The post is primarily in regards to an inflamitory photo posted at the huffington post depicting Joe Lieberman with the notorious “blackface.” The left never ceases to amaze. I am curious what Lamont has to say about beheviour like this.

While you’re at it check out dgg.com. It makes blogging easy and there are lots of cool articles on there.

malkin, liberals, netroots, blackface, photoshop, lieberman, lamont, digg

---

The Netroots along with many of the OG – Original Grassroots – are frustrated with the lack of success of the party that so obviously represents all the people.

---

And today I read this from righwingnews.com:

---

While 59 percent of Americans told an Associated Press poll this month that they disapproved of President Bush’s handling of Iraq, 64 percent disapproved of the Democrats’ handling of it. While 62 percent of Americans told a Washington Post/ABC News poll last month that they disapproved of Bush’s handling of the war, an even higher percentage of respondents, 71 percent, said the Democrats do not offer clear alternatives.

---

Ok, so the war is just one issue that democrats are disconnected from the people about. But it doesn’t matter if the democrats are connected with the people on other issues or not. What matters is what I think, because I say so. Do you disagree? Probably so, but let me tell you where I derive my logic.

You see, to the left, or at least a few people from that side of the aisle, argument with facts to back those arguments up don’t matter, as long as I think I am right combined with a need for laziness, as illustrated by this quote from a member of the “Truth” squad:

---

Bo, the reality based community has tried reasoning with wingnuts for the past 6 years. When people make stuff up, repeat known lies, and make irrational arguments it is a waste of time to debate them. It takes one minute to regurgitate some assinine talking point you can’t even recall correctly. It’s takes at least a half hour to research the stupid remarks to figure out just where such drivel originates. Then you spend days arguing over the meaning of words. It’s more effective and takes less time to just point and laugh.

---

This quote came after I politely requested explination as to why the author this editorial was, among other things, “…he has no f**kin’ idea of what he speaks…” and what was wrong about the article. I will point out, however, that eventually my request was answered with a thought out argument based on the author’s facts. However, the author of those comments probably fits into his peer’s category that he is not in a “career that does not have a god-da** thing to do with exploring modern economic theory,” thoughroughly invalidating his argument.

So there you have it friends. If you want to do argue against the left come up with one fact to counter their argument and either they will rationalize that you are an idiot and they will be too lazy to argue back (9 times out of 10 they are probably wrong and know it, which is why they will attack you in the first place) or they will come back with their own facts, in which case you better be able to prover your point. Don’t worry though, in the above exchange, out of 7 posters, excluding myself because I asked the question, only 1 was able to begin to rationalize why the editorial’s author was wrong.

Reality based indeed.

liberals, liars, democrats, netroots, nutroots, reality based