Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Republicans in disarray!

If you thought you’d already seen people saying the stupidest things possible on the internet, prepare yourselves.

Republicans want to make it harder to vote and easier for them to cheat.

Not rolling over. fuck you, make me.

Is it negotiation when the other party actually wants to shoot the hostage?

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. keep building.

If ‘weird’ was the finish line, they ran through the tape and kept running.

If you’re gonna whine, it’s time to resign!

Trumpflation is an intolerable hardship for every American, and it’s Trump’s fault.

Nothing says ‘pro-life’ like letting children go hungry.

Republicans: The threats are dire, but my tickets are non-refundable!

If you still can’t see these things even now, maybe politics isn’t your forte and you should stop writing about it.

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

GOP baffled that ‘we don’t care if you die’ is not a winning slogan.

Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.

Wake up. Grow up. Get in the fight.

Quote tweet friends, screenshot enemies.

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

The only way through is to slog through the muck one step at at time.

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

No one could have predicted…

The revolution will be supervised.

You are here: Home / z-Retired Categories / Previous Site Maintenance / Sunday Open Thread

Reader Interactions

37Comments

  1. 1.

    ThymeZone

    Well, the Tubes are full of chatter about an attack on Iran. Military plans are supposedly in place, the Cheney fear machine is supposedly tuned up and ready to deliver the spin2war propaganda.

    What is everyone hearing? Thinking? Are they going to try this? What if they do? Is this the Iraq end game they have been stalling for all this time? A wider war?

    Or is the rumor mill just …. a rumor mill?

  2. 2.

    Pb

    Re: Iran, see my pre-open thread post about it–if I wanted to start a war with Iran, I’d have some hack organization like the Heritage Foundation do the “study” to tell me I could do it “responsibly”. And really, just listen to these idiots…

    Yesterday, Raw Story pointed out that former CIA operative Bob Baer told Fox News that the Bush administration will likely attack Iran in the coming months. “Iran policy is on close hold, but the feeling is we will hit the Islamic Revolutionary Guard corps sometime next six months or so,” said Baer.
    Today, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton appeared on Fox News and responded. He said that while he couldn’t confirm Baer’s statements, he “absolutely” hoped they were true
    […]
    Bolton’s calls for strikes against Iran mirror those of other neocons, such as Bill Kristol and Michael Rubin, who also pushed for the Iraq invasion.

  3. 3.

    Dennis-SGMM

    Here’s a map of Iran. Kuwait, the main port for US supplies is just a hop, skip and an IRBM away from Iran. The entire eastern border of Iraq faces Iran as well. The supply line from Kuwait to Baghdad is vulnerable along its entire length. Aerial resupply can only furnish about 20% of the necessities for the troops in the field, the rest has to be trucked in. The Strait of Hormuz passes along the Iranian coast but they’d never use their stealthy diesel-electric subs to interdict tanker traffic there – would they? Do any of those misguided, clueless maniacs actually believe that an attack on Iran will have no consequences?

    Then there’s the fact that we’d be attacking yet another majority-Islamic country. How much more fuel for propaganda do we want to hand to the jihadees and the pan-Islamists?

    In short, attacking Iran is the most suicidally stupid thing that Bushco could do – so of course they’ll do it.

  4. 4.

    ThymeZone

    And really, just listen to these idiots…

    Yes, idiots indeed. Some of the tube chatter holds that the potatoheads think they can pull off action against Iran with 30% public support. That they are saying, that’s all they need. One has to suppose that they mean (if they are actually saying this) that as long as they have their base, they can do whatever they want, and the other 70% of us don’t matter.

    If the hottest rumors are true, we’ll be seeing an agressive verbal run-up to war in the next two weeks.

    What will be — or should be — the political reality here in the US? Will the warmongers get their way? How will the country respond?

  5. 5.

    demimondian

    Driving from Tacoma today, I drove by Puyallup Valley Taxidermy. They’re advertising jackalope supplies on their reader board.

    This message is offered as a public service to those posters finding themselves in need of such supplies.

  6. 6.

    Mark

    Are there any, you know, objectives mentioned in any of this? Of course, if we dispense with goalposts altogether, we won’t have to move them every few weeks. Whatever happens is what we wanted. I’m betting on:

    Rallying Iranians around the mullahs.
    Making them more determined to get nukes.
    More terrorism.

    But for the War President, any war is better than no war.

  7. 7.

    calipygian

    I can’t believe you haven’t commented on this article yet:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/washington/02book.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1188878400&en=deea1b6f0fd24c78&ei=5087&oref=slogin

    The key graphs:

    But in an interview with a book author in the Oval Office one day last December, he daydreamed about the next phase of his life, when his time will be his own.

