Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Harry Reid: Sharron Angle is "pathological"

Harry Reid, who seems to be running out of ways to describe Sharron Angle as mentally unbalanced, is out with a new ad that comes right out and brands her "pathological":

The spot shows Angle running away from reporters. The claim that she's "pathological" is a reference to Nevada journalist Jon Ralston's tireless efforts to document what he describes as her "pathological" tendency to rewrite history and pretend she never said what she plainly did say.

Has any campaign ever been quite this direct in claiming that their opponent is, well, a complete whack-job? The Reid team has completely emptied the thesaurus.

And right on cue, Ralston reports, the Angle campaign has now banned TV cameras from any remaining events.

By Greg Sargent  | October 29, 2010; 2:39 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans, Tea Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: What if Obama and Dems hadn't passed health reform?
Next: Sharron Angle: "I'll answer those questions when I'm the Senator"

Comments

The Smear-mongering of the democrats is not working this year. Actually the bullying by the Obama people is sickening the American People.

If you don't agree with Obama, they try to smear you with False Charges of Racism.


That is not the America I want. That is not the America the country wants.


.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 29, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

"And right on cue, Ralston reports, the Angle campaign has now banned TV cameras from any remaining events."

And speaking of banned, don't wait for Greg to get around to it! Ban users yourself with the WaPo Troll Hunter!

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/89140

Requires Greasemonkey or Google Chrome. Easily enabled or disabled. You can add users you want to ban, but you do have to edit the source code, and you may want to keep it a list around as any future update will only add sockpuppets to the default redacted list. ;)

All right, enough OT, before Greg brings the banhamer down on me. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse


When there is a multitude of reporters seeking to report the news on an even-handed and fair basis, that is fine.


However, when there is a multitude of reporters seeking to find anything they can to TWIST or make someone look bad, then defensive measures are justified.

At this point, the liberals in the media have done so much to smear people that the candidates are right to be extremely cautious. It is an atmosphere created by the media.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 29, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

What has Angle have to hide by banning cameras?

Ahh, "freedom of the press", as long as the TeaOp defines it.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 29, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

LOL! Give 'em hell, Harry.

Posted by: CalD | October 29, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

All, I've just banned SolarEnergy for repeating that point again and again about Obama and race in one thread after another.

Again: Thread bombing of this sort will not be tolerated. And I reserve the right to determine who is posting with intent to harass.

This sort of thing will get you banned quickly from now on.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 29, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

"The Reid team has completely emptied the thesaurus."

No they didn't. They're just pikers, they sure didn't call me.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

If Nevadans elect Sharron Angle, it will be interesting to watch from afar how that pans out for them. Let's see, folks -- your other U.S. Senator is, oh right, that illustrious and morally upright "C" Streeter, John "My Best Friend's Wife" Ensign. If the Republicans don't get a majority in the Senate, Nevada is going to be for all intents and purposes without meaningful representation in the U.S. Senate.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone think that this ad will change the result in Nevada? It's just "the last gasp from a sad, desperate little man".

Added bonus to firing Harry Reid:

"Many Dems Expected to Retire — Including Pelosi — if They Lose the House"

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2028212,00.html#ixzz13lb8NJzM

LOL!!!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

@ChuckinDenton | October 29, 2010 2:50 PM:

It's hard for someone to claim they never things that want to deny having said, when people keep taping the things they say.

Posted by: CalD | October 29, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

@greg: "All, I've just banned SolarEnergy for repeating that point again and again about Obama and race in one thread after another."

Sweet justice.

BTW, as soon I spot the next sockpuppet (I'm sure there will be one), I'll update the WaPo Troll Hunter. Mostly for anyone who doesn't want to edit the source themselves (it's really not hard). ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Kevin,

You have no idea how much I admire anyone who can use technology as you do! You lost me (the neo-luddite) at "source code." Oh well, I guess I will just scroll past the ones I don't want to read. Thanks for the effort, though. I appreciate that you have developed a "free market" solution that allows each user to make their own choices.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

No Kevin, the WaPo bloggers should carry you around on their shoulders for a few days. That 37thandOstreet troll you call Solar Energy has run off uncounted numbers of posters and lurkers (they are all clicks to the counters). This is going to be more fun.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Is it "thread bombing" to excerpt from Time magazine?

Even if [Pelosi] wanted to stay on, it's not at all clear that she would win the position of minority leader: seven Democratic incumbents and several candidates oppose her leadership — on Wednesday, North Carolina Representative Heath Shuler suggested he might challenge Pelosi for the spot — and another 20 have refused to say one way or another.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2028212,00.html#ixzz13mAqsOiT

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

@Kevin_Willis: Sounds great. What do I need to install to use your script with Chrome?

Posted by: QuiteAlarmed | October 29, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Greg -

I'm anything but a PC geek, but isn't there a way to track the IP Address of SolarEnergy, et al. and just block he/she from posting? You must have IT people at the Post who know how to do it.

Posted by: filmnoia | October 29, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

"Mostly for anyone who doesn't want to edit the source themselves (it's really not hard)."

