NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, I was flipping through the channels on the TV about 15 minutes ago, looking for coverage of the CT Democratic primary race. The first channel I see covering it happens to be FNC, with Hannity and Colmes on. Hannity is in the studio, and Colmes is in CT at a Lamont supporters rally. As Colmes is talking, a guy holding a Lamont sign in the background takes it down, and writes something on the back of it. He holds it up behind Colmes as he is talking, making sure the camera can see it. It says "Hannity sucks ass." Hannity's face at that moment was priceless - if I can find a picture, I will post it.

Well, I was flipping through the channels on the TV about 15 minutes ago, looking for coverage of the CT Democratic primary race. The first channel I see covering it happens to be FNC, with Hannity and Colmes on. Hannity is in the studio, and Colmes is in CT at a Lamont supporters rally. As Colmes is talking, a guy holding a Lamont sign in the background takes it down, and writes something on the back of it. He holds it up behind Colmes as he is talking, making sure the camera can see it. It says "Hannity sucks ass." Hannity's face at that moment was priceless - if I can find a picture, I will post it.
And why are you so proud of the fact that Lamont supporters are assholes? They use anti-Jewish slurs against LIeberman and crash his website. Yeah, the prson they support is the person I want to go and vote for.:rolleyes:

And why are you so proud of the fact that Lamont supporters are assholes? They use anti-Jewish slurs against LIeberman and crash his website. Yeah, the prson they support is the person I want to go and vote for.:rolleyes:
My intention wasn't to support either canditate... I just thought it was funny that someone held up that sign on the show... It could have been any place or time, where and who it was for wasn't the point.

And why are you so proud of the fact that Lamont supporters are assholes? They use anti-Jewish slurs against LIeberman and crash his website. Yeah, the prson they support is the person I want to go and vote for.:rolleyes:
Mmm, semitiphile.
Hannity is a pompous douche.

Hannity is a pompous douche.

Hannity is a pompous douche, who sucks ass.

Mmm, semitiphile.
Hannity is a pompous douche.
Much like Colmes.

Much like Colmes.

They don't make a font size small enough to describe Colmes.

And why are you so proud of the fact that Lamont supporters are assholes? They use anti-Jewish slurs against LIeberman and crash his website. Yeah, the prson they support is the person I want to go and vote for.:rolleyes:
HAHAHAH. Crash website. More like "joementum" didn't pay his bandwidth bills and hired an incompetant webhost.

Much like Colmes.
Colmes strikes me as more of a 'hamster' type.

HAHAHAH. Crash website. More like "joementum" didn't pay his bandwidth bills and hired an incompetant webhost.

Yes, from what I've gathered, Lamont was paying $1,500 a month for his bandwith, compared to Lieberman's $15 a month...

Any luck finding that reaction shot? Inquiring minds wanna know, or something.

*jumps up and down*

Find me a picture!

I. Must. See. NOW.

Hannity is a pompous douche, who sucks ass.


I would daresay, my good man, that he is indeed, the most vinegary of all douches.
Who does indeed, suck ass.

Yes, from what I've gathered, Lamont was paying $1,500 a month for his bandwith, compared to Lieberman's $15 a month...

Well Joe is like 64.

He just didnt know that you couldnt host a good site with Earthlink.

Hannity is a pompous douche, who sucks ass.
Have to agree with you there.
It was on TV that he sucked ass, so it must be true.



Reminds me about a Cricket game that was TV years ago.
One of the commentators was Henry Blofield who, as all cricketphiles know, talks in a total pouncy upperclass plum-in-mouth English toff voice. As you can imagine, this doesn't go down well amongst some antipodean cricket supporters.

Anyway, cricket match happening and, of course, not much going on in the middle. So the camera is panning around the crowd. One group of drunk Uni students (it was in Christchurch, NZ IIRC) has a huge banner that proudly reads, "Henry BloJOB" accompanied with a crude picture (height of wit amongst Cantabarians).
The other commentator (Grant Nisbett), without reading it properly, exclaims, "Hey, Henry! There's a banner about you...oh!...um...never mind"
Henry: "No, no old chap. How delightful! What was on the banner? Where is it? Oh, you must tell me!"
You could almost hear Nisbett squirming in his seat as Henry kept badgering him for more information about said banner.

