vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

2.21.2008

It's getting hot under the dome

The weather may be chilly outside, but partisan politics are heating up in the Statehouse.

For example, Senate President Pro Tempore Peter Shumlin is beating his drum about Gov. Jim Douglas following in the late Gov. Richard Snelling's footsteps. Shumlin wants Douglas to sit down with Democratic leadership in the Legislature and look for solutions to this year's financial challenges. He says he's made this request repeatedly, but gets no response.

Shumlin says he talked with Douglas this week (they touch base every week) about one of the tough choices that the governor's budget poses. According to Shumlin's account of the conversation, he observed that Douglas had "assured us that his close friendship with President Bush" would help pave the way for a waiver for the Catamount Health plan for uninsured Vermonters. The state wanted to be able to use some of its federal allotment to cover uninsured Vermonters with incomes between 200 and 300 percent of poverty. The federal government rejected the waiver request, so now the state has to pay the full cost of that coverage. In next year's budget, that will be $7.5 million.

Stay with me here. Shumlin said he made the point that the Douglas budget covers the $7.5 million expense, but proposes to restore previously higher health insurance premiums to Vermonters with lower incomes to raise $5.4 million. "I was trying to explain the tough choices for Democrats," Shumlin said.

Secretary of Administration Mike Smith says that in the course of thise conversation, Shumlin proposed eliminating coverage or at least the subsidy for uninsured Vermonters with incomes between 200 and 300 percent of poverty. Smith said Douglas rejected the idea on the spot.

Shumlin said he never made such a suggestion.

This discussion took place at a private meeting, but Thursday, the Douglas administration released a letter Smith sent to Shumlin saying the governor wouldn't go along with Shumlin's plan to shrink Catamount.

Now the two are disputing each other's accounts of the meeting.

Yikes. There are weeks left in this session and the sand is already flying.

-- Nancy Remsen

posted by vt.Buzz | 6:49 PM |

Comments:

Impeach shumlin

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:50 PM, February 21, 2008

Let's see. A conversation took place behind closed doors and we're supposed to take Shumlin's word on what was and was not said . . . ?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:30 PM, February 21, 2008

or Mike Smith's?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:58 AM, February 22, 2008

Mike Smith would never ever mislead or spout half truths. Just take the lottery issue for example. Oh yeah. Don't use that one.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:14 AM, February 22, 2008

And our governor said he values public safety and is committed to fully staffing the Vermont state police. Yeah. We should believe him and Michael Smith.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:18 AM, February 22, 2008

Howierd Dean refused to increase State Police staff, at least Jim Douglas has steadily added troopers to the ranks since taking office.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:29 AM, February 22, 2008

"Jim Douglas has steadily added troopers to the ranks since taking office."

30 some vacancies and no new cadet class(es?). Yeah, Douglas is all over adding to the ranks. Puhlease.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:44 AM, February 22, 2008

I hope the troopers don't endorse Doesless this time around. He doesn't deserve it (and probably never did).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:56 AM, February 22, 2008

Jim Douglas is a hypocrite !

He says he supports Public Safety, even adding trooper positions, but now follow the money -- oh yeah, there is not enough money to fund all those positions!

This allows Jim Douglas to speak from both sides of his mouth!

Then to top it off - he proposes to raid local PDs to insure the state may have enough troopers!

Thus he is now raising taxes and putting local communities at risk!

Jim Douglas was suposed to provide more good jobs, and make VT safer - he has failed at both!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:38 PM, February 22, 2008

True that ^

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:39 PM, February 22, 2008

Hmmm ... a credibility contest between Peter Shumlin and Jim Douglas. I don't think it's much of a contest.

Political insiders can nitpick at Douglas, but I think the average Vermonter perceives him as an honest man, whatever his faults.

I'd be interested to see poll numbers on the issue. Even more interested to see a poll of journalists and/or lawmakers who have had dealings with Shumlin.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:25 PM, February 22, 2008

I'm sure it's a complete and total accident that Shumlin is perceived to be untrustworthy.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:55 PM, February 22, 2008

Hmm...... the nose on Pinnochio
and the nose on Shumlin.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:19 PM, February 22, 2008

Anonymous said...

"I'm sure it's a complete and total accident that Shumlin is perceived to be untrustworthy."

