Archive for the ‘Moronic US right wingers’ Category

International Political Spectrum

Wow, the recent US Supreme Court decisions have highlighted that there is NO WAY I can call myself a “conservative” by US standards. Which is weird since I am pretty middle of the road by standards in other countries. In the US, I find myself off on the far left. By contrast, I would probably be conservative in Holland since the social liberalism is accepted. Again, that’s strange since the Dutch come about by their social liberalism from the same school of thought that leads to the religious right in the US (Calvinism). The Dutch prefer to treat the social problems instead of punish them, which makes sense to me.

It’s amusing that a conservative paper, Le Figaro, has the following sort of comments about the recent Supreme Court decision on carrying firearms publicly:


le 23/06/2022 à 22:47

La Cour Suprême américaine vient de totalement se décrédibiliser en montrant à quelle point elle était politisée. Une honte!
Ce sont en effet les Républicains qui s’opposent depuis des décennies à toute mesure sur le contrôle des armes au nom de leur Constitution écrite à une époque ou les fusils étaient à un coup…

The US Supreme Court has just totally discredited itself by showing how politicized it is. A disgrace!
It is indeed the Republicans who have been opposing for decades any measure on gun control in the name of their Constitution written at a time when guns were single shot…

There are a lot of reasons I supported Bernie Sanders in 2016, but one of them was a hope for a change in US politics. Not sure if I want to get into the “Deep State”, but the US’s duopoly politics leaves a lot to be desired for me. I am also not sure if there will soon be a switch from the “three branches of government” to something which is more streamlined and democratic (e.g., a parliamentary system).

I’m not sure I buy into the fear on the left that things will become more authoritarian, but there is a definite need for change in the cities to enforce law and order.

Anyway, one of the issues that led to my divorce is that I made it clear I am going back to Europe. I am not very optimistic about US culture or politics these days.

And the Supreme Court doesn’t inspire much confidence.

Why I am particular about people who can comment here.

{ed. This was cross posted at the Man with the Muckrake blog as Sepp, through his ignorance, refers to Obama as a man of principle, envied by rivals}

I was invited to be a guest author on the Man with the Muckrake’s Blog haven’t figured out how to post as a guest author  or I would make this interaction a post on his blog.  I’m hoping someone with those privileges does that since it would be amusing to see sepp see make a fool himself.  But he does that all the time anyway.

Anyway, there is a moron, Sepp, who likes to come by and make idiotic comments which I fact check and show he has no idea of what he is talking about.  In typical “How to talk to Liberals” form, he continues saying the same shit.

Here  sepp, through his ignorance, compliments Barack Obama!

Sepp is too much of a dumbshit to have figured out what was going on.  Anyway…

65 Responses to “Cartoon Characters Headline 2012 GOP Candidates”

-Sepp Says:
03/25/2011 at 10:59 AM | Reply

<snip through right wing nonsense>

A man for all seasons!

  • lacithedog Says:
    03/25/2011 at 2:05 PM | Reply
    A man for all seasons! 

    Naw, that was Sir Thomas More, you twat!

    • lacithedog Says:
      03/26/2011 at 1:31 PM
      Since sepp is too dim to understand this comment, I will further explain that a literary allusion works a whole lot better when you use it correctly.The work a Man for All Seasons was about Sir Thomas More: 

      The plot is based on the true story of Sir Thomas More, the 16th-century Chancellor of England, who refused to endorse King Henry VIII’s wish to divorce his aging wife Catherine of Aragon, who could not bear him a son, so that he could marry Anne Boleyn, the sister of his former mistress. The play portrays More as a man of principle, envied by rivals such as Thomas Cromwell and loved by the common people and by his family.

      As the blurb points out, More was a man of principle.

      Sepp, by not having an idea of what he is talking about is referring to Obama in the same light as Sir Thomas More.

      And he wonders why I think he’s a shit for brains.

Sepp , of course, misses the fact that his literary allusion totally blows the point he is trying to make to anyone with any knowledge of the play “A Man For All Seasons” and says:

So to break my point down for you, and explain the point in it’s most basic meaning so you can understand it, I took the long route in saying that Obama appeals to BOTH party extremes since he talks like Obama and acts like Bush.

My response:

Yeah, but in typical Sepp dumbshit fashion, you torpedo that by saying “A Man for All Seasons” which is a play about Sir Thomas More.

The play shows More as a man of principle envied by rivals and loved by the common people.

Literary allusions work a whole lot better when you have some idea of what you are saying, shit for brains.