Well, while it is all very nice to see the unlovable Hannity getting a dose of ... something unpleasant,
that incident, combined with the Blofield thingy, serves as a reminder of the need to outlaw and penalise all usage of profane language.

Well, while it is all very nice to see the unlovable Hannity getting a dose of ... something unpleasant,
that incident, combined with the Blofield thingy, serves as a reminder of the need to outlaw and penalise all usage of profane language.

Fuck that!

:D

Fuck that!

:D

Ah, that is pretty much the kind of language that ought to be rewarded by a week of hard labour.

Ah, that is pretty much the kind of language that ought to be rewarded by a week of hard labour.

Why?

Why?

He's one of those sophistimacated types what don't like to deal with the rabble. They might get his shoes dirty. Probably kicks homeless people. Or puppies. Or homeless puppies.

Why?

To further very decent communities.

Ah, that is pretty much the kind of language that ought to be rewarded by a week of hard labour.

I say I can say shit, piss, fuck, ****, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits whenever I want.

He's one of those sophistimacated types what don't like to deal with the rabble. They might get his shoes dirty. Probably kicks homeless people. Or puppies. Or homeless puppies.


A bit slanderous. I work several nights a week in a homeless shelter.
What have you done for the homeless lately?

To further very decent communities.

I don't see the connection.

A bit slanderous. I work several nights a week in a homeless shelter.
What have you done for the homeless lately?

Not kick them? At the moment, my options are limited.

I say I can say shit, piss, fuck, ****, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits whenever I want.


In that case I can say: those who don't uphold moral strictness look best when dancing at the end of a rope.

In that case I can say: those who don't uphold moral strictness look best when dancing at the end of a rope.

I don't see how swearing is less morally strict than saying people should hang.

In that case I can say: those who don't uphold moral strictness look best when dancing at the end of a rope.

I don't get it.

I don't see how swearing is less morally strict than saying people should hang.

Ohh, right. Nevermind.

I don't see how swearing is less morally strict than saying people should hang.

Violence is perfectly okay. As long as you don't have a potty mouth. :)

Not kick them? At the moment, my options are limited.

Oh? You could volunteer, donate money, food, wash their clothes, give away some of those razors which you can buy at Wilkinsons at several pence, since it is kinda hard to use an electric shaver when living rough. You could take 'em back home for a bath, and a meal to eat.

If you can afford to get online, I daresay your options might be limited, but not zero.

Violence is perfectly okay. As long as you don't have a potty mouth. :)

You read that wrong: violence is perfectly okay - when aimed at potty mouths.

Oh? You could volunteer, donate money, food, wash their clothes, give away some of those razors which you can buy at Wilkinsons at several pence, since it is kinda hard to use an electric shaver when living rough. You could take 'em back home for a bath, and a meal to eat.

If you can afford to get online, I daresay your options might be limited, but not zero.

I don't hav a job. And subsequently, don't have money. Or shave.

Sean Hannity can go to hell. I'm cheering for that guy with the sign.
And show us that picture! We're dying for it! :D

Ah, that is pretty much the kind of language that ought to be rewarded by a week of hard labour.

People have a right to say what they want, and if they decide to use profanity, so be it! It's not the government's job to monitor their every word and put them on the chain gang whenever they say "fuck you" or some such thing. It's a waste of time, money, and effort.
On the other hand, under your reign, would I be arrested for ownership of furry porn? :P

I don't hav a job. And subsequently, don't have money. Or shave.

Do you have a bath? I don't mean for yourself - you could let others use it too.

Violence is perfectly okay. As long as you don't have a potty mouth. :)

Killing off people for swearing? I think we're witnessing the effects of some sort of childhood trauma.

Do you have a bath? I don't mean for yourself - you could let others use it too.

Well, I suppose I could invite people to use the bathtub...Little weird, but effective I suppose.

