Sunday, July 27, 2008

Big Dogs, My Ass

These bloggers, folks, perhaps if they could just get some other interests. Maybe THAT would help. Like, for instance, I don't know, instead of surfing the Internet/looking for dot-coms that perpetrate various conspiracy theories (this, in an attempt to denigrate their political opponents), maybe have them check out some art-work; Frank Weston Benson perhaps. If that doesn't work, how 'bout some classic cinema? Anything with Montgomery Clift (no clifffff, not because he was gay) works for me; "The Heiress", "From Here to Eternity", "A Place in the Sun", "Red River", etc.. Oh, and, THEN, after the movie, have them throw some Bedrich Smetana in to the player - Czech nationalism, bro!; "The Maldau", "The Bartered Bride". It's all frigging good, for Christ!........................................Of course, having said all this, the one thing that would help most would be the installation of a little humility. These guys (most of who, let's be clear here, folks, have a clear/textbook diagnosis of paranoid personality disorder), I'm telling you, have actually determined themselves as noteworthy folks (an affirmation arrived at, apparently, through this rather incognito association with a fading sitcom actress). And, yes, me-buckos, until they can come to grips with this little delusion (compare this to me, a person who KNOWS he's insignificant), there could in fact some some even tougher sledding downward. Just ask the family members of Bledsoe, for instance. They'll tell you....................................P.S. And, no, don't even get me going on their lack of frigging humor. This, I'm saying, in that that, me-buckos, would itself be a full-time excursion - an excursion into madness!!!!!

61 comments:

Anonymous said...

dear, dear, will;


It looks like these comments are coming home to roost;

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Voltron, when you get a chance, check out Utah's blog. I just unloaded on Keith Olbermann (one of her heroes). Man, oh man, is she ever going to be pissed!

June 18, 2008 10:10 PM


Are we pissed yet?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Rusty, good to see you over at Politics Plus. It appears that we just left back to back bombs over there. Serves him right, I say, all that character assasination of McCain. It's disgusting, I'm telling you.

June 26, 2008 10:00 PM


Looks like those bombs kind of boomeranged.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

A centrist can't even get a hearing over there. As for Mike, I don't actually think he's a son-of-a-bitch. I get a kick out of him, to be honest with you. Him and Rusty teeing off on each other. It's entertainment PLUS!!

June 28, 2008 7:21 PM


Enjoy cause it seems they are doing it on your blog now.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Great graph, Voltron. Witty and irreverant, as usual (I'm going to get hammered for complimenting you, you know that, right?). The only thing I would change (only my perception, mind you) would be to slide both me and Fox News a little to the right. I would keep Mike and Cliffy, however, to the left of Pink-land. LOL

July 7, 2008 5:10 PM


Which references this
and by your own admission it makes the MSM centrists and you and fox into right wing activists.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Voltron, sorry about that Utah Savage brush-up. I e-mailed her directly and smoothed it over. She's basically a good egg but, yeah, you're right, a tad on the thin-skinned side. If you ever read her blog, you'll find out that she does have some mental health problems and possibly that was at play here. If you check out my latest post, you'll see that we're having a little difference of opinion on the blogger Tomcat (Politics Plus). Feel free to weigh in.

June 13, 2008 7:07 PM


So you admit to covering FOR partisan right wingers but attacking left wing partisans?

Interesting.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Voltron, I just left a bomb over at politicsplus.blogspot.com The guy (Tomcat) was throwing around that Nazi innuendo again. I couldn't help myself. Check it out.

June 14, 2008 8:34 PM


Sucks to get your own medicine back right?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Tom? I'm ready to sick Rusty after him at this point.