No it's ludicrous to imply that Mike Smith or any other member of the jimi douglas experience is trustworthy, little nameless-nitwit fella.

Nice try. No sale.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 1:35 PM, February 23, 2008

"No it's ludicrous to imply that Mike Smith or any other member of the jimi douglas experience is trustworthy, little nameless-nitwit fella.
Nice try. No sale."

Please point to exactly where I said Mike Smith was trustworthy, little idiot fella.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:08 PM, February 23, 2008

"No it's ludicrous to imply that Mike Smith or any other member of the jimi douglas experience is trustworthy, little nameless-nitwit fella.
Nice try. No sale."

"Please point to exactly where I said Mike Smith was trustworthy, little idiot fella."

Please point out where I said you did in the passage you've cited, little toodumbtolive fella.

That's what I thought.

Oy, Gevalt, no wonder you post anonymously, little nameless-nitwit fella.

Get somebody to define the word "imply" to ya, shmendrik.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:27 PM, February 23, 2008

Ah, so it's the ol' you-didn't-say-it-but-you-implied-it song and dance, eh, little nitwit fella?

The same song and dance you've rejected countless times when applied to you, eh, little hypocrite nitwit fella?

You're a hypocrite. You're a liar. You're an anti-social psycho.

Have a great day!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:28 PM, February 23, 2008

This comment has been removed by the author.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:51 PM, February 23, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Ah, so it's the ol' you-didn't-say-it-but-you-implied-it song and dance, eh, little nitwit fella?"

Well, aren't you quite the little man playin' dress up in Daddy's clothes, little fella!

"The same song and dance you've rejected countless times when applied to you, eh, little hypocrite nitwit fella?"

Nice try.

Actually, it's not even close. The fact that you can't grasp that distinction makes the picture of you playing dress up that much more poignant, little fella. It also makes it abundantly clear that you've had more than a few too many anvils land on your head, little "lookin' more like Wile E everyday now", fella.

"You're a hypocrite. You're a liar. You're an anti-social psycho."

Nah, but you've clearly got bupkis while growin' more desperate and pathetic by the second, Wile E.

"Have a great day!"

Way ahead of ya, little fella. I'm walkin' on sunshine and sowin' anvils, everywhere I go.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:04 AM, February 24, 2008

Right. Sure.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:49 AM, February 24, 2008

jwcoop really needs some medication

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:36 AM, February 24, 2008

"You're an anti-social psycho."

JWCOOP that'd like the pot calling the kettle black!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:38 PM, February 24, 2008

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "It's getting hot under the dome":

"jwcoop really needs some medication"

In other words, ya got bupkis.

You need somethin' to say, little fella.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 1:09 PM, February 24, 2008

Okay, before this thread devolved into an insult contest, the question at hand was the credibility of Jim Douglas and Peter Shumlin.

Someone then suggested that Mike Smith and the entire Douglas Administration lacked trustworthiness.

Evidence, please?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:30 PM, February 24, 2008

IndependentVter said...

"Okay, before this thread devolved into an insult contest, the question at hand was the credibility of Jim Douglas and Peter Shumlin."

In other words, before I called your sorry butt on your bogus premise and the fact you've got bupkis to back it up, little independent of the facts and reality, alleged VTer fella?

Ya had no factual foundation or supporting evidence to support your slop when ya coughed this load of unsubstantiated rubbish up then and ya got your customary bupkis now. What's changed?

That's what I thought.

"Someone then suggested that Mike Smith and the entire Douglas Administration lacked trustworthiness."

"Evidence, please?"

Nice try, nitwit. No sale. You muttered some meshuggah malarkey while pontificating how most alleged "political insiders" may take issue with douglas, but you suspect the average VTer perceives him to be honest in spite of his failures.

Again, evidence please?

That's what I thought.

Ya had no supporting evidence or factual basis for your ignorant slop the first time around and ya got bupkis now.

Of course, ya got now evidence that you're either independent or a VTer then and ya got bupkis now, too.

So, outside of your well-established history of making claims you can't substantiate while presuming to speak for people that don't exist or hold the views you attribute to them, just what credentials do you have, little pretentious fraudulent fella?

That's what I thought.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:45 PM, February 24, 2008

Anonymous said...