Sean Hannity can go to hell. I'm cheering for that guy with the sign.
And show us that picture! We're dying for it! :D



People have a right to say what they want, and if they decide to use profanity, so be it! It's not the government's job to monitor their every word and put them on the chain gang whenever they say "fuck you" or some such thing. It's a waste of time, money, and effort.
On the other hand, under your reign, would I be arrested for ownership of furry porn? :D

Only if the porn used dirty words.

Sean Hannity can go to hell. I'm cheering for that guy with the sign.
And show us that picture! We're dying for it! :D



People have a right to say what they want, and if they decide to use profanity, so be it! It's not the government's job to monitor their every word and put them on the chain gang whenever they say "fuck you" or some such thing. It's a waste of time, money, and effort.
On the other hand, under your reign, would I be arrested for ownership of furry porn? :D

Trust me on this: you wont be arrested for buying it.
But for selling or making? Heck - why not?
Unless it has some political relevance some way or other. Was that way in the UK around 1970. As long as it has some kind of political meaning ( even if a bit far-fetched ) let it be.

'This strip is purely political' as the then-joke had it.

Oh, and it is the Government's job to censor all behaviour, if folks wont do it themselves.

Well, I suppose I could invite people to use the bathtub...Little weird, but effective I suppose.

A little awkward on the street; "Hi. ... How are you? ... Nice...um... grocery cart. ... Want to come take a bath at my house? ... No, I'm not some kind of pervert. ... I have Mr. Bubble. ..."

:)

*snip*

Oh, also:

Let no one speak of tolerating moderate islamic practises - unless you can explain how to moderately stone a woman.

Ever thought of using dirt clods?

Well, I suppose I could invite people to use the bathtub...Little weird, but effective I suppose.

Very! And it tends to be highly appreciated too. Because it is one of those intangible commodities that cannot be 'begged' or even bought. Unlike a drink, for example.

Oh, also:


Ever thought of using dirt clods?


Can't say I have.
I always felt that anything that actually inflicts physical injury crosses the line.

Oh, also:


Ever thought of using dirt clods?

Potatoes. :)

Can't say I have.
I always felt that anything that actually inflicts physical injury crosses the line.

You've obviously never been a kid in a dirt filled lot.

LG? Ever done dirt clods, or were you always a mud kid?

Can't say I have.
I always felt that anything that actually inflicts physical injury crosses the line.

Um... mashed potatoes?

You've obviously never been a kid in a dirt filled lot.

LG? Ever done dirt clods, or were you always a mud kid?

I called them 'dirt bombs' because of the way they exploded upon hitting a hard surface. :)

Trust me on this: you wont be arrested for buying it.
But for selling or making? Heck - why not?
Unless it has some political relevance some way or other. Was that way in the UK around 1970. As long as it has some kind of political meaning ( even if a bit far-fetched ) let it be.

'This strip is purely political' as the then-joke had it.

Oh, and it is the Government's job to censor all behaviour, if folks wont do it themselves.
They're cartoons, dude.
If people are stupid, life will punish them. The government has more important things to attend to than the mouths of 200-something million people.
And I don't think I'm getting you on the "unless it has political relevance" part. Can you clarify? :confused:

I called them 'dirt bombs' because of the way they exploded upon hitting a hard surface. :)

Aye, that was the best part.

Um... mashed potatoes?

And waste, yes, desecrate food?
Dreadfully sorry, but I am neither a muslim nor a republican.

They're cartoons, dude.
If people are stupid, life will punish them. The government has more important things to attend to than the mouths of 200-something million people.
And I don't think I'm getting you on the "unless it has political relevance" part. Can you clarify? :confused:

300-something. Well, in October anyways.

And waste, yes, desecrate food?
Dreadfully sorry, but I am neither a muslim nor a republican.

...Water balloons?

...Water balloons?

OTHER POTTYMOUTHS!!

They're cartoons, dude.
If people are stupid, life will punish them. The government has more important things to attend to than the mouths of 200-something million people.
And I don't think I'm getting you on the "unless it has political relevance" part. Can you clarify? :confused:


I'll try. If some bint wishes to claim that she's spreading her legs for a political purpose ( giving Bush a case of the clap? ), I suppose I'll disbelieve her, but I feel uncomfy about gagging the Opposition for Opposing ( as opposed to being pottymouths. ).