    First, Mr. Bush said, “I’ll give some speeches, just to replenish the ol’ coffers.” With assets that have been estimated as high as nearly $21 million, Mr. Bush added, “I don’t know what my dad gets — it’s more than 50-75” thousand dollars a speech, and “Clinton’s making a lot of money.”

    The man must be a writer for Comedy Central’s Lil’ Bush.

    And, to boot:

    Then he said, “We’ll have a nice place in Dallas,” where he will be running what he called “a fantastic Freedom Institute” promoting democracy around the world. But he added, “I can just envision getting in the car, getting bored, going down to the ranch.”

    A dillitante asshole to the end.

  8. 8.

    Pb

    If the hottest rumors are true, we’ll be seeing an agressive verbal run-up to war in the next two weeks.

    And check out the timing, we’ve got the perfect storm here, what with the 9/11 anniversary, magical September, the presidential elections heating up, Ahmadinejad’s latest “defiant” announcement, etc., etc…. in short:

    9/11 Iraq al-Qaeda Democrat Congress troops nucular Iran WMDs war on terror

  9. 9.

    Pb

    Dennis-SGMM,

    Do any of those misguided, clueless maniacs actually believe that an attack on Iran will have no consequences?

    I quote:

    In the meantime, administration officials are studying the lessons of the recent war game, which was set up to devise a way of weathering an economic storm created by war with Iran. Computer modelling found that if Iran closed the Straits of Hormuz, it would nearly double the world price of oil, knock $161 billion off American GDP in a single quarter, cost one million jobs and slash disposable income by $260 billion a quarter.

    The war gamers advocated deploying American oil reserves – good for 60 days – using military force to break the blockade (two US aircraft carrier groups and half of America’s 277 warships are already stationed close to Iran), opening up oil development in Alaska, and ending import tariffs on ethanol fuel. If the government also subsidised fuel for poorer Americans, the war-gamers concluded, it would mitigate the financial consequences of a conflict.

    The Heritage report concludes: “The results were impressive. The policy recommendations eliminated virtually all of the negative outcomes from the blockade.”

    Cue Jeff Foxworthy voice: “…and if you believe that… you might be in the Bush administration…“

  10. 10.

    ThymeZone

    Yes Pb I think that summary is right on point.

    I do truly think these shitheads will use war as purely a political device. Their calculations are not mindful of politics, they are fully grounded in the politics. They will calculate that war with Iran, or something that looks like it, has long term benefits to the Grotesque Old Party, and I have no doubt that their decisions will be made in that context, not in the context of a coherent foreign policy or what is best for the USA.

  11. 11.

    Rome Again

    In short, attacking Iran is the most suicidally stupid thing that Bushco could do – so of course they’ll do it.

    It’s in the PNAC plans, I fully expect them to try to pull it off, and fail.

  12. 12.

    demimondian

    I can’t imagine that they honestly believe a war with Iran would pay off. At the very least, they’d create a horrific depression in China, Korea, and most of Europe, which are critically dependent upon Persian Gulf oil; China will almost certainly respond by selling “investments” (read: dollar denominated Federal bonds) to buy oil.

    Yes, they’re trying to stoke the rumor mills, to position the talking points. I hope they fail, though; the results of them succeeding are too grim to discuss.

  13. 13.

    Elvis Elvisberg

    calipygian, that’s the same reaction I had. George W. Bush really sounds just like ‘Lil Bush. Also, he has no idea how the decision to disband the Iraqi army was made.

    As to Iran, it would be such a strategic catastrophe that I don’t think it will happen. But if they calculate that they could get some domestic political advantage from it, that makes it a 50-50 bet.

    War is the continuation of politics by other means, after all.

  14. 14.

    Pb

    Also, he has no idea how the decision to disband the Iraqi army was made.

    I’d like to see the Congress investigate this, i.e., how is this even possible? Incompetence or treason?

  15. 15.

    capelza

    I swear, for the first time in my life I’ve seriously thought about leaving this country, if Bush were to actually do this.

    Where I’d go I have no idea, but I couldn’t stand the thought of living in a country where the Congress would allow it, the Pentagon would go for it and the 70% of the country that is not out of their ever lovin’ gourds wouldn’t finally get out on the streets and demand that Bush and his crazy friends be thrown out of office.

  16. 16.

    Perry Como

    olives marinated in orange and thyme
    squid with bacon and garlic oil
    cherry tomatoes stuffed with spanish olive tapenade
    garlic shrimp
    tomato and watermelon skewers
    fried potatoes with allioli and brava sauce
    potatoes rioja with chorizo
    white mushrooms with garlic, sherry, and parsley
    wild mushroom confit
    tomato salad with sherry vinegar, fresh herbs and cabrales cheese

    I say good day sir.