May 29, 2008 3:40 PM


Don't like it when YOU get the sick on treatment I guess.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Have you noticed how protective of Eisenhower I've become? You can bash any other President (Bush, Clinton, what have you) and it doesn't bother me but you lay a glove on Ike and I go frigging crazy. You don't think I've got a man-crush on HIM, do you? LOL

May 24, 2008 9:10 PM


In a one word answer,

Yes, in a Montgomery Clift sort of way that is.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

My "evidence"....was pointing out that the source (some loser working out of his basement, I gather)was bogus. I'm sorry, but when people (even those who I don't support) get swift-boated, I tend to get a little berserk. Actually, I thought I was funny (using her sit-com as a means to torture, saying that rather than watching said sit-com, I'd prefer to stare at a chalk-outline of Sal Mineo, etc.). And, just for the record, I went equally ballistic when Kerry got swift-boated in '04. As for the way I came across, insults, sure, but what lies and generalizations did I make? Christ, I was the one who was unfairly/prematurely characterized as a McCain operative. And, bro, I NEVER see any dissent on the Lydia Cornell site. That's MY definition of an echo chamber; everybody reading off the same play-book. Whatever. P.S. Come and visit some time. If you're as nonpartisan as you say you are, you might even like it.

May 10, 2008 7:40 PM


Unlike the placed you have "bombed" at, you actually invited Mike here.

Which nobody did where you go uninvited right?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Have you ever checked out existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com? That guy makes the Lydia clan look like the Claire Boothe Luce Institute. A lot of 9/11 conspiracy crap. P.S. I've heard that France is 80% nuclear. No good?

April 13, 2008 8:11 PM

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Stay tuned, gentlemen. I have yet another Lydia Cornell lambasting just around the corner. Existentialist Cowboy, though, have you checked that garbage out yet? tnp

April 16, 2008 10:06 PM


Both posts showing YOU doing what your crying about here. Asking right wingers to go places and do what you cry about being done here, seems a little hypocritical doesn't it?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Another far-left wack-job to report on, Voltron. The individual goes by the name of 1138 and can be reached at bethat.blogspot.com. Accepts no criticism of Obama, WHATSOEVER, spins the "typical white person" comment to the point of making those who criticize him for it the actual villains, and accuses McCain of staying in an "upscale POW camp" (oxymoronic or what?) Check it out and please leave a comment. I'd love to see you play some devil's advocate there. Later, bro.

April 25, 2008 7:52 PM


Sucks to have a devils advocate show up doesn't it?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I went back, me-bucko. Like a damn fool. Guess what? They're still vilifying me. Of course, I couldn't help myself and left a couple more of my patented tactical nuclear blogs. All that's left is to wait for the fall-out. Later, man.

April 9, 2008 10:09 PM


It looks like YOU aren't as honest or innocent as you pretend to be.

Or as moderate, I bet you wish you hadn't started this,

Because like Will Smith said in Men in Black

Don't start nothing won't be nothing

I hear the karma goddess is such a bitch in ways like that.

And it seems you are her latest target.

For a "take no prisoners" kind of guy, you seem to whine a hell of a lot.

Anonymous said...

Talk about a guy who can't keep his story straight.

Anonymous said...

Will said These bloggers, folks, perhaps if they could just get some other interests. Maybe THAT would help. Like, for instance, I don't know, instead of surfing the Internet/looking for dot-coms that perpetrate various conspiracy theories (this, in an attempt to denigrate their political opponents)"

There's that hippocrissy and do as I say not as I do double standard AGAIN........apparently is ok for YOU to surf the net looking for conspiracy theories and Reich wing talking points to denigrate YOUR political opponents.

Like when you stated Obama wants to bomb Pakistan, instead of the truth that he said he is willing to go into the remote mountain regions to capture or kill a small group of rogue terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 and are still operating training camps for terrorists to do the same according to to General Petraeus.............theres a huge difference between recklessly bombing a country as YOU implied and going into remote mountain regions to capture a small bunch of rogue terrorists that are wanted throught most of the world and are still operating terroist training camps.