OTHER POTTYMOUTHS!!

...Ummm...We're going to throw pottymouths at the women?

...Water balloons?


Provided they have some soap in 'em, and are not too cold nor too hot?
And we provide towels?

And waste, yes, desecrate food?
Dreadfully sorry, but I am neither a muslim nor a republican.

If it'll make you feel better, you share many of their most prominent qualities.

Provided they have some soap in 'em, and are not too cold nor too hot?
And we provide towels?

I think we're getting moderately stoning and bathing the homeless mixed up.

If it'll make you feel better, you share many of their most prominent qualities.

Which Are?

I think we're getting moderately stoning and bathing the homeless mixed up.

In that case, I think we should take it for granted that moderately stoning women is impossible.

Which Are?

Your desire to have government enforce YOUR personal moral code on others. Seems to me that your biggest objection with muslim governments is not that they enforce a moral code, but that it isn't yours.

In that case, I think we should take it for granted that moderately stoning women is impossible.

We can put sand in their hair. :)

Your desire to have government enforce YOUR personal moral code on others. Seems to me that your biggest objection with muslim governments is not that they enforce a moral code, but that it isn't yours.

Seems to me that my biggest objection to muslims governments is that they can't ever refrain from killing willy-nilly.
Killing willy-nilly goes against my moral code.

We can put sand in their hair. :)


Apres vous.

...Ummm...We're going to throw pottymouths at the women?

I thought we were throwing pottymouths at other pottymouths.

But that isn't a bad idea either.

Seems to me that my biggest objection to muslims governments is that they can't ever refrain from killing willy-nilly.
Killing willy-nilly goes against my moral code.

Killing willy-nilly? Mr. "dancing at the ends of ropes" BogMarsh accuses Islamic governments of killing willy-nilly?

Killing willy-nilly? Mr. "dancing at the ends of ropes" BogMarsh accuses Islamic governments of killing willy-nilly?

He went overboard and said something outrageous, so I returned him the favour.
*shrug*

Seems to me that my biggest objection to muslims governments is that they can't ever refrain from killing willy-nilly.
Killing willy-nilly goes against my moral code.

They only kill potty mouths. It's just a different potty.

I'll try. If some bint wishes to claim that she's spreading her legs for a political purpose ( giving Bush a case of the clap? ), I suppose I'll disbelieve her, but I feel uncomfy about gagging the Opposition for Opposing ( as opposed to being pottymouths. ).

Well. I'm still confused. :confused:

Seems to me that my biggest objection to muslims governments is that they can't ever refrain from killing willy-nilly.
Killing willy-nilly goes against my moral code.
But you call for the eradication of homosexuals, which contradicts your own moral code if you are a Christian/Catholic, which I had assumed. Whatever happened to "love thy neighbor"?

Well, I was flipping through the channels on the TV about 15 minutes ago, looking for coverage of the CT Democratic primary race. The first channel I see covering it happens to be FNC, with Hannity and Colmes on. Hannity is in the studio, and Colmes is in CT at a Lamont supporters rally. As Colmes is talking, a guy holding a Lamont sign in the background takes it down, and writes something on the back of it. He holds it up behind Colmes as he is talking, making sure the camera can see it. It says "Hannity sucks ass." Hannity's face at that moment was priceless - if I can find a picture, I will post it.

Very mature! If this is a sign of things to come, I hope you won't mind if other people call your candidate "a cocksucking whore" or "a disease-ridden prostitute who gives his/her ass to anyone for free".

We could also say that you won't mind if we think of even more insulting things to say about your favorite pundits.

See how that works?

Very mature! If this is a sign of things to come, I hope you won't mind if other people call your candidate "a cocksucking whore" or "a disease-ridden prostitute who gives his/her ass to anyone for free".

We could also say that you won't mind if we think of even more insulting things to say about your favorite pundits.

See how that works?

Doesn't that already happen?

Doesn't that already happen?
Not to that extent, no.

Very mature! If this is a sign of things to come, I hope you won't mind if other people call your candidate "a cocksucking whore" or "a disease-ridden prostitute who gives his/her ass to anyone for free".