I'm game to try, the noise level went down about 10 notches immediately. Between you and Greg, maybe we'll get back to the usual fights and we can have our PL election night party without the crasher, note I didn't use plural there.

Posted by: lmsinca | October 29, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

"the Angle campaign has now banned TV cameras from any remaining events"

+++++++++++++

I certainly hope someone has told her about CSPAN. I mean, does she know that if she wins, TV cameras are part of the deal of being in Congress?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Kevin, thanks a bunch for putting together this greasemonkey script. I was close to not even reading the comments anymore, let alone contributing.

Posted by: holyhandgrenaid | October 29, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw-

Excellent point.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 29, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse

OMG!!! Thanks, Greg! And Kevin, too. It's a great day!! :o)

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 29, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

The words: "Sharron Angle, US Senator", should scare the crap out of anyone with even an ounce of common sense.

I know Harry Reid isn't very popular in Nevada but sheesh, are they really foolish enough to elect a half baked sociopath like Angle to represent them in congress the next six years?
.

Posted by: DrainYou | October 29, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

And then there was silence....

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 29, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Jake,

I agree it isn't (and shouldn't be) a foregone conclusion that Pelosi would be the Minority Leader in a Republican-controlled House. If the team loses, the manager takes the blame. It is part of the job. Of course, the Brits are more predictably ruthless about this -- in my recollection, a "deposed" PM almost never survives as the party's leader in Parliament.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

@jd2: slavery is freedom, ignorance is truth, Angle is sane...

Banning media from public campaign events is par for the course if you don't want to defend what you say to your supporters on tape. Angle is a pathological liar, given the # of she has flatly denied saying things that she clearly said on video.

If Nevada elects her, they will get what they deserve, poor representation in the Senate.

Posted by: srw3 | October 29, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

"are they really foolish enough to elect a half baked sociopath like Angle to represent them in congress the next six years?"

Yes, they may very well be. Remember -

"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people." - P.T. Barnum

Even with TV and the internet, nothing else really has changed since the mid 19th Century.

Posted by: filmnoia | October 29, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Whats next for her? Banning cellphones?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 29, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

All I know about Senator Harry Reid, he genuflects to illegal aliens and his return means Amnesty for the 13 to 20 million living here. That the cost of $2.6 Trillion dollars, to make them comfortable will come out of taxpayers pockets; added to the 13 Trillion debt we already have.

Posted by: infinity555 | October 29, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

The words: "Sharron Angle, US Senator", should scare the crap out of anyone with even an ounce of common sense.

Posted by: DrainYou
++++++++++++

You know you are talking about Nevada? A state built around an industry that relies on people who think math doesn't apply to them?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Re Angle and "no cameras"...

We're now in the midst of something quite unprecedented - a movement of extremist political candidates who are relying on a totally partisan media system to move them into office. I don't know of any prior example in US political history for what we are witnessing. Obviously, what is avoided (and this is a fundamental purpose) is any serious scrutiny of the individual's philosophy, policy ideas and competence to hold the office sought.

I'm not sure that this won't continue to be the pattern even where some of these people win elections.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

"A state built around an industry that relies on people who think math doesn't apply to them?"

Word. I heard Charles Barcley the other day, talking about growing up poor in Alabama. He got wistful about his weight ("fat ain't pretty"), his age and all of the things that he'd wished he'd learned growing up. He mentioned he knows now there are only two things you can't beat, time and The House in Las Vegas.

I can't figure out why people figure that Ponzi scheme will just work there forever. The big money is already off to Macau.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

@QuiteAlarmed: "Sounds great. What do I need to install to use your script with Chrome?"

Chrome 4.0 or higher, which I'm certain you are using. Just go to:

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/89140

And hit the install button, and do it again when I update (I believe), and that'll take care of STRF and SockPuppets, as they are positively identified. I suspect DrainYou is STRF's take on a lefty commenter, but I'll wait and see. ;)

Editing the source is more tricky with Chrome. Essentially, you have to copy the source from the Source Code Tab-- that's here:

userscripts.org/scripts/review/89140

Then paste that into a text editor, then edit the badCom list:

badCom[0]='SolarEnergy';
badCom[1]='SaveTheRainforest';
badCom[2]='KaddafiDelendaEst';

Either add 1, like

badCom[3]='Kevin_Willis';

or delete one, if you want to read all that users witty musings.

Then, save it to your desktop as "wapo_troll_hunter.user.js", then go to Open File . . . in Chrome, and click on that file, and then install (keeping in mind, Chrome puts the approve for the install right at the bottom of the browser window).

Sorry, I'd like to make it easier. Will work on it, but can't make any promises right now.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

DrainYou:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/29/poll-shows-surge-for-odonnell-in-delaware/#more-131718

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

bernie-

Exactly what I had in mind (but not as eloquent as you).

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 29, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Kevin, this is GREAT.

Now I can ignore your posts forever!