And our governor said he values public safety and is committed to fully staffing the Vermont state police. Yeah. We should believe him and Michael Smith.

We should, eh? Absent evidence, why?

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:13 PM, February 24, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Howierd Dean refused to increase State Police staff, at least Jim Douglas has steadily added troopers to the ranks since taking office."

He did, eh, little nameless-nitwit fella?

Just for the hell of it, why don't ya do something completely different and actually substantiate one of your questionable claims, little factually-challenged fella?

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:17 PM, February 24, 2008

Anonymous said...

"I'm sure it's a complete and total accident that Shumlin is perceived to be untrustworthy."

Nah, it's just another one of your unsubstantiated allegations that assume facts not in evidence, little factually-challenged fella. It's no different than the rest.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:30 PM, February 24, 2008

jw, are all Christians "neo-nazis"? Talk about racism!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:37 AM, February 25, 2008

"You do realize that Jews and Gentiles are both part of the Human Race, don't you, little neo-nazi nitwit, fella?"

So why call somebody a "goyishe kop?"

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:04 AM, February 25, 2008

"Just for the hell of it, why don't ya do something completely different and actually substantiate one of your questionable claims, little factually-challenged fella?"

Why don't you do something completely different and actually add something or shut the hell up?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:05 AM, February 25, 2008

You sad people still reading JW's crap?

Do yourself a favor and just don't read his posts.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:50 AM, February 25, 2008

"You sad people still reading JW's crap?

Do yourself a favor and just don't read his posts."

I'm sure you'll find some nameless nitwit to read 'em it to ya sooner or later, little ignorant, ill-informed, illiterate fella.

Lord knows there's nothing else on this board but bubble boy's white supremacist/Anti-American propaganda and his nameless-nitwit amen corner.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:57 AM, February 25, 2008

JW,

Just so you know it....this is from the Terms of Service from this Blog....

"Use the Service to post or transmit any unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane or indecent information of any kind, including without limitation any transmissions constituting or encouraging conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability or otherwise violate any local, state, national or international law."

Just some facts for you pal.

You offend me with each and every post.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:06 AM, February 25, 2008

Thank you for the professional response to a fair request. It was said like a true 6 year old. I really can't thank you enough.

This level of vile posting started with your arrival, JW. Please comply with the terms of the agreement unless of course you are, for some reason, above it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:47 AM, February 25, 2008

JWCOOP ruins this blog for all the others.

Does anyone notice it besides me?

I remember what it used to be like, it was never all that great, but it was certainly better.

Now I am dumber for readinng thei worthless watered down demeaning dribble.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:04 PM, February 25, 2008

Nobody has to respond directly to anybody. Just ignore posts that don't have anything to do with the subject at hand. And when you find the thread has run its course in terms of productive dialogue, stop posting to it.

That's just an opinion; you can take it or leave it. Frankly, I think blogs are more fun when there's a little snarkiness (preferably polite) but when wit descends into contemptuous abuse, no matter which side is dishing it, it gets pretty tired.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:02 PM, February 25, 2008

IndependentVter said...

"Nobody has to respond directly to anybody. Just ignore posts that don't have anything to do with the subject at hand. And when you find the thread has run its course in terms of productive dialogue, stop posting to it."

Ah, so you're runnin' a goin' outta business sale, little factually-challenged fella.

All things considered, that's probably for the best.

"That's just an opinion; you can take it or leave it."

Well, at least you're goin' out with your first flirtation with the facts, little factually-challenged fella. Good for you. It's always best to leave on a high note. Based on your record to date, I doubt you'll get this far off the ground again.

"Frankly, I think blogs are more fun when there's a little snarkiness (preferably polite) but when wit descends into contemptuous abuse, no matter which side is dishing it, it gets pretty tired."

Well, little factually-challenged fella, while I'm gonna miss you and your tiresome trash, if wit ever manages to make my acquaintance here, I'll be sure to test your theory, little factually-challenged fella.

It's been fun. Best of luck to ya in all your future factually-challenged endeavors, Indy.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:32 PM, February 25, 2008

"Oh,yes there is! And you can't even see it, blind man! There is exposed for all to see how you absolutely just can't help yourself from bein' a misanthrope."