We could also say that you won't mind if we think of even more insulting things to say about your favorite pundits.

See how that works?
Lol a lot of pundits on both sides deserve this already

Lol a lot of pundits on both sides deserve this already
Well, I actually think that a better entertainment value during the Presidential elections would be deathmatch ultimate fighting bouts between opposing pundits, instead of Presidential debates.

You know you would watch, even if it were on pay-per-view.

Well, I actually think that a better entertainment value during the Presidential elections would be deathmatch ultimate fighting bouts between opposing pundits, instead of Presidential debates.

You know you would watch, even if it were on pay-per-view.
I probably would as long as bill keeps his frigging shirt on:p

Very mature! If this is a sign of things to come, I hope you won't mind if other people call your candidate "a cocksucking whore" or "a disease-ridden prostitute who gives his/her ass to anyone for free".

We could also say that you won't mind if we think of even more insulting things to say about your favorite pundits.

See how that works?
Not really, no.
Exactly what candidacy is Hannity running for again?
I've forgotten.

Or are you trying to say that a right-wing talk-show hack (or any talk-show hack for that matter) is deserving of our respect?

Well. I'm still confused. :confused:


But you call for the eradication of homosexuals, which contradicts your own moral code if you are a Christian/Catholic, which I had assumed. Whatever happened to "love thy neighbor"?

Er... do I call for the eradication of homosexuals? :confused:

Edit: it's news to me. I do call for eradicating childmolesters, though.

Not really, no.
Exactly what candidacy is Hannity running for again?
I've forgotten.

Or are you trying to say that a right-wing talk-show hack (or any talk-show hack for that matter) is deserving of our respect?

There used to be some air of decorum, even amongst pundits. But if you're happy with me calling various people "syphylitic pus leaking douchebags" on national television, then maybe we should go full bore on this and reduce all political discourse to namecalling.

There used to be some air of decorum, even amongst pundits. But if you're happy with me calling various people "syphylitic pus leaking douchebags" on national television, then maybe we should go full bore on this and reduce all political discourse to namecalling.

Well, I'm sure blogs have been there for a while.

Well, I'm sure blogs have been there for a while.
Not all of them.

I don't see any namecalling on The Belmont Club, or Fistful Of Euros, for instance.

Not all of them.

I don't see any namecalling on The Belmont Club, or Fistful Of Euros, for instance.


The abolition of decorum is, after all, a mayor part of the Libbie agenda.
( Or, why I don't like that lot. )

The abolition of decorum is, after all, a mayor part of the Libbie agenda.
( Or, why I don't like that lot. )

...Bwah?

...Bwah?


Decorum. Decency. Good manners. No drooling or spitting when in public. Punctuality. Chewing with your mouth closed. Being housebroken. Understanding that beer does not make for a good shampoo.

All those things which appear to be very hard to follow when off the left side of Joe Lieberman.

There used to be some air of decorum, even amongst pundits. But if you're happy with me calling various people "syphylitic pus leaking douchebags" on national television, then maybe we should go full bore on this and reduce all political discourse to namecalling.
You mean it hasn't been for a long time already?

I seem to recall a certain John Kerry being called a 'flip-flop' and before that Al Gore being (falsely) ridiculed for his 'assertion' about internet inventing. And of course, Clinton being called all manner of names based on his inability to keep it holstered. And then of course there was the "Willie Horton' ads...

Again, it seems you can't differentiate between a political candidate and a talk-show hack. Why do you feel that because someone, on the spur of the moment, wrote an obscenity about Hannity, that's somehow akin to insulting and denigrating political candidates. Are you not aware that Hannity is not running for office?
Or have you made the assumption that the Right and FOX are so intertwined, that any attack on a FOX employee is equivalent to attacking GOP?



And air of decorum amongst pundits? Care to show where and when Rush, Hannity, Ann Coulter or Melanie Morgan have shown decorum?

Am I very stupid for looking at this several times and thinking, "huh? A thread about me?"

IT LOOKS LIKE MY NAME, DAMMIT! :mad:

You mean it hasn't been for a long time already?