Just kidding. Fantastic. Thank you very very much!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 29, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

@Kevin_Willis: That was easy, and it works. Its a great improvement for reading these comments. Thanks!

Posted by: QuiteAlarmed | October 29, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

All,

This looks serious.

-Emirates Flight 201 Being Escorted By Fighter Jets Lands At JFK Airport-

3:35 PM ET: Emirates Flight 201 just landed. The plane is now going to be isolated and investigated for the safety of its cargo

3:29 PM ET: The AP is reporting a United Arab Emirates official says an "explosive device" was found on a cargo plan flying from Yemen to Dubai.

http://www.businessinsider.com/uae-flight-201-2010-10

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 29, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

shrink2,

When I was probably about 8 or 9 years old, my family was driving through Nevada and we stopped for dinner in Winnemucca (love that name). My twin brother and I asked my dad what all the bright things in the restaurant lobby were for. He took out a quarter, put it in, pulled the handle, and said, "It's called a slot machine. It takes your money."

I've never spent a dime gambling, including lottery tickets.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "Kevin, this is GREAT. Now I can ignore your posts forever!"

Heh! It's a free country. I think most comments section ought to let individuals ignore trolls and people they just don't ever think add the conversation.

I'm actually probably not going to use it much, mainly because I stick to Safari, but I wanted to give commenters an option other than tuning out. It'll be one of those things I probably fire up for Very Special Threads.

"Just kidding. Fantastic. Thank you very very much!"

You're very welcome. Use it in good health. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

OT

A further on some earlier discussions re the modern conservative movement's broad rejection of science...

"At last night's Alaska gubernatorial debate, Gov. Sean Parnell (R) wouldn't respond directly to a questions about the age of the earth. "Only God knows," he said.

Parnell and Democrat Ethan Berkowitz were asked which number more accurately describes the age of the earth, 6000 years or 6 billion years. After Parnell's answer, Berkowitz said: "I'll go with 6 billion."
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/ak-gov-parnell-only-god-knows-the-age-of-the-earth-video.php?ref=fpb

Hello dark ages. This is so deeply dangerous in so many ways that it boggles to imagine such notions have any traction at all. A group of civil engineers working out the plans for a bridge skip the physics and settle on prayer to get their formulas.

This is yikes territory.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

I'm putting everyone into the script so I can just see my own comments and bask in my greatness.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 29, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

"I'm not sure that this won't continue to be the pattern even where some of these people win elections."

I don't see how voters will let them get away with it for long. Republicans can't just win by appealing to their base, look at Palin's approval ratings, and if they won't do legitimate interviews or answer questions, I don't think the electorate will put up with it for long. I'm probably just being naive again though.

I tend to think the only reason Angle is doing so well is because it's Nevada, really the hardest hit state in the Union, and Harry Reid, not the most popular politician on the planet to begin with.

Posted by: lmsinca | October 29, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

If Angle manages to win, her first act will be to introduce legislation requiring C-SPAN to turn off its cameras whenever she speaks.

Mitch McConnell and the other GOP leaders do not want to see this nutbag within 1000 miles of DC any more than anyone else does.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 29, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

If Angle manages to win, her first act will be to introduce legislation requiring C-SPAN to turn off its cameras whenever she speaks.

Mitch McConnell and the other GOP leaders do not want to see this nutbag within 1000 miles of DC any more than anyone else does.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 29, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: Here's another way of looking at that poll: Even far outlier results don't bring O'Donnell within single digits of Coons.

Posted by: QuiteAlarmed | October 29, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

I'm putting everyone into the script so I can just see my own comments and bask in my greatness.

Posted by: mikefromArlington

Fair warning...when we see you replying to yourself, we're calling the EMT's with the straight jackets... lol

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 29, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Bernie,

Maybe Sean Parnell thinks of "Mother Earth" and doesn't want to publicly discuss a woman's age?

O.K., probably not.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Joke goes to bed at night dreaming of Christine O'Donnell in her ladybug costume.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 29, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"We're now in the midst of something quite unprecedented - a movement of extremist political candidates who are relying on a totally partisan media system to move them into office."

I think this post is 2 years too late, isn't it?

Posted by: ScottC3 | October 29, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

And for all you non-gamblers out there, you don't know what you're missing. My grandma taught me to play poker for my allowance when I was 7. I love the thrill of Vegas, but even though we're only three hours away we only go once or twice a year, we're not stupid after all.

Posted by: lmsinca | October 29, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

@KW: "You're very welcome. Use it in good health. ;)"

I hope to, thank you.

Now if only we could somehow harness your powers for the cause of good. ;-)

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 29, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

"Mitch McConnell and the other GOP leaders do not want to see this nutbag within 1000 miles of DC any more than anyone else does."

Exactly right, the White House is where the power is and a House majority is only a symbolic victory. The R leadership will get busy squashing all TP related anything...after their votes are counted.

We may not know much, but we do know Americans want moderate Presidents.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

lmsinca,

I understand that some people enjoy gambling. But personally, I can't enjoy gambling as entertainment. Basically, two things could happen if I gambled -- I would lose money that I worked to earn, or I would get money that I didn't work to earn. For me, neither outcome is good (probably more lessons from my upbringing).