It is, eh? How so, little nameless-nitwit fella? Am I somehow required to like and respect the lunatic-fringe likes of you and the little bigot boy in order not to be a misanthrope in your ignorant, ill-informed, lyin' eyes, little fella

I don't see that in the terms of my contract, little fella. Bubbles is white-supremacist trash and you're in his posse of pathetic putzes. Why should I pretend to have anything but contempt for the likes of you.

Ya got any arguments with actual meat on their bones, little fella?

That's what I thought.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 2:28 PM, February 26, 2008

"little nameless-nitwit fella
lunatic-fringe likes of you
little bigot boy
your ignorant, ill-informed, lyin' eyes, little fella
little fella
white-supremacist trash
pathetic putzes
contempt for the likes of you.
little fella"

The above is absolute perfection in the misanthrope department and Exhibit No. 1 that you are a misanthrope. Case closed.

"Am I somehow required to like and respect the lunatic-fringe likes of you and the little bigot boy"

No, but you're supposed to be civil.

So tell me, Mr. No-I'm-Not-A-Misanthrope, where's the single posting that you've written anywhere on this blog, in the entire time you've been posting here, where you say something nice, or even express polite agreement or concurrence with someone here?

That's what I thought.

You're a misanthrope.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:03 PM, February 26, 2008

JW asks...."What's their take on nameless nitwits telling other posters to "take their meds" or to "go easy on the Richards"?

First of all, let's be clear. Those posts were made directly to you JW after weeks of your tirades. They are probably no more acceptable than your litany of insults but were undoubtedly self-inflict by your own boorish behavior. What's the old saying...turnabout is fair play?

Act like an adult and those you routinely insult may treat you like an adult in return.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:31 AM, February 27, 2008

JW, a little refresher from your short stay at Charm School...Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:35 AM, February 27, 2008

JW - get the medication!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:52 AM, February 27, 2008

JW asks...."What's their take on nameless nitwits telling other posters to "take their meds" or to "go easy on the Richards"?

"First of all, let's be clear. Those posts were made directly to you JW after weeks of your tirades."

First of all, that's horsebrit. Secondly, it's irrelevant and you're lyin' scum.

So much for your act, little fella.

The archives say different, my little ignorant, ill-informed, lyin' sack of gop-slop slime friend. The facts may not be doing you any favors, but I'll gladly take my chances with the archives. Like your bogus arguments, they're not goin' anywhere.

The also confirm the fact that ya had bupkis long before I got here, little fella.

"They are probably no more acceptable than your litany of insults but were undoubtedly self-inflict by your own boorish behavior. What's the old saying...turnabout is fair play?"

Yeah, it's got your picture next to that entry.

Ah, the old "you made them do it" defense. Gee, now who coulda seen that comin'.

Get over yourself, punk. You weren't actin' like "an adult" long before I got here and ya haven't acted like "an adult" since I've been here. You clueless cretins were pullin' your ignorant-trash, cyber-bully number on Hoffer and anybody else who dared point out the rather obvious fact that ya don't know what the hell you're talkin' about with respect to any legitimate subject likely to come up here, so spare me your pathetic high-horse song and dance.

As always, the archives seem to have a different recollection of events than you do, little fraudulent fella. I'll go all in with the archives and call and raise your ignorant, ill-informed and fundamentally-dishonest butt, little fella.

Let's see your hand, schmuck.

Ya got bupkis. I'm shocked.

Ya had bupkis long before I got here, schmuck. The only difference is that I smack your sorry butt back and ya can't handle it.

What's that old saying, somethin' about ya can dish it out but ya can't take it?

That's got your picture next to it too, schmuck.

"Act like an adult and those you routinely insult may treat you like an adult in return."

Let me put this as tactfully as possible: Go cheney yourself, schmuck. You're ignorant, ill-informed white-supremacist trash and you lack the ability to walk upright. There's nothin' adult about ya. Frankly, I'm hard-pressed to find anything human about ya.

Let me explain something to ya, little fella, a lie is not a point of view. It's just a lie and you've got nothin' else.

I'm not gonna pretend to consider you a serious person advocating a legitimate point of view. You're not and you don't. Ya got bupkis.

You're wholly without merit, factually, legally and historically.

If you don't like having your ignorant, ill-informed, white-supremacist trash nonsense routinely battered from pillar to post, then stop posting ignorant, ill-informed, white-supremacist trash nonsense that's easily shredded.