General Petraeus seems to and most of the other military experts on the ground seem to agree with Obama's position that we should try to capture or kill the terrorists and stop them from training new ones to attack and murder us and the rest of the world..........do you CLAIM to disagree or know MORE than the military experts or generals on the ground........kinda like Volt CLAIMS to know MORE about energy than all the scientists, PHD's and experts in the field yet cant seem to provide a single fact to support his arguments and disprove Pickins...........go figure!

Anonymous said...

Will LIED and said "2) To Mike, I never said simply that Obama was going to "bomb Pakistan". I said that he (his words) was ready, if he had actionable intelligence, to bomb strategic targets inside of Pakistan.

No YOU NEVER ONCE mentioned "Actionable Intelligence" OR "Strategic Targets..........You GLEEFULLY tried to smear Obama and twist and misrepresent his his position just like a partisan hack like O'Lielly or Sean Hannitty would have here's what you said on TomCats's Blog " Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...
And let's not forget, either, folks, how OBoomBoom (what can I say, the fun's contagious) has threatened to bomb INSIDE OF PAKISTAN! I mean, you think that the civil war in Iraq is bad, trying causing one in a country where extremists can get their hands on 3-4 dozen nuclear weapons. Thankfully, he seems to have backed off this madness.

Anonymous said...

Those facts get you guys EVERY time............facts to a Reich Wing ideologue is like holywater or sunlight to a vampire...............how many lies have you guys been cau=ght in tonight Will and Volt?

Anonymous said...

So apparently will you are against capturing the terrorists that attacked us or stopping them from operating training camps to train more terrorists to kill innocents...........HMMMMMMMMM!

Anonymous said...

YOU NEVER mentioned "actionable intelligence" or "strategic targets".........you chose your words VERY carefully in fact, you said Obama THREATENED and you even capitalized INSIDE PAKISTAN for added empasis implying he wanted to recklessly bomb the country and without even considering he could destabilize it............there is a HUGE difference between going into or to capturing a small group of people in remote mountain regions or strategically targeting remote regions and recklessly bombing INSIDE PAKISTAN to the point of causing civil unrest and destabilization............AND YOU apparently were aware of that distiction thats why YOU used one set of terms to smear and misrepresent Obama's position on Tomcats site and used a COMPLETELY different set of terminolgy to respond to me today YOU KNEW YOU LIED LIKE A SLIMY PARTISAN and YOU WERE TRYING TO COVER UP YOUR BALDFACED LIE.

YOUR NOT SO FAIR AND BALANCED ARE YA BILL...........That WHOPPER OF A LIE WAS WORTHY OF FAUX NEWS AND SEAN HANNITTY!

Anonymous said...

YOU NEVER mentioned "actionable intelligence" or "strategic targets".........you chose your words VERY carefully in fact, you said Obama THREATENED and you even capitalized INSIDE PAKISTAN for added empasis implying he wanted to recklessly bomb the country and without even considering he could destabilize it............there is a HUGE difference between going into or to capturing a small group of people in remote mountain regions or strategically targeting remote regions and recklessly bombing INSIDE PAKISTAN to the point of causing civil unrest and destabilization............AND YOU apparently were aware of that distiction thats why YOU used one set of terms to smear and misrepresent Obama's position on Tomcats site and used a COMPLETELY different set of terminolgy to respond to me today YOU KNEW YOU LIED LIKE A SLIMY PARTISAN and YOU WERE TRYING TO COVER UP YOUR BALDFACED LIE.

YOUR NOT SO FAIR AND BALANCED ARE YA BILL...........That WHOPPER OF A LIE WAS WORTHY OF FAUX NEWS AND SEAN HANNITTY!

Anonymous said...

YOU were forwarding and circulating Reich Wing talking points to make Obama look reckless and inexperienced and thats WHY i dont buy for a second you support Obama and are gonna vote for HIM and not McSame.............lets examine the facts shall we you smear Obama and defend McSame at almost EVERY opportunity, you deny facts and label anyone who disagrees with you as a rabid partisan, and lastly you associate with two of the most partsan Reich Wingers on the Internet.