My favorite game is chess -- no dice, no odds, nothing random, and nothing hidden except the thoughts of my opponent.

Shrink2 can probably diagnose me now . . .

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"This is so deeply dangerous in so many ways that it boggles to imagine such notions have any traction at all."

The idea that someone confesses ignorance as to the age of the earth is "deeply dangerous"? Don't worry, Bernie. It's going to be OK. Really.

"A group of civil engineers working out the plans for a bridge skip the physics and settle on prayer to get their formulas."

Spectacular logic...from "Only God knows" to "Let's build a bridge without physics" in one simple (-minded) step.

Posted by: ScottC3 | October 29, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

OT

"Florida Gov. Charlie Crist would caucus with Senate Democrats if he wins Florida’s three-way U.S. Senate contest on Tuesday, a close advisor told Washington Wire Friday.

That’s a big “if.” Mr. Crist is trailing Republican candidate Marco Rubio in most polls. But the declaration by Florida trial lawyer John Morgan sheds light on one of the many mysteries in the Bill Clinton-Charlie Crist-Kendrick Meek imbroglio.

“Crist is going to caucus with the Democrats,” Mr. Morgan said. “I don’t think there’s any ifs, ands or buts about it. It would be, in a very tight year, almost like a Democratic pickup in a solid Republican state.”

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/10/29/crist-would-caucus-with-democrats-advisor-says/

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 29, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "Now if only we could somehow harness your powers for the cause of good."

Hey, I just provided Plum-liners a troll screening tool, and I spend most of my time doing database stuff for a public school system (I'm a public employee!), so you should consider most of my actual work output mostly for "the cause of good". ;)

@ScottC3: "I think this post is 2 years too late, isn't it?"

220 years too late, actually. Basically, starting with the first election after Washington's 2nd term. Indeed, for a long time, it was pretty well understood that the papers were 100% partisan, and deeply in the tank for one side or the other. I don't remember the specifics, but I think Jefferson's election was going to end up with all women being prostitutes, Bibles being burned, and all the cities in flames.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

@Ims - I'm not sure how this will play out either. On the sobering side of what we are witnessing is that these people have gotten so far riding this new bi-furcated media universe. Who would have thought such a thing possible?

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Ding! bc1 Dx: normal

As I youngster, unlike those who are told, "well someone has to win it," I learned through the application of mathematical analysis, I had approximately the same chance of winning the lottery whether or not I bought a ticket. Yup, I was a smallish nerd, I did not ride in the back of the bus with those jocks and bullies - the ones who still like to play hunches with their hard earned money.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Actually the leveling of False Charge of Racism is designed to intimidate people into not exercising their Freedom of Speech.

It is just like Voter Intimidation - designed to prevent people from exercising their civil rights to vote.

So, False Charges of Racism is bullying - and it is RACIST AGAINST WHITES - because it is only used to intimidate whites into not excercising their civil rights Freedom of Speech.


Blacks are never subjected to these false charges or bullying.


The fact that the Obama people have engaged in these bullying tactics is a campaign issue this year.

The conduct of Obama and his people has been disgraceful.

The tactics of the Obama and his people are nothing less than UNAMERICAN.

We, as Americans, can not have a fully functioning Republic with these Obama bullying tactics being put in place all over the nation.

It is important to speak out against these Obama bullying tactics - and shame them into halting these practices.

The tactics of Obama calling people RACIST just to silence them, or to diminish the level of opposition to policies - is simply RACIST AGAINST WHITES. It is a campaign issue - and it should be denounced by all Americans who love our political system.


.

Posted by: MachSeven | October 29, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

@ScottC3: "Spectacular logic...from 'Only God knows' to 'Let's build a bridge without physics" in one simple (-minded) step"

Well, because a believe in the Biblical time-line for the age of earth corrupts all thought processes and leads inevitable to anti-mathematical anarchy.

Although it's worth remembering, Isaac Newton believed in a Biblical age for the earth, and he kept trying to rejigger his own math to explain why the earth wasn't still boiling hot if it was only 6000 years old. Yet he came up with some pretty grounded ideas, and some folks might suggest he ended up knowing a thing or two about physics.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

@KW: "I just provided Plum-liners a troll screening tool, and I spend most of my time doing database stuff for a public school system (I'm a public employee!)"

Okay. I'm sold.

@suekzoo1

NOW he tells us. Could he have waited until Monday night? Either way, it's too little, way too late.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 29, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

So Kevin - public employee

You are using work-time for private projects???

And for work of a political nature???

I'm sure the taxpayers would be happy to know that your salary is well spent.


.