You dug your own grave, schmuck. Go fall in it.

Nice talkin' to ya.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:10 AM, February 27, 2008

Just so there is no confusion this is directed to you JW....take a deep breath, get a glass of water and take your meds, please.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:18 AM, February 27, 2008

Are you sure you are reading the archives from the BFP?

Setting that aside, once again you have made very compelling points on your role in and contribution to civil discourse. Congratulations and thank you for a raising the bar with your sophisticated and level-headed reply.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:26 AM, February 27, 2008

"Are you sure you are reading the archives from the BFP?"

Yeah, unlike you I have that ability.

"Setting that aside, once again you have made very compelling points on your role in and contribution to civil discourse."

Nice try, little fundamentally-dishonest fella. No sale. You've set reality aside more than enough for one lifetime. There's no free passes for clueless cretins, little fella.

You were pullin' your ignorant slop song and dance long before I got here. Ya had factually-challenged bupkis then. Ya got factually-challenged bupkis now.

Can the compelling points crap, punk. The next compelling point you dredge up will be your first

You are not a serious person in any way shape or form, little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest fella. Serious people don't post anonymously. They don't feel the need to.

At best, you're lyin' scum. There is nothing about legitimate about you, little fraudulent fella. You're just some nameless-nitwit spewin' ignorant, ill-informed white-supremacist trash nonsense while pretending to be the voice of the average Vermonter. No you're not. Your take back Vermont/Tennessee Taliban trash went down in flames 10 years ago. Whatever nitwits managed to ride that pathetic wave of ignorant bigotry masquerading as traditional values got turfed after one term when people realized how incompetent they were.

The facts are the facts, schmuck, and they sure as hell ain't doin' your ignorant ass any favors.

Then again, when ya got bupkis, that's bound to happen, little fundamentally-dishonest fraudulent fella.

Bummer.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:09 AM, February 27, 2008

JW,

As a barometer of your civility, try this. Take a collection of your greatest hits and read them tonight out loud to your family at dinner time and then ask them how proud they are of Dad.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:41 PM, February 27, 2008

JW,

"As a barometer of your civility, try this. Take a collection of your greatest hits and read them tonight out loud to your family at dinner time and then ask them how proud they are of Dad."

Nice try, nitwit. They've seen your ignorant, ill-informed, nameless-nitwit, white-supremacist slime song and dance routine. They want me to stop pullin' my punches and give you neo-nazi nitwits your just desserts.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:10 PM, February 27, 2008

It must be quite a group of storm troopers you have there.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:19 PM, February 27, 2008

JW, I have to hand it to you. I have never seen so much hatred bottled up inside one person as I have with you.

It's interesting how those who claim to be the most open-minded and liberal, when exposed to the light of day, are in fact the most intolerant and prejudiced.

I disagree with almost everything you say but am more than willing to let you express your views(civilly). You on the other hand shout down every opposing point of view. With all your references to Nazis and the like, isn't that exactly what they did?

You seemed to have learned well.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:41 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "It's getting hot under the dome":

"JW, I have to hand it to you. I have never seen so much hatred bottled up inside one person as I have with you."

Do tell, little factually-challenged fella. How does my recounting the facts constitute "hatred", little fella?

What's more, if I'm holding it inside, why are you reacting to having read it as we speak?

'splain it to me, Lucy.

"It's interesting how those who claim to be the most open-minded and liberal, when exposed to the light of day, are in fact the most intolerant and prejudiced."

Ah, so your gonna try and sneak the old "if you hate nazis and the klan, you're a bigot, too" song and dance pitch by me, eh?

Tell ya what, little fella. If you or one of your compatriots ever show up with a legitimate argument, I'll give it a spin. Until then, ya got bupkis.

'Scuse me while I kiss the sky and watch that slop clear the Monster Seats and head for the Citgo Sign.

"I disagree with almost everything you say but am more than willing to let you express your views(civilly)."

You are, eh? That's big of ya, little fella. Ya might as well tell me ya quit smoking 10 minutes ago, little factually-challenged fella. Let's see how long ya can stick with it.

