Wingnut Logic
Today, the New York Times, citing its poll data, suggests that McCain's recent attacks on Barack Obama aren't working and are in fact hurting McCain, not Obama. In response, this blogger at RedState cites the Times article as "proof that the negative attacks on Obama are working." His reasoning: "The absolute hysteria of the New York Times proves the attacks are working." That's the full extent of his logical analysis: if the Times says P, the truth must be not P. The fact that there is no polling data anywhere suggesting that McCain's attacks are working is irrelevant.
On a related note, there appears to be an emerging consensus among many on the Right that McCain is losing because he lacks the stomach to really take the gloves off. It's amazing that so many people can so totally misread the public mood. As Jason Zengerle put it this morning:
On a related note, there appears to be an emerging consensus among many on the Right that McCain is losing because he lacks the stomach to really take the gloves off. It's amazing that so many people can so totally misread the public mood. As Jason Zengerle put it this morning:
It really is hard to see how, after the celebrity ads and the "palling around with terrorists" line and the endangering our troops canard and the Acorn nonsense, that the McCain campaign could be accused of lacking the stomach to get into the gutter. But that, evidently, is going to be the lesson some conservatives will take away from the '08 election: McCain wasn't nasty enough. Ugh.Indeed. It's the wrong lesson, though, so if it's the one they take away from this election, they're going to be in the wilderness a while.
posted by A.L. at 10:07 AM
18 Comments:
How is it the wrong lesson? It's how Democrats took Congress in 2006, by lying and being nasty and ugly for 6 years. They sure didn't do anything else that whole time, and the do-absolutely-nothing-except-investigate-the-Bush-administration 110th Congress is proof of it. Hell, they didn't even do anything to even attempt to fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and then they were taken over anyway.
And, of course, is the Times had reported that McCain's attacks appeared to be working, that would have been proof positive that they were.
So, it's all good for McCain.
I think SteveIL is one of those rare trolls who can make every single word into an outright lie or hateful distortion. Keep up the good work!
you're right, Steve. The 2006 victory had nothing to do with external events like, say, the Iraq War, the administration's response to Katrina, or the fact that another Republican member of Congress was getting indicted every week.
you're right, Steve. The 2006 victory had nothing to do with external events like, say, the Iraq War, the administration's response to Katrina, or the fact that another Republican member of Congress was getting indicted every week.
Did the Democrats in the 110th Congress end the war like they promised? No, they helped expand it. Did the Democrats in the 110th Congress fix the problems as they related to Katrina? No, those actions were done prior to the 110th Congress and real leadership from a quality conservative Republican governor, Bobby Jindal, instead of that miserable failure, liberal Democrat Kathleen Blanco. And let us not forget how Democrats were going to find the guilt of the Bush administration and the Terrorist Surveillance Program and allowing lawsuits of telecom companies to proceed; then they changed their mind.
And you want to talk about suspected, indicted and convicted Democrats, some in Congress? William "Cold Cash" Jefferson. Kwame Kilpatrick. Tony Rezko. Tim Mahoney. Eliot Spitzer. Shall I go on?
Oh, they did manage to raise the minimum wage, except that the minimum wage for workers in American Samoa was delayed, including those at Delmonte's Star Kist plant; it's funny, but Delmonte's corporate office is in Nancy Pelosi's district.
And to top it off, since the 110th Congress took charge in January, 2007, we saw gas prices rise over 80%, and per barrel oil prices rise almost 300%. And then we saw the economy thrown into the toilet. All this on the watch of Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid.
In the last two years, Democrats have been doing exactly what they've done since before the 2006 election, whether it's to you, one of the supporters of Democrats, or to me, an opponent of Democrats: lying. And when they haven't been lying, they've been doing nothing. Except lining their pockets in campaign contributions.
Oh, and how is the 110th Congress rated these days? Are they above single digits? Are the numbers still half of the President?
Steveil,
Thank you so much for your complete and accurate portrayal of Bizzaro world. We may have to memorialize this post as a perfect encapsulated example of concentrated wingnut, so that future historians can demonstrate to their students what was so wrong with the present era we currently live in.
Mr. and/or Mrs. lost, name me one problem with any of those facts I listed.
Speaking of negative, do you think it's ok with Obama when his supporters, of both genders, call Palin a c#nt?
Speaking of negative, do you think it's ok with Obama when his supporters, of both genders, call Palin a c#nt?
They should leave that kind of talk to McCain.
Yeah, well it's coming from Obama supporters (click on the first link in the post). By the way, the "person" had a picture of the shirt on Obama's website (which has since cleaned it up).
I really shouldn't engage this level of nonsense, but I have a question for you, Steve. In 2004, virtually every poll conducted during the election--including the CBS/NYTimes polls--consistently showed George Bush ahead, albeit not by much. Those turned out to be pretty accurate. Why would this year's polls be different? Why would these organizations start cooking their polls now?
Come on, guys, leave steveil alone. He's funny.
I love that he comes here, gets himself all worked up, tries to change the opinions of the rest of us, and fails miserably. All his effort in composing comments with just the right amount of vitriol just falling on our stupid, Obama-loving, deaf ears is just too awesome.
Why would this year's polls be different? Why would these organizations start cooking their polls now?
Barack Obama. They are in love with him, and they would go to any lengths, and have already (even by ignoring his past), to see him win. Because he is the perfect picture of the ultimate liberal candidate. Never mind that he's never done anything in his political life (and I do mean anything); he's the perfect picture of the ultimate liberal candidate.
Steve,
Is being that delusionally paranoid physically painful? Just curious.
Hey, I just got this from the McCain/Palin Campaign: "the polls show John McCain and Governor Palin in a virtual tie."
This was not taken out of context.
Those who cannot construct logically correct sentences are over their head in trying to make logical arguments.
Steveil exemplifies perfectly the paranoid, xenophobic (like many on the right, he seems to regard Democrats as unamerican) base of the modern GOP.
Logic has no hold over his thought processes and facts are just minor inconveniences for them.
Speaking of which, we're still waiting for any evidence of the outrageous claims you made a few days ago.
Is being that delusionally paranoid physically painful?
See, this is one of the things that makes liberals so interesting. They love to talk about how much they love to talk, but then they don't. Especially when someone makes a point that hits home. So what happens? The usual, statements like the one I highlighted above. Hey, that's fine; just don't tell me liberals want to really talk about the issues, because they don't.
OT
By the way, anyone else catch the pro-infanticide Obama lying about his voting record on the Illinois Born-Alive Infant Protection Act?
Steveil,
Thanks for that perfect example of wing-nut "logic", encapsulating the concept that only the trivial or inane things you want to talk about are of interest.
Everybody else has already come to the conclusion that the whole "infanticide" issue is a tissue of lies concocted by dribbling nincompoops. You can move on.
Everybody else has already come to the conclusion that the whole "infanticide" issue is a tissue of lies concocted by dribbling nincompoops.
I think the more accurate statement is:
Everybody who doesn't have a problem with babies born alive after a failed abortion and then dying alone in a hamper has already come to the conclusion that the whole "infanticide" issue is to be avoided since it is a monstrous truth.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home