Posted by: MachSeven | October 29, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

QuiteAlarmed:

The only poll that counts is the one next Tuesday ; )

shrink2:

If Obama doesn't become "moderate" real quick, he just may find out how important the House of Representatives actually is.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Just so I understand this correctly. Ginning up fear is bad, right? Telling voters to not vote for your opponent because they're "pathological" is ok because... It's not ginning up fear? Or is it ok to gin up fear if, you know, you really, really want to keep your seat and you happen to have some advocates at WAPO?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

suekzoo1,

Crist knows his only path to victory is to peel more Democrats away from Meek, and (unlike how the Dems accepted Leiberman back after he betrayed them), there is no way the Republicans would give Charlie Crist more than crumbs from their plates if he wanted to join their caucus. So it doesn't surprise me that his campaign is trying to get word out that he's "just like a Democrat." He really has nothing to lose.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

@Troll: "Telling voters to not vote for your opponent because they're "pathological" is ok because..."

...it's true.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 29, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

OT: I've just added MachSeven to the sock puppet filter on my WaPo Troll Hunter script.

If you aren't adding trolls manually, update here:

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/89140

Just hit the install button, and say okay, and all should be right with the world. This works with Greasemonkey and Firefox, at any rate. I'll test Chrome shortly.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

badCom[3]='MachSeven';


:)

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 29, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

I agree that DrainYou is STRF's take on a lefty commenter too. BAN HIM!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Ethan and bearclaw....yeah, I hear both of you.

I think if Crist would have come out right after the primaries saying he would caucus with the Dems, he would have peeled off enough votes, and Meek would be in single digits, and Crist would be in a dead heat with Rubio. Seems awfully late in the game, and also "gamey" that he would send this signal now.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 29, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

@MachSeven: "You are using work-time for private projects???"

Nope. Got 30 minutes for lunch and two 15 minute breaks. ;)

"And for work of a political nature???"

Nope.

"I'm sure the taxpayers would be happy to know that your salary is well spent."

I'm a frickin' bargain. I tell you what.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Harry and the liberals are enmeshed in an effort to prove that they can endear themselves to the American people by insulting them at every turn.

Yeah, that should work quite well. the sneering cynicism of angry liberals has become as music to the ears of conservatives. The discomfiture of the Democrats, who are paying the price for ignoring the people, is a thing to behold.

A question that is likely to emerge from this election is the overall validity of the traditional polling that we've followed thus far. Does polling accurately measure enthusiasm or motivation?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 29, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Well, Scotty. What do you think is the age-range of the planet? How many physical sciences contribute to your conclusion?

Conversely, how many developed physical sciences must be rejected - often almost in toto - in order to maintain a notion that the planet is 6000 years of age?

What are the consequences for the further developments of the sciences in the US (and thus US competitiveness in the world) where those sciences are equated with religious faith precepts or with an insistence that the Old Testament is the literal, unquestionable truth of things?

And how, you might want to add, are such views different from that which preceded the Englightenment?

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

OT:

-Elderly Black Voters Allegedly Intimidated At Their Homes In Texas-

Two middle-aged white Republican activists in Texas allegedly harassed and intimidated at least seven elderly African-American voters at their homes in eastern Texas, according to a complaint filed with the Justice Department on Thursday.

[...]

A GOP candidate for Bowie County Clerk, Natalie Nichols, also allegedly threatened a Bowie County elections official due to her concerns over mail-in ballot fraud.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/elderly_black_voters_allegedly_intimidated_at_thei.php

Disgusting.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 29, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

TrollMcWingnut:

IOKIYAD

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

"Re Angle and "no cameras"... We're now in the midst of something quite unprecedented - a movement of extremist political candidates who are relying on a totally partisan media system to move them into office. I don't know of any prior example in US political history for what we are witnessing. Obviously, what is avoided (and this is a fundamental purpose) is any serious scrutiny of the individual's philosophy, policy ideas and competence to hold the office sought. I'm not sure that this won't continue to be the pattern even where some of these people win elections.

Posted by: bernielatham"

Up through the end of the nineteenth century the press was, in fact, known by its political and socialaffiliations. Republicans burned down Democratic newspaper buildings, and democrats burned down Republican newspapers. Owning a printing press was the impetous to put out your paper with your news. As the ability to get news to news papers from every where, via telegraph and then by telephone, newspapers began to see the value in being neutral brokers of the news rather that partisans spreading their particular news to their partisan readers. That we are swinging back probably gets its drive from the need to get more readers by getting many more readers who like your deliberate slant on the news than you lose because of the slant.

Meanwhile the market for real news goes totally empty because nobody realizes what real news is, and doesn't know how to sell it.

Posted by: ceflynline | October 29, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010:

Sorry, but it's a FACT that there's no such thing as "mail-in ballot fraud". Careful, or you will be called a REPUBLICAN:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/republicans_fear_based_agenda.html

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

I'm a frickin' bargain. I tell you what.
Posted by: Kevin_Willis

Wingnuts were never worried about tax payer pennies when the Shrub was clearing brush in Crawford for 8 years which Darth Cheney was feeding billions to Haliburton, but that is all black water under a bridge.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Einstein posit, when it came to quantum weirdness, that "God doesn't play dice with the universe?". Now, if you believe in quantum mechanics you'd have to believe Einstien was wrong, but because Einstein believed in God, does that mean everything else he did was also wrong? We do have satellites in orbit, right?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

All, this is absolute must watch video of Sharron Angle, nothing short of amazing:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/sharron_angle_ill_answer_those.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 29, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

I always react with mixed feelings to news on this particular Senate race. I hate the thought of there being a Senator Sharon Angle, but I love the thought of a Speaker Chuck Schumer.