Just what have I said that you disagree with, little fella? Is it your contention that Leahy, Sanders and Welch weren't elected to represent the State of Vermont in DC, little fella? Is it your contention that both Chambers of the Vermont Legislature aren't solidly in Democratic hands? I'm certainly not arguing the fact that Douglas and Dubie are the duly elected Governor and Lite Gov. of Vermont and we need to field strong candidates and defeat them at the ballot box.

Just what is it I'm saying that you disagree so strongly with, little fella? If you object to the way I say something, that's fine. If you've got a beef with what I've said, spit it out and make your anonymous case.

I'm all ears and the floor is yours. Knock yourself out.

"You on the other hand shout down every opposing point of view. With all your references to Nazis and the like, isn't that exactly what they did?"

Really? Gee, that's funny. I don't recall invading Poland while claiming they invaded me, little factually-challenged fella. If you have evidence to the contrary, dazzle me, little fella.

"You seemed to have learned well."

You seem to have your customary difficulties getting the bat on the ball, little fella.

Let's see if ya can toe the rubber and at least keep me in the ball park.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:20 PM, February 27, 2008

"How does my recounting the facts constitute "hatred", little fella?"

This isn't "recounting the facts." It's anti-social hatred. Pure and simple:

Nice try, nitwit
your ignorant, ill-informed, nameless-nitwit, white-supremacist slime
you neo-nazi nitwits
little factually-challenged fella
little fella
little fella
ya got bupkis
little fella
little factually-challenged fella
little fella
little fella
little fella
little factually-challenged fella
dazzle me, little fella
little fella

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:08 PM, February 27, 2008

"I don't recall invading Poland while claiming they invaded me, little factually-challenged fella. If you have evidence to the contrary, dazzle me, little fella. "

Tell me about LBJ and the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Nice move to escalate an unneeded action. Wasn't he a Dem?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:58 AM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

""How does my recounting the facts constitute "hatred", little fella?""

"This isn't "recounting the facts." It's anti-social hatred. Pure and simple:"

It is, eh? That's horsebrit, little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest fella. Pure, simple, fox noise channel-approved horsebrit perfectly consistent with the rest of your ludicrous, nameless-nitwit act, little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest, got-bupkis fella.

Am I goin' too fast for ya, little fella? Do you need me to repeat anything?

Do ya need me to define the word repeat for ya?

You ain't pure, but you sure are simple.

It's unfortunate that you're ignorant, ill-informed, white-supremacist trash with nothing to say and even less to back it up on your best day, little fraudulent fella, but your complete and utter cluelessness is not my concern. Your ignorance is your problem.

The fact that it sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb and glows in the dark making it an obvious, convenient target under any and all conditions is merely gravy.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:47 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

"I don't recall invading Poland while claiming they invaded me, little factually-challenged fella. If you have evidence to the contrary, dazzle me, little fella. "

"Tell me about LBJ and the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Nice move to escalate an unneeded action. Wasn't he a Dem?"

Tell me about the alleged lack of evidence linking the White Citizens Council with the Klan you were anonymously talkin' nameless-nitwit trash about a week or so ago, little "let's ham-handedly try to change the subject and hope nobody notices" fella?

That's what I thought.

What's the matter, little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest, got-bupkis fella? Why the sudden need to change the subject? Ya tired of strikin' out with the subject at hand?

Ya feelin' the need for greener pastures on which to go down swingin'? New frontiers to flail away on?

That's what I thought.

Be that as it may, yeah, LBJ was a Dem. He was a Dem with a GOP Sec Def in McNamara that he'd inherited from JFK. What's your point, putz? Just when did I defend LBJ's actions surrounding the hoax that was the Gulf of Tonkin Incident and the subsequent escalation of the War in Vietnam it prompted, little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest fella?

That's what I thought.

Moreover, when did I say Dems never make mistakes, little fella? Clearly, McNamara was a big mistake on both JFK and LBJ's hands. Feel free to point out just where I said Dems are pure as the driven snow and never make mistakes, little fella?

That's what I thought.

Ya can toss this latest load of lunatic-fringe, nameless-nitwit nonsense on the pile with all of the other specious allegations you've made and can't substantiate and make a day of it, little fraudulent fella.

Dems make mistakes. Gops do little else.

Dazzle me, little factually-challenged fella. Knock yourself out and save me the trouble.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 1:45 PM, February 28, 2008

JW...