To further illusrate your hippocrissy you gleefully find Rusty a partisan troll who attacks and slimes others and disrupts other peoples blogs "amusing"........yet when a troll disrupts YOUR blog and attacks you you dont seem to find it as amusing........more double standards and hippocrissy.

Anonymous said...

YOU LIED.........you CLAIMED you sdaid Actionanle Intelligence and STRATEGIC TARGETS............NOW that you got caught you CLAIM that was implied ..............Slimy Biill REALLY Slimy.

Its obvious for anyone but an idiot and/or a Reich wing ideologue what you were trying to do.

You were trying to smear Obama and make him look reckless, inexperienced and naive............now WHY would a fair and balanced non partisan moderate want to do that.

Are We Learning Yet?

Anonymous said...

So are YOU saying General Petraeus is wrong and needs to be fired and/or rempoved since he agrees with Obama that we need to go ,into REMOTE areas on ACTIONABLE INTELLIGENCE to STRATEGICALLY CAPTURE or TAGET THE TERRORISTS.

There is a huge difference between saying going into remote areas on actionable intelligence and Just bombing INSIDE PAKISTAN so as to destabilize it and let the nukes fall into the terrorists hands.

YOU chose your wording VERY carefully and painted a purposely vivid picture........you used one set of terminology to smear and misrepresent Obama's position over at Tomcats and a COMPLETELY different terminology when i called you out.

Come on Man are YOU trying to say its the same and evokes the same picture wehen you paint a picture of THREATENING a country and BOMBING INSIDE that country so as to allow the terrorists to seize power and gain control of nuclear weapons................. vs going into REMOTE mountainous areas on actionable intelligence.

One sounds reckless and dangerous the other sounds reasonable, justified and neccessary!

Anonymous said...

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...
Idiot! I never claimed that I said "actionable intelligence"

Oh Really?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...2) To Mike, I never said simply that Obama was going to "bomb Pakistan". I said that he (his words) was ready, if he had actionable intelligence, to bomb strategic targets inside of Pakistan.

Anonymous said...

So do YOU believe General Petraeus is reckless and incompetent and should be fired since he says the SAME thing as OBAMA!

Anonymous said...

So YOUR implyiing THREATENING to bomb INSIDE PAKISTAN and on actionable intellience going into REMOTE mountain regions or strategically targetting them are the SAME thing............they sure paint two vividly different pictures in my mind and sound night and day different kinda like a swat team sniper on actionable intelligence surgically taking out a killer by patiently WAITING for a clean shot...............VS a large group of people storming the building and opening fire with automatic weapons during a hostage situation.

One sounds logical, and carefully planned out, while the other, sounds reckless and dangerous and something only and inexperience naive person with poor judgement would do.

Anonymous said...

You got a truth-o-cution here like you have gotten in other places.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
IrOnY RaGeD said...

Wow Clif, I bet you thought no one would check out your story on how there's no media bias...

Center for Media and Public Affairs

The Study (careful it's a pdf)

Granted I didn't read all the way through it, but it doesn't seem to say at all what you posted....

Who's the liar now?

Anonymous said...

You really need professional help son, maybe you were dropped on your head or molested as a child.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Hey Bill, just wondering how you can hippocritically attack people on Lydia's blog, Tomcats blog and else where for not coming out against and disavowing outright lies, smears and misrepresentations.............you somehow labeled myself and others as guilty by association for not attacking and disavowing Larry's article about McSame yet YOU NEVER seem to attack or disavow your buddys Voltron;s or Rusty's lies or smears..........Voltron got caught in lie after lie about oil, natural gas, wind, solar and other forms of energy sometimes even contradicting himself in the same post and not a peep out of you.

Same with that slimy smear you tried on Obama where you misrepresented things trying to make him appear reckless, trigger happy, inexperienced, naive and dangerous by carefully crafting your words, you then lied and said you never said "Actionable Intelligence" or "Strategic Targets"..............when about 10 posts earlier you clearly said that very thing to misrepresent what you said previously.