Posted by: QuiteAlarmed | October 29, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

bernielatham:

I think that ceflynline is trying to politely tell you that your claim of an "unprecedented ... partisan media system" is wrong. Try reading about the election of 1800 sometime ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

"I don't know of any prior example in US political history for what we are witnessing."

how about ALL of US history. The press, newspapers in particular, were openly partisan until about the 60s. the whole idea of an independent, objective media is relatively new.

Posted by: NoVAHockey | October 29, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

"I love the thought of a Speaker Chuck Schumer."

WOO HOO!!! He's going to resign too?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Here's an equivalence for you.

"Alabama Supreme Court Justice Tom Parker, a disciple of disgraced former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, released a campaign ad comparing the judge who recently struck down the unconstitutional Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy to Al-Qaeda:

'Recently, U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips ordered a worldwide injunction to overturn the Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell policy on homosexuals serving in the military. With a stroke of a pen, this Clinton appointed judge—who got her law degree at Berkeley—unilaterally made the biggest single change in military policy in American history. . . . Most people believe that Al-Qaeda is one of America’s biggest security threats, I think it’s time to add liberal activist judges like Judge Phillips to that list.'"

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/29/parker-al-qaeda/

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

QuiteAlarmed,

Chuck Schumer would have to switch to the House of Representatives to be Speaker, but you raise an issue I have to admit I haven't thought about: who would be the new Majority Leader if Reid loses but the Democrats retain a majority in the Senate?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

NoVAHockey:

Not to mention that "cameras" weren't even used in the American media prior to Lincoln's presidency.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

@troll:

"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." - Albert Einstein in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas (Einstein's secretary) and Banesh Hoffman, and published by Princeton University Press.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 29, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Jake -- did you see that reason.tv clip too? hilarious:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_zTN4BXvYI

Posted by: NoVAHockey | October 29, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

@kevin,

Thanks so much for the Troll Hunter. I see it's been downloaded 27 times and counting. It must be working on Firefox, since I see no posts from STRF et al.

Fantastic.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 29, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

I stand corrected. Thank you schrodingerscat.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

NoVAHockey:

Yes (today's liberals are ignorant and/or liars).

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

It would give me a great deal of satisfaction to see ANY candidate who is the victim of dirt, smear tactics, and personal invective, win his election anyway. Not necessarily because I agree with that candidate's positions, but because those who use dirt and personal invective in lieu of substantive argument need to be taught a lesson.

Posted by: sinz52 | October 29, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, she is. But then, so is Reid.
He's the most Right Wing Democrat in the Senate in a hundred years. A lot of Lefties are going to be voting for Angle, just to finally get rid of Reid. The Dems will still keep the Senate, and then the leadership will shift dramatically to the Left.

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | October 29, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Bernie does any belief outside of the mainstream drag us back to fascism? What if someone believes in ghosts? Or aliens? Or Sasquatch? Or right wing conspiracies?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

TrollMcWingnut:

Don't give up so easily. Einstein did indeed say: "Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us any closer to the secret of the 'old one.' I, at any rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice."

Letter to Max Born (4 December 1926); The Born-Einstein Letters (translated by Irene Born) (Walker and Company, New York, 1971) ISBN 0-8027-0326-7. This quote is commonly paraphrased "God does not play dice" or "God does not play dice with the universe", and other slight variants.

ALSO:

"I believe in Spinoza's God, Who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."

In response the telegrammed question of New York's Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein in (24 April 1929): "Do you believe in God?"

Einstein was obviously conflicted about God, but I hope he made peace before dying : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

"any belief outside of the mainstream"

Well, I'd certainly agree that when someone holds that the earth (and universe) must be 6000 years old because it was so calculated by a long-dead Bishop who tallied up the generations and begettings and did so on the premise that the bible was literally true - and that therefore any other epistemological tools (such as the physical sciences) must be fallacious if their conclusions contradicted the 4004BC date - and that these sciences represent an epistemological equivalence to the Bishop's means...yeah, I'd label that as out of the mainstream. But little to do with fascism.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

@12Bar: "Thanks so much for the Troll Hunter. I see it's been downloaded 27 times and counting. It must be working on Firefox, since I see no posts from STRF et al."

You're welcome. I mostly did it so STRF could block your posts, so he wouldn't feel so harassed. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 29, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

You're welcome. I mostly did it so STRF could block your posts, so he wouldn't feel so harassed. ;)
-----------------------------------
You are a good man, Kevin. I certainly wouldn't want STRF to be stressed out by lil ole me.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 29, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Bernie,

I thought your fear was a return to right wing fascism. Now I don't know. Your frequent links and dark, cryptic messages led me to that obviously erroneous conclusion. What, specifically is your fear, so I can understand?