Just wanted to make the point that Dems have been known to do some covering up to, although you will never admit it. It didn't begin and won't end with your namesake George 'W'(as in JW) Bush.

BTW Dick Cheney sends his regards and hopes your kids had a good time at his house last weekend.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:53 PM, February 28, 2008

And thinking of deception and misuse of taxpayer funds, what about all the cover up of JFK's tryst with Marilyn Monroe or the general cover up of JFK's overall health issues.

You know the behind the scenes stuff he was doing when he wasn't contemplating withdrawal from VietNam. Wasn't he a Dem?

And then what about all the covert surviellance on MLK and the civil rights leaders? Who was in charge then? hmmm

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:03 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "It's getting hot under the dome":

"And thinking of deception and misuse of taxpayer funds, what about all the cover up of JFK's tryst with Marilyn Monroe or the general cover up of JFK's overall health issues."

In other words, in another in a continuing series of your ham-handed attempts to change the subject in the hopes that nobody will notice because you're tired of getting your ignorant, ill-informed fundamentally-dishonest ass kicked from pillar to post on the topic at hand.

No sale, schmuck. Ya got bupkis.

I'll be happy to kick your ignorant ass on the subject of JFK, LBJ and MLK or whatever topic you know absolutely nothing about in due course, but for the time being, your ignorant, ill-informed, white-supremacist slime, lyin' sack of gop-slop ass will have to confine itself to the topics at hand.

You can come up with a fresh load of thoroughly-discredited, factually-challenged and fundamentally-dishonest bupkis once you're done with your homework and your chores, little coalition of the clueless cretin fella.

Always a pleasure.

Post a comment.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:49 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...
JW...

"Just wanted to make the point that Dems have been known to do some covering up to, although you will never admit it."

Apart from the fact that I never said they weren't, gee, yet another bogus allegation you can't substantiate - what are the odds, and the next point you make will be your first, ya mean you were tired of getting your ignorant, lyin' scum ass kicked from pillar to post on the topic at hand, so ya ham-handedly tried to change the subject in the hopes that no one would notice.

I noticed. You've got bupkis. No sale.

"It didn't begin and won't end with your namesake George 'W'(as in JW) Bush."

Apart from the fact that I never said it did, what you're saying is that the proverbial smoking gun, the lynch pin of your argument is that the nitwit in chief and I share the same middle initial.

Gee, I'd never noticed that before, little fella. You're the first ignorant schmuck to raise the issue, little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest, got-bupkis fella?

Ya gonna tell me my mother wears Army Shoes now, little got-bupkis fella?

Fred Astaire, Bono and I share the same birthday, little graspin' at straws, fella.

That didn't make me a great dancer, a rich rock star or Time's Man of the Year.

I think I can manage sharing a middle initial for a few more months with the worst President in US History.

Do you have any more delusional dreck you feel compelled to share or is that it for now?

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:22 PM, February 28, 2008

That's horsebrit, little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest fella
horsebrit
your ludicrous, nameless-nitwit act
little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest, got-bupkis fella
little fella
you're ignorant, ill-informed, white-supremacist trash
nothing to say
little fraudulent fella
your omplete and utter cluelessness
Your ignorance
nameless-nitwit trash
little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest, got-bupkis fella
What's your point, putz
little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest fella
little fella
little fella
this latest load of lunatic-fringe, nameless-nitwit nonsense
specious allegations
little fraudulent fella
little factually-challenged fella
Dismissed
your ham-handed attempts
your ignorant, ill-informed fundamentally-dishonest ass kicked
schmuck
Ya got bupkis
your ignorant ass
you know absolutely nothing about
your ignorant, ill-informed, white-supremacist slime, lyin' sack of gop-slop ass
load of thoroughly-discredited, factually-challenged and fundamentally-dishonest bupkis
little coalition of the clueless cretin fella
yet another bogus allegation
your ignorant, lyin' scum ass
You've got bupkis
little fella
ignorant schmuck
little factually-challenged, fundamentally-dishonest, got-bupkis fella
little got-bupkis fella
little graspin' at straws, fella
delusional dreck

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:44 PM, February 28, 2008

JW...Your 5:22PM comeback was SOOO compelling. WOW are you good.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:47 AM, February 29, 2008