I seem to recall a certain John Kerry being called a 'flip-flop' and before that Al Gore being (falsely) ridiculed for his 'assertion' about internet inventing. And of course, Clinton being called all manner of names based on his inability to keep it holstered. And then of course there was the "Willie Horton' ads...

Again, it seems you can't differentiate between a political candidate and a talk-show hack. Why do you feel that because someone, on the spur of the moment, wrote an obscenity about Hannity, that's somehow akin to insulting and denigrating political candidates. Are you not aware that Hannity is not running for office?
Or have you made the assumption that the Right and FOX are so intertwined, that any attack on a FOX employee is equivalent to attacking GOP?


I think you're confused - I am quite aware that Hannity is not a candidate.

However, in the past, even pundits didn't resort to namecalling.

Flip flop is not, by comparison to the sign, namecalling. It's labeling, and quite tame labeling at that.

Saying someone "sucks ass" is pretty far down the road.

I am saying that current political discourse, even amongst pundits, is at an all time low.

Of course, you don't seem to have any problem with that. So I'll be sure to refer to Democrats (whether candidates or pundits) in the vernacular to which you are accustomed.

Decorum. Decency. Good manners. No drooling or spitting when in public. Punctuality. Chewing with your mouth closed. Being housebroken. Understanding that beer does not make for a good shampoo.

All those things which appear to be very hard to follow when off the left side of Joe Lieberman.

...So...Who's the Libbies? Liberals are destroying manners?

...So...Who's the Libbies? Liberals are destroying manners?

Indeed. By being potty-mouthed, for one example.
(Which begs the question: is Dick Cheney a closet-Libbie?)


Decorum. Decency. Good manners. No drooling or spitting when in public. Punctuality. Chewing with your mouth closed. Being housebroken. Understanding that beer does not make for a good shampoo.

All those things which appear to be very hard to follow when off the left side of Joe Lieberman.

And why are you so proud of the fact that Lamont supporters are assholes? They use anti-Jewish slurs against LIeberman and crash his website. Yeah, the prson they support is the person I want to go and vote for.:rolleyes:

LOL...

Wow...just wow...

Is this what people stoop to now?

Crashing the web site? Give me a break.

UPDATE ON THE ATTACK ON THE LIEBERMAN CAMPAIGN WEBSITE

STATEMENT FROM SEAN SMITH: "For the past 24 hours the Friends for Joe Lieberman's website and email has been totally disrupted and disabled, we believe that this is the result of a coordinated attack by our political opponents. The campaign has notified the US Attorney and the Connecticut Chief State's Attorney and the campaign will be filing a formal complaint reflecting our concerns. The campaign has also notified the State Attorney General Dick Blumenthal for his review."

"We call on Ned Lamont to make an unqualified statement denouncing this kind of dirty campaign trick and to demand whoever is responsible to cease and desist immediately. Any attempt to suppress voter participation and undermine the voting process on Election Day is deplorable and has no place in our democracy."

Disrupted and disabled? How were you able to make this update hmm?

Indeed. By being potty-mouthed, for one example.
(Which begs the question: is Dick Cheney a closet-Libbie?)


Decorum. Decency. Good manners. No drooling or spitting when in public. Punctuality. Chewing with your mouth closed. Being housebroken. Understanding that beer does not make for a good shampoo.

All those things which appear to be very hard to follow when off the left side of Joe Lieberman.

...And...you're a real person, right?

LOL...

Wow...just wow...

Is this what people stoop to now?

Crashing websites must be OK with you, eh?

...And...you're a real person, right?

Yes. And what is your point?

Yes. And what is your point?

And you actually believe the things you say on NSGeneral? Your mind works in this manner, yes?

Crashing websites must be OK with you, eh?

*shrug* Websites crash all the time, accidentally and purposefully. It's an internet thing, take precautions against it.

And you actually believe the things you say on NSGeneral? Your mind works in this manner, yes?
Mine certainly does.

I've noticed that people who are not conservative have this odd idea that only someone who is insane would agree with *anything* conservative.

Hate to burst your bubble there.