But, the question stll stands. Does belief in ghosts disqualify you from political office? Aliens? Sasquatch? 9/11 conspiracies? Or just a belief that the earth is 6000 years old? What about 60 billion years old ? Is tha out of the mainstream and therefore disqualifying?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

@Jake:

You're not very good at reading comprehension, are you?

Neither of your quotes contradicts what I wrote. In fact, the quote about "Spinoza's God" is usually used to back up the idea that Einstein did not believe in "God" - at least not in the traditional sense.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 29, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

"But, the question stll stands. Does belief in ghosts disqualify you from political office? Aliens? Sasquatch? 9/11 conspiracies? Or just a belief that the earth is 6000 years old? What about 60 billion years old ? Is tha out of the mainstream and therefore disqualifying? Posted by: TrollMcWingnut"

Certainly a candidate who regularly talked about his belief in Ghosts, or Sasquatch would probably reduce by a significant amount his voter tallys. A 9/11 conspiracy proponent likewise might reduce his constituency.

I candidate who thought that the Earth was nearly four times as old as the universe might get ridiculed for a lack of scientific acumen.

But insisting on the age of the Universe, or just Earth as 6000 years old suggests that Uncritical and particularly unjustified acceptance of a history based, not even on the Bible, but in the completely unjustified miscalculations of an Anglican Bishop on a freeform speculative exercise that can't even be repeated by his own contemporaries, or anyone since, suggests that the candidate has sold his thought processes to the deliberate religious purveyors of special revelation who make their fortunes off self deluded followers.

A candidate who proudly announces his acceptance of religious beliefs that are Red Queen belief practice demonstrates a willingness to allow his mind to be given to those who have little care for reality, but great care to isolate their followers from reality based existence.

All of these and like beliefs do disqualify their adherents from being serious candidates.

But only the Proud acceptance of Christian Fundamentalist anti-creationist nonsense will get you the votes of the religious right.

Posted by: ceflynline | October 29, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

McWing:

"Bernie does any belief outside of the mainstream drag us back to fascism?"

Come, come McWing. Let's not be so hyperbolic as to bring Hitler into it. Clearly Bernie was expressing nothing more than the much more moderate position
that the election of a religious believer portends the likely loss of every
technological and scientific advancement since the age of the
Enlightenment. And be honest...who among us rational folk doesn't worry
about that from time to time?

Posted by: ScottC3 | October 29, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

@Troll: "But, the question stll stands. Does belief in ghosts disqualify you from political office? Aliens? Sasquatch? 9/11 conspiracies? Or just a belief that the earth is 6000 years old? What about 60 billion years old ? Is tha out of the mainstream and therefore disqualifying? "

Excuse me for butting in, but I found your question an interesting one that's worth exploring.

Your list of possible disqualifiers is interesting but 2 of them are not like the others (at least in my mind). A belief in ghosts or aliens or Sasquatch - while they may be interesting or quirky - can be held by all sorts of people for all sorts of reasons. I'm not sure how much believing Ann Boleyn walks the grounds of the Tower of London 470 yrs after her death really provides insight into someone's overarching philosophy of life.

The idea that the earth is 6000 yrs old or the belief that the government attacked its own citizens, however, is not made in a vacuum and each of those views seems to be a calling card for a group of people with well-defined worldviews and political opinions. Their views - and the overriding mindset that brought about those views - would more than likely guide their overall political viewpoints and thus effect me as a voter.

So, for me, the answer is that I personally could never, ever vote for anyone who thinks the world is 6000 yrs old or thinks that Jesus had a pet dinosaur - not just because the scientific evidence is against them but also because they would more than likely also be against other things I hold dear like reproductive freedom, gay rights, etc. I could also never vote for a birther or a truther because a penchant for conspiracies wrapped up in political extremism is a scary combination.

Just my 2 pesos.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 29, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

schrodingerscat:

No, I am very good at reading comprehension -- what do YOU think "Einstein was obviously conflicted about God" means? BTW: I know exactly who Baruch Spinoza was too ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

"what do YOU think "Einstein was obviously conflicted about God" means? "

It means that you don't know very much about Einstein.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 29, 2010 7:21 PM | Report abuse

s'cat:

"So, for me, the answer is that I personally could never, ever vote for anyone who thinks the world is 6000 yrs old or thinks that Jesus had a pet dinosaur..."

Can you name a candidate for national political office over, say, the last 50 years who has expressed either of the above beliefs?

Posted by: ScottC3 | October 29, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell's a young earth creationist.

Palin is reportedly to have spoken about Jesus and the dinosaurs while she was mayor of Wasilla (which would not be too much of a stretch given her evangelical background), but there is nothing directly quoting her.

Paul has recently refused to answer the young earth question, interestingly enough. I find it fascinating that someone has no problem admitting he has issues with the Civil Rights Act, but can't quite bring himself to take a stand on how old our planet is.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 29, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

s'cat:

I find it semi-plausible that O'Donnell has, although I would like to see the actual evidence that she has.

