Somebody call the WAAAAAAAAAHmbulance

January 22, 2009 in Political Animals | 8 comments

A defining characteristic of wingnuts is their extreme immaturity. When they don’t get their way, the wailing and foot-stomping begins, and they threaten to just sit down and hold their breath till they turn blue. The shrieking halfwit calling itself “Stogie” is a prime example:

I believe a coalition of Red States could be convened wherein certain unconstitutional laws passed by the Federal Government could simply be refused or nullified by the states.

…

We, the political minority, have a right and a duty to insist that the Federal Government adhere to the Constitution, as its meaning is written and originally intended; and if it is not, the actions of the Federal Government should be ruled as inadmissable and of no effect in the Red States.

Awwwwww, isn’t he cute. When the widdle crybaby doesn’t like a law, he’s just going to ignore it. What a truly mature and well-reasoned way to deal with one’s problems.

“Stogie” has abandoned the idea that this is a country of laws — if indeed he ever accepted that fact. What he wants is a land where anyone can ignore any law they don’t like. What he wants is absolute anarchy.

Well, I wish him much joy of his little tantrum. The adults who recently took the reins of government are going to get on with the grownup business of actually running the country. Maybe someone can take a few minutes sometime and change Stogie’s diaper.

UPDATE 01/23/08 7:35 AM EST: Oh, the shame. I have so failed to offend “Stogie” that he has devoted an entire post to explaining to a breathless world just how unoffended he is.

Oh, my. Oh, goodness. How will I ever live down this terrible failure? Oh, dear.

  1. Stogie on January 22, 2009 at 10:05 pm

    You really are an offensive aren’t you Meathead? Since you are unable to frame anything resembling a coherent argument, you result to name-calling and tantrums on the level of a 3rd grader. I don’t though. I don’t respect you enough to care when you insult me, so have at it.

    Sorry, laws that are unconstitutional and therefore illegal must not be followed or respected.

    There was a time when the Supreme Court would have struck down unconstitutional laws, but the Supreme Court has become a liberal captive and is no longer concerned with the constitution as written or intended. It is concerned with judicial fiat, legislating from the bench, and thus imposing liberal doctrines on the nation that it did not vote for. It is for this reason that we can no longer rely on our institutions to protect us—they have become too corrupt. Therefore, a Red State Coalition and some new ways of opposition become necessary for the survival of liberty.

    There was a time in this country when states did exactly that, refused to follow federal laws they deemed unconstitutional. It was called the doctrine of nullification.

    The Red States should revivify the doctrine of nullification; or consider secession in the even the USA is to become another socialist tyranny.

    Or as Abraham Lincoln once said from the floor of Congress,

    “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable – a most sacred right – a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world.”

    Yes, it may be time for such an event to occur. In any case, we conservatives and Red Staters need to begin discussions as to our moral and lawful alternatives.

  2. meatbrain on January 23, 2009 at 7:14 am

    Since you are unable to frame anything resembling a coherent argument, you result to name-calling and tantrums on the level of a 3rd grader.

    How amusing. When someone points out that Stogie is throwing a tantrum, the immediate response is “Nuh-UH! You are!”

    Sorry, laws that are unconstitutional and therefore illegal must not be followed or respected.

    Sorry, whining wingnuts don’t get to unilaterally decide what laws are unconstitutional.

    There was a time when the Supreme Court would have struck down unconstitutional laws, but the Supreme Court has become a liberal captive and is no longer concerned with the constitution as written or intended. It is concerned with judicial fiat, legislating from the bench, and thus imposing liberal doctrines on the nation that it did not vote for. It is for this reason that we can no longer rely on our institutions to protect us—they have become too corrupt. Therefore, a Red State Coalition and some new ways of opposition become necessary for the survival of liberty.

    When Stogie and his fellow crybabys don’t like the decisions made by the Supreme Court, they’re going to sit on the floor, kick their heels, and scream.

    Oh, and for those unfamiliar with the fine points of Wingnutese: “survival of liberty” is code for “I don’t wanna! You can’t make me! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!”

    The Red States should revivify the doctrine of nullification; or consider secession in the even the USA is to become another socialist tyranny.

    O frabjous day! PLEEEEEEASE do take your useless carcasses and secede! There isn’t one damn thing you lackwit cretins contribute to this country. Don’t let the door hit you in your dimtard asses on the way out.

    In any case, we conservatives and Red Staters need to begin discussions as to our moral and lawful alternatives.

