Friday, April 08, 2011

Landmarks in Political Cynicism

Go sit in the corner, Jack Betts.

19 comments:

  1. retired educator7:37 PM

    JW-do you think we might give Jack some credit for satire and tongue-in-cheek? Don't really think, after reading Jack for years, that he has real admiration for trash. Could be wrong though. Maybe Jack's lost his mind like so many voters.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:53 AM

    I laughed so hard last night at Virginia Fox. I was watching when the announcement was made by the Republican leadership of the House a deal had been reached. Republicans begin to line up behind the Speaker and Cantor. MSNBC had just made remarks about the flags and people were even assigned to make sure they looked good for TV announcement. Here comes Virginia Fox, walking behind the the speaker nearly causing the flags to fall. Then, she steps in front of Eric Cantor and not at his invite. From the look on the faces of the Republicians, they were embrassed for her. But she was not.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous5:27 PM

    Of course the Security Cam was shut off proving once again it was a another Republican inside table job....

    ReplyDelete
  4. retired educator6:41 PM

    The Madam thought it was a buffet line and the flags were pan covers.
    This wasn't nearly as bad as when she tried to give W some tongue after a State of the Union address. Yes, I know she got 2/3's of our district votes. But, the political genes of our district would vote for Tarzan's monkey, (can't remember the name), if it had a Republican label. To hell with looking after their best interest.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mike D.11:19 PM

    "the political genes of our district would vote for Tarzan's monkey" - retired educator

    For how many years did you teach intolerance to young, impressionable minds before you retired? Please tell me you retired after only 6 months of 'teaching'.

    ReplyDelete
  6. retired educator8:37 AM

    f o Mike D After reading this blog for a couple of years I decided to start posting. I also decided I would NEVER respond to you, the most confused human on the blog, because it goes nowhere and has no purpose. So bye.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous6:05 PM

    Retired Educator, if you are afraid to even debate Mike D, you are truly a coward.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mike D.11:19 PM

    Retired Educator,

    "you[me], most confused human on the blog" - retired educator

    There have been times in my life when I envied the monochromatic, purist ideology you possess. Do you realize how isolating it is, how difficult it is to make friends with people when you do not subscribe to some shade of one of the two political belief systems we have been taught that we must follow?

    Thank you, sir or madam, for the good work you have done throughout your dedicated career to show young and impressionable minds that free thought, independent thought, is "confused", "goes nowhere", and "has no purpose".

    Thank you for saving so many from the burdensome loneliness of a non-partisan existence. You have done well.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Mike D.11:40 PM

    By the way,

    Tarzan's monkey's name was "Cheetah (sp?)", and for a retired educator, your English is not so great.

    "2/3's" - "2/3" would suffice.

    "our district votes" - "our district's votes"?

    "their best interest" - "their best interests"?

    I don't need your English to be perfect to respect you or for us to carry on a meaningful dialogue; however, I suspect that as you ridicule the voters within your district as less civilized, less enlightened than you, you have almost certainly, at one point or another, ridiculed them for their language skills. Am I right?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Liberal POV5:11 PM

    Mike D

    What name on the Republican ticket do you know that would not receive close to 2/3 of the Republican vote? This is a rigged congressional district where Democrats have very little chance of winning.

    As much as you seem to want us to think you know, I would think you would be aware of this political fact.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Mike D.11:25 AM

    Liberal POV,

    If this district is rigged for Republicans, does that not mean, mathematically, that the neighboring districts must be rigged to help Democrats?

    Given the landslide of the last election, the rigging of our district must have been a godsend for Democrats, as it would have the tendency to isolate Republicans in one district, rather than spread them out to influence several races, right?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Mike D.12:00 PM

    Before you comment on the shape of districts and the impact of the voters there within, you may want to look at the District Map and the Results of the 2010 elections.

    Of our adjacent districts, only the 12th and 13th saw wins for Democrat U.S. House of Representatives candidates in 2010. Bradley Miller won by about 23,000 votes. Watt won by 48,000 votes (in a crazily mapped district that looks like a flying squid). So that's 71,000 votes total separation for the two Dem victors.

    Virginia Foxx won her race by about 67,000 votes. To our south, McHenry won by 78,000. To our East, Coble won by a whopping 106,000 votes, or 50 percentage points! So that's a total of 251,000 votes.

    251,000 vs. 71,000.

    Are you sure you want to peel away some of the Republican super-majority votes of NW North Carolina to influence adjacent races?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous1:42 PM

    BOO HOO HOO!!! I am in the minority,, so the district must be rigged!

    What about most of the rest of the state? There is a republican majority in BOTH houses.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Liberal POV8:03 PM

    Mike D

    I repeat what name on the Republican ticket do you know that would not receive close to 2/3 of the Republican vote?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Mike D.11:22 PM

    Liberal POV,

    I do not know what ticket you are referencing. Do you mean the entire country? Olympia Snowe, maybe? Dan Quayle? I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.

    What I do know is that you called our district "a rigged congressional district".

    What I do know is that there are four other districts which border the 5th District... the 6th, the 10th, the 12th, and the 13th, and I know that those four districts split in the 2010 election for the U.S. House of Representatives, two for Democrats and two for Republicans.

    What I do know is that Virginia Foxx won the 5th District by 67,000 votes. I know that the two adjacent Democrat victors won their races by a combined margin of 71,000 votes.

    So, even totally discarding the 184,000 vote combined margin of the two adjacent Republican victors, Virginia Foxx still came within 4,000 votes of being able to completely cover the spread of the Democratic victories in the two adjacent districts which would supposedly benefit from the fact that the 5th District is, as you say, "a rigged congressional district".

    I wonder if your sleight of hand, your obfuscation actually tricks you, or if you are doing it while fully understanding how preposterous it sounds?

    Whatever the case, your smokescreen fails a mathematical examination of the facts so thoroughly that I fear we may need to hold you back a grade just for presenting it with a straight face.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous7:25 AM

    Good point, Liberal POV. It would be difficult to find a district where one third of the voters would be stupid enough to vote for a Democrat.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Mike D.12:45 AM

    Anonymous,

    Why would it require "stupid" to vote for a Democrat? I vote for Democrats all the time, and I honestly don't feel stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous1:15 PM

    I rest my case! :-)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Mike D.2:55 PM

    Anonymous,

    It's about time! ;-)

    ReplyDelete