how somebody who claims to be always right was unable to see the massive “fraud” coming, while dummies like Nathan Silver and a number of polls had it exactly right.
Maybe all of them were let in on the fraud ahead of time? Yeah, that’s the ticket. It makes as much sense as suzie’s claim of widespread fraud in the millions that the Republicans have yet to uncover proof of.
#73 Aw, isn’t that sweet. I post some quotes from a conservative who thinks Krugman is exactly right about the economy and suzie has to go look up something negative in response.
Dave Hicks, not for nothing, but when people quote a famous and influential political history icon, it is the quote that is important, carries the impetus of the point and gives it the gravitas so desired. The “sentiment” belying an incorrectly attributed quote is quite irrelevant in this particular scheme. Defending it, even more so.
#76 That restored my faith in humanity today, Art.
Thanks Art, that was truly a wonderful story, he seems like a great person and a credit to the police force!
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 12:53 pm
“when people quote a famous and influential political history icon, it is the quote that is important, carries the impetus of the point and gives it the gravitas so desired.”
I fully agree. You are absolutely right. That’s why I dislike (hate might be a better word) spurious quotes.
OTHO, disproving the quote takes the wind out of the impetus of argument being put forward for the debater’s point and discredited the debater making the point — however, it has no bearing on the truth-value of a conclusion. The conclusion is not proven or disproved.
It’s a gotcha — not a proof of truth-value.
“The ‘sentiment’ belying an incorrectly attributed quote is quite irrelevant in this particular scheme.”
I’m not sure I understand the intent of that sentence.
a : to give a false impression of
b : to present an appearance not in agreement with
a : to show (something) to be false or wrong
b : to run counter to
I’m the last one to complain about typos /proofos / spellchecker road kill / etc.
However, did you intend, “The ‘sentiment’ underlying an incorrectly attributed quote is quite irrelevant in this particular scheme.”
If so, disagree — particularly in a case like this where the “sentiment” or “opinion” is often attributed to the FFs (plural) and where the “sentiment” or “opinion” is documented in the FFs’ writing. IMHO, all the more so, when some appear to be claiming that the spurious quote proves something other than the opposing debater blew it by introducing the spurious quote.
Historical Argumentum ad Verecundiam and /or Ipse Dixit fallacies are typically suspect anyway — as situations etc change over time.
Were you to misquote an historical figure about gun control would that discredit your basic position on gun control or just be a tactical mistake in debating skills?
Name is required
A valid email is required (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Comment is required
Your email address will not be published.All fields are required to comment.
Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:06:31 +0000
Metro Columnist Dan Casey knows a little bit about a lot of things but not a heck of a lot about most things. That doesn't keep him from writing about them, however. So keep him honest!
He welcomes your rants, raves and considered opinions, so long as the language is civil (i.e. no four-letter words). He'll read all your posts and may or may not respond.