  17. 17.

    calipygian

    You forgot the cheese of the Gods: Manchgo
    As well as the Ham of the Gods: Acorn fed Jamon de Jabugo.

  18. 18.

    The Other Steve

    Do any of those misguided, clueless maniacs actually believe that an attack on Iran will have no consequences?

    War is GOOD for the economy.

  20. 20.

    keatssycamore

    From that NY Times piece, what does Bush mean by this:

    “One interesting question historians are going to have to answer is: Would Saddam have behaved differently if he hadn’t gotten mixed signals between the first resolution and the failure of the second resolution?” Mr. Bush said. “I can’t answer that question. I was hopeful that diplomacy would work.”

    Work for what? Was diplomacy going to make Saddam step down from power? What else would have been sufficiently different behavior from Bush’s viewpoint? Does he really believe the things he says?

    I mean surely he knows that he intended to attack Iraq during the whole UN process and regardless of the outcome of that process.

  21. 21.

    Elvis Elvisberg

    I’d like to see the Congress investigate this, i.e., how is this even possible? Incompetence or treason?

    Well, pb, I am perfectly content to assume incompetence rather than malevolence.

    The end results can look awful similar, though.

    If you were president, and an al Qaeda mole, wouldn’t you be talking up a strike on Iran, after everything else? Terrorism is way up, respect for the US is at a low ebb, and al Qaeda’s fringe, juvenile fantasy of a battle between Islam and the West is sure a lot closer now than it was 7 years ago.

  23. 23.

    capelza

    demimondian, that was interesting.

    I have Safari now (and a new Mac with OSXsomething!)..so I can actually read the comments now. Not sure that that is a great thing though. 1300+ in that diary and now Markos’ wn is pushing over 500, too. Exhausting.

  24. 24.

    David

    As 9/11 Draws Near, a Debate Rises: How Much Tribute Is Enough?

    Again it comes, for the sixth time now — 2,191 days after that awful morning — falling for the first time on a Tuesday, the same day of the week.

    Again there will be the public tributes, the tightly scripted memorial events, the reflex news coverage, the souvenir peddlers.

    Is all of it necessary, at the same decibel level — still?

    Each year, murmuring about Sept. 11 fatigue arises, a weariness of reliving a day that everyone wishes had never happened. It began before the first anniversary of the terrorist attack. By now, though, many people feel that the collective commemorations, publicly staged, are excessive and vacant, even annoying.

    “I may sound callous, but doesn’t grieving have a shelf life?” said Charlene Correia, 57, a nursing supervisor from Acushnet, Mass.

    After watching this last week’s blanket coverage of “Remembering Katrina” and “Remembering Diana” all over the cable news channels, the NYT shows concern about the oversaturation of… 9/11?

    Not to argue about how much is enough or too much; but among the three, I’m not sure I’d have used 9/11 as the subject of the “grieve quotient” question…

  25. 25.

    ThymeZone

    After watching this last week’s blanket coverage of “Remembering Katrina” and “Remembering Diana” all over the cable news channels, the NYT shows concern about the oversaturation of… 9/11?

    We should declare a National Period of Bathos.

  29. 29.

    Dug Jay

    But in a more serious vein, does John Edward’s proposal on health care, with its mandatorily required visits to doctors, etc., bother anyone? Acccording to the AP, “Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards said on Sunday that his universal health care proposal would require that Americans go to the doctor for preventive care.”

  30. 30.

    ThymeZone

    “Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards said on Sunday that his universal health care proposal would require that Americans go to the doctor for preventive care.”

    Well, except for Republicans. When they get sick, they can call a prayer line.

  31. 31.

    ThymeZone

    “Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards said on Sunday that his universal health care proposal would require that Americans go to the doctor for preventive care.”

    Well, except for Republicans. When they get sick, they can call a prayer line.

  32. 32.

    Rome Again

    TZ, I find it ironic that you posted that twice. The Repubs can call a prayer line over and over and it will do nothing about curing their illness.

  35. 35.

    BIRDZILLA

    JOHN EDWARDS wants everybody to give up their SUVs but still has his limos his fancy home and his private jets just your typical liberal demacratic hypotcrit

  36. 36.

    TenguPhule

    We’re not going to bomb Iran. *Iraq*. No support for this.

    Think of the worst possible action and outcome.

    Bush will exceed it. Always.

  37. 37.

    TenguPhule

    But in a more serious vein, does John Edward’s proposal on health care, with its mandatorily required visits to doctors, etc., bother anyone?

    The people afraid of doctors, maybe.

Comments are closed.