The Palin claim has always seemed to me a liberal myth for which, as you acknowledge, there is no actual evidence.

As for Paul...Politicians dodge questions all the time for all kinds of reasons. And frankly I find it fascinating that anyone would think a politician's thoughts on the age of the earth is even remotely as relevant, interesting, or notable as his thoughts on the Civil Rights Act.

Posted by: ScottC3 | October 29, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

"I find it semi-plausible that O'Donnell has, although I would like to see the actual evidence that she has."

I think the mumbo-jumbo she spewed in her 1996 CNN interview about the "carbon dating test" on Mount St. Helens is a pretty clear indication of where she stands. That's pretty standard rhetoric used by the young earthers.

"As for Paul...Politicians dodge questions all the time for all kinds of reasons."

So why do you believe he avoided the question? He certainly didn't dismiss it as "irrelevant" - his response was:

"I forgot to say I was only taking easy questions," Paul joked, adding: "I'm going to pass on the age of the Earth. I'm just going to have to pass."

So the guy ducks this "controversy" but has no problem questioning whether or not people with the wrong skin color can be barred from eating at certain establishments. I just think it's a fascinating commentary on the priorities of certain segments of voters.

"And frankly I find it fascinating that anyone would think a politician's thoughts on the age of the earth is even remotely as relevant, interesting, or notable as his thoughts on the Civil Rights Act."

I believe it was Tom Robbins who once posited that the quickest way to figure someone out was to ask them one question: "Who's your favorite Beatle?". As I explained upthread, it can, at the very least, be used as a quickguide of sorts to gauge someone's stance on a whole host of other issues. I'm not worried that someone's going to get to the senate and pass a law stating what the age of the earth is 5k yrs old - I'm more concerned about the other issues that typically go hand-in-hand with the issue: reproductive freedom, school prayer, school vouchers, gay rights, etc.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 29, 2010 9:25 PM | Report abuse

I've tried to see any salient points in arguments by right-wing conservatives, but after years of examining any attempts at logical arguments on their side, I have had to come to the conclusion that there is virutally NEVER any truth and logic to their arguments. They are rather, based on fear and self-interest, typically the worst of what humans are.

And after reading all (and I hate to use the label, but time is short) of the comments by evident conservatives, I'm reminded of the quote (by someone unnamed and not wanting to be harassed by dangerous people):

"I'm not saying that all conservatives are stupid. But MOST all stupid people ARE conservatives."

I suggest to all you self-labeled extreme conservatives - try the spiritual path (NOT necessarily religious), where the human ego that reflects your insecurities is supplanted by concern for others and not overridden by your own petty miserable human existence.

Posted by: edclarkcom | October 29, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Gee, I wish I lived in Nevada so I could vote AGAINST Harry Reid.

Posted by: battleground51 | October 30, 2010 12:38 AM | Report abuse

edclarkcom: I don't think your name-calling deserves anything more than an observation that you're probably projecting your own stupidity onto those conservatives you seem to hate and despise so much.

Like battleground51, I sure wish I lived in Nevada so I could vote AGAINST Harry Reid. And his bleating time and again that Angle is a specimen of mental disease is hilarious, because the voters are evidently going to prefer her "insanity" to his inane name-calling.

Which is what libturds do when they cannot defend their own policies truthfully to the voters. Alinsky Rule #5: "Isolate the opponent and demonize him/her."

Posted by: djman1141 | October 30, 2010 4:52 AM | Report abuse

"Former President Bill Clinton compared Republicans to a football coach fired after several losing seasons who demands his job back after the new coach posts a winning record but still hasn't won a championship.

"

Posted by: hsr06011 | October 30, 2010 5:20 AM | Report abuse

My thoughts on Ms. Angle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZlhSY_5_fo

Posted by: scathingres | October 30, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

HARRY, WITH ALL YOUR GOOD WORK, WHY DO YOU WANT TO PUT THE PLUS 12,000,000 ILLEGALS AHEAD OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?

Posted by: usapdx | October 30, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

President Obama has been too moderate and would benefit from following more progressive ideas. When the republican's had power it was a mandate and they got everything their way, look how that ended. Practically bankrupted the country and started another great depression, which President Obama's leadership subverted. We need for the government to reflect the ideas of the many (especially working and middle class) rather than a pathetic group of republican whiners. They can't stand that President Obama is a great leader when republican president's have failed miserably.

Posted by: drrgwilson | November 1, 2010 12:16 AM | Report abuse

President Obama has been too moderate and would benefit from following more progressive ideas. When the republican's had power it was a mandate and they got everything their way, look how that ended. Practically bankrupted the country and started another great depression, which President Obama's leadership subverted. We need for the government to reflect the ideas of the many (especially working and middle class) rather than a pathetic group of republican whiners. They can't stand that President Obama is a great leader when republican president's have failed miserably.

Posted by: drrgwilson | November 1, 2010 12:17 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company