    It is always amusing to hear the morally incompetent whinge on about what is “moral”. It’s kind of like getting sex advice from a eunuch — you know that there is no way in hell he can possibly have had any experience with the subject at hand.

    And let’s just point out that Stogie is advocating that people who don’t like the law should simply violate it. By definition, such an action cannot be considered “lawful”.

  3. Adam on January 23, 2009 at 7:58 am

    I love that these are laws subject to their own shifting definition of what is and isn’t constitutional. Half his list are things that get spread by chain e-mail to whip up the rube vote around every election. Oh they’re going to change gun laws, oh they’re taking our hard earned money and giving it to the lazy poor, oh the government is going to mess with our economy…

    You see this a lot since the election. Instead of starting to think about how they can reclaim leadership roles they talk of tyranny, taxation without representation, hoarding guns and ammo. They call up all those things glorified about the American Revolution as if their epic failure to lead and therefore temporary banishment from American politics means a call to arms to overthrow ancient tyrannies. Grow up people.

    I also love the still oozing fear of “unassimilable” brown skinned people who invade our borders, set up Mosques and Mexican Restaurants, vote in our elections, and raise children who hate white people. Also seems ironic that almost every time we have a historical milestone with African Americans then a bunch of “red state” idiots start to talk about splitting from the Union in some form or another.

  4. socketplug on January 23, 2009 at 5:33 pm

    No offense meatbrain but insulting Cao, Stogie and the various other Republicans/conservatives you blog about doesn’t help the discussion. I think you do a good job showing various falsehoods and hypocrisies floating around the internet but you don’t have to resort to name calling.

    I’ve sometimes wondered if I might get a little more respect from Cao (rather than having some of my posts censored) if the various posters on her site that disagreed with her kept to the facts and didn’t resort to insults.

  5. meatbrain on January 23, 2009 at 7:46 pm

    You are operating under the assumption that the wingnuts are capable of respecting others with differing views, socket. They are not. I call liars and hypocrites what they are. If they don’t like that, they have it within their power to stop being liars and hypocrites.

    But of course, they won’t. It’s so much easier for them to be what they are.

  6. Adam on January 23, 2009 at 9:04 pm

    I tend to agree with meatbrain on this one. I’m a long term reader of Big Dog and he of my site when I still had one. I’ve grown very disillusioned about bloggers and the alternative realities they create through the fans they collect on their sites.

    When it comes to wingnuts you simply cannot win with facts, logic, or reason. Cao is as good example as any. Take for instance the conversation we had about IP’s and networking. Not once did Cao read what I was saying with any comprehension or for one second stop and think about the implications of what was being said.

    While I usually don’t resort to name calling to the degree that meatbrain does I find it very futile to try and change anybody’s minds about anything and instead find myself simply resorting to snarky sarcasm aimed at the sheer lunacy that these folks vomit daily.

    The sad part is I’ve always felt like meatbrain doesn’t even have to try that hard to find gross inaccuracies and outright lies by these folks. But they don’t have anybody else around telling them they’re wrong and they don’t listen anyway. It’s just one big fat circle jerk of a mass delusion…

  7. Adam on January 23, 2009 at 9:19 pm

    And furthermore it must be like 90% of all content these people post is part of the echo-chamber. Take any random topic from any random post on any random wingnut site and then google search it and you’ll find dozens and dozens of sites publishing the same content over and over and over.

    Here is an example I was dealing with yesterday over at Big Dog’s site. It was a post talking about Obama not being at the Medal of Honor Ball.

    Google search Medal of Honor Ball and what do you get? A dozen sites with the keywords Obama “Snubs Medal of Honor Ball”. There’s nothing these folks love more than getting worked up into righteous anger and they just feed off each other.

    It’s hard to counter such a collective annoyance without resorting to name calling or sarcasm. You can either ignore it, or you can point and laugh like that dude from the Simpson’s…

  8. billy Joe on January 26, 2009 at 12:22 am

    In addition to being a crybaby, Stogie also sounds like an idiot. The Supreme Court is ‘a liberal captive’? How many justices were appointed by Republicans?

    According to Wikipedia 2 were nominated by Dumbya, 2 by Reagan, 2 by bush Senior (including Limbaugh’s favorite, Silent Clarence Thomas), 1 by Ford and 2 by Clinton.

    For wingnuts who can’t do math (or look stuff up online), that means 7 of 9 were nominated by Republicans:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States#Current_membership

    Just when you think the wingnut blogosphere couldn’t get any dumber than, say, Cao or big Dog or Ogre, along comes a moron calling himself ‘Stogie’. Is there no end to their stupidity? They need some cheese with their whine.