Anonymous said...

So Since General Petraeus clearly agrees with Obama..........do you think Petraeus is incompetent and should be fired.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Sorry doltron BUT you are posting about a study done in March and April,

READ the TITLE and you will see that.

Volume XXII Number 1: March/April 2008(from the header of the study YOU posted the PDF about son.)

which means PRIMARIES.

The one I reference is from the general election cycle;

to wit;

but a think tank finds that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Barack Obama than on John McCain in recent weeks.

and THE KEY quote;

The media center's most recent batch of data covers nightly newscasts beginning June 8, the day after Hillary Rodham Clinton conceded the Democratic nomination, ushering in the start of the general-election campaign. The data ran through Monday, as Obama began his overseas trip.

Sorta DESTROYS any chance it is the study from March-April time frame YOU reference don't it dolty boy?

or this quote;

That was a reversal of the trend during the primaries, when the same researchers found that 64% of statements about Obama -- new to the political spotlight -- were positive, but just 43% of statements about McCain were positive.

The study you reference is from the primaries which I never spoke about, and this shows there is TWO studies;

Even Faux noise gets their place and they were tougher on Obama to NO ones suprise;

The review found that, since the start of the general-election campaign, "Special Report" offered more opinions on the two candidates than all three networks combined.


The way I see it for ya about now son is; either say you dumb as a box of rocks and have NO reading comprehension skills, which is why YOU referenced a study THAT the article I posted is NOT talking about, like DIDN'T you read but searched for disinformation to derail what the study shows;

OR

Your just another gutless chicken hawk lying right wing troll doing what YOU always do;

LIE

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Nicholas, whether he be an actual hominid or one of Clifffff's alter-egos, is done. Those types of knuckle-dradgging comments will not be tolerated. Excoriate troll-like behavior while engaging utterly vile troll-like behavior of your own. THAT is hypocrisy, no-lifes.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Clifffff, 2 words. Get help. O.K.? P.S. Rusty's funny, you're snot.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Sorry Will,

But I am NOT nicholas,

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

So, what do you think of Nicholas, Clifffff? Pretty classy guy, huh?

Anonymous said...

To me, rustyridesagain and nicolas were separated at birth.

But for some reason you LIKE one of them.

I know why you do not like the other.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I like Rusty the same way I like Don Rickles and Triumph the Insult Comic Dog. He amuses me, just like Mike used to amuse me. Of course, now that Mike attacks me, I don't find him all that amusing anymore.

Anonymous said...

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...
I like Rusty the same way I like Don Rickles and Triumph the Insult Comic Dog. He amuses me, just like Mike used to amuse me. Of course, now that Mike attacks me, I don't find him all that amusing anymore."

Hold on a minute Slim.............I never attacked you, i accused you off lying and used facts to back up my position, i focused on what you said...........I never attacked you personally without a point like Crusty or Nicholas did..........so dont sit here and lie and say i attacked you if YOU arent man enough or smart enough to defend your positions and back up your statements thats YOUR problem but dont say I attacked you!

Anonymous said...

SO

It is NOT funny if the attack is directed at YOU eh?

Real moderate attitude there

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Rusty writes in a way that I find humorous. Sue me. I also laugh during Goodfellas and Casino. Mike. Mike, you compared me to Bill O'Reilly. And your tone is ALWAYS of an attacking nature. "Not man enough." "Not smart enough." Do you even read what you write? I answer your "charges". You just don't even try and understand the other person's point of view. I'm to the "left of you". I'm a right-winger pretending to be a moderate. You can't even decide on a talking-point. I've never met anybody like you guys. Never attacked me. Whatever. And I'm not a liar,#^&()(&^$#%. There are different ways to interpret data. With that whole gas tax thing, I included all the taxes that go into a gallon of gas from the making to the distribution. You didn't. But, no, insted of allowing for this difference in interpretation, you immediately call me a liar. Seriously, I don't even think Obama would want your support. He certainly wouldn't admit to it in public.