Crashing websites must be OK with you, eh?

UPDATE ON THE ATTACK ON THE LIEBERMAN CAMPAIGN WEBSITE

STATEMENT FROM SEAN SMITH: "For the past 24 hours the Friends for Joe Lieberman's website and email has been totally disrupted and disabled, we believe that this is the result of a coordinated attack by our political opponents. The campaign has notified the US Attorney and the Connecticut Chief State's Attorney and the campaign will be filing a formal complaint reflecting our concerns. The campaign has also notified the State Attorney General Dick Blumenthal for his review."

"We call on Ned Lamont to make an unqualified statement denouncing this kind of dirty campaign trick and to demand whoever is responsible to cease and desist immediately. Any attempt to suppress voter participation and undermine the voting process on Election Day is deplorable and has no place in our democracy."

If the site was disrupted and disabled, how did they make this update?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/img/06/0808_lieberman.gif?click

its a bunch of bullshit. All Lieberman has done is smear Lamont and his supporters.

*shrug* Websites crash all the time, accidentally and purposefully. It's an internet thing, take precautions against it.
You could take all the precautions you like. I can crash any website I wish, if I were willing to violate the law.

If the site was disrupted and disabled, how did they make this update?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/img/06/0808_lieberman.gif?click

its a bunch of bullshit. All Lieberman has done is smear Lamont and his supporters.

I tried to visit the site all day yesterday. It was down.

You could take all the precautions you like. I can crash any website I wish, if I were willing to violate the law.

*shrug* Point? Never said they were perfect.

Mine certainly does.

I've noticed that people who are not conservative have this odd idea that only someone who is insane would agree with *anything* conservative.

Hate to burst your bubble there.

Good for you.

*shrug* Point? Never said they were perfect.
I guess you won't mind if the next Democratic Presidential candidate can't get a website off the ground, because some unnamed person is crashing it non-stop.

I tried to visit the site all day yesterday. It was down.

How exactly did they trace the perpetrator(s)?

I guess you won't mind if the next Democratic Presidential candidate can't get a website off the ground, because some unnamed person is crashing it non-stop.

Sucks to be them. It's an internet thing.

I tried to visit the site all day yesterday. It was down.

Point being? If you were able to get in and make an update smearing Lamont supporters, you were able to restore the site. Not only that, a little while later the page said "This account is under construction Please check back soon. It will be available shortly. Thank you."

How exactly did they trace the perpetrator(s)?
Sorry, I don't buy the timing. It was down at 5:30 AM yesterday (first time I checked). And it stayed down, despite the efforts of the host to bring it back up.

Sorry, I don't buy the timing. It was down at 5:30 AM yesterday (first time I checked). And it stayed down, despite the efforts of the host to bring it back up.

Timing? I could've sworn I was saying something about finding out who did it.

And you actually believe the things you say on NSGeneral? Your mind works in this manner, yes?

Which part of you is NOT okay with strict morals, no profanity, no drugs, no boozing, and generally speaking, behaving like a proper gentleman?

Which part of you is NOT okay with stern and stark personal lifestyles, combined with a belief that whatever material wealth you don't need for your own sustenance is to be given to the poor?

Which part of you is NOT okay with the mores that whatever behaviour would not be appropriate when attending a garden-party given by HM ( and not Posh Spice and similar ilk ), is not okay in private either?

Which part of you is NOT okay with the belief that Laws exist in order to be obeyed?

Which part of you is NOT okay with strict morals, no profanity, no drugs, no boozing, and generally speaking, behaving like a proper gentleman?

Which part of you is NOT okay with stern and stark personal lifestyles, combined with a belief that whatever material wealth you don't need for your own sustenance is to be given to the poor?

Which part of you is NOT okay with the mores that whatever behaviour would not be appropriate when attending a garden-party given by HM ( and not Posh Spice and similar ilk ), is not okay in private either?

Which part of you is NOT okay with the belief that Laws exist in order to be obeyed?

I'll take that as a yes.

And finally, my joke about some sort of trauma causing your extreme psuedo-gentleman stance is in no way related to the truth, correct?

I'll take that as a yes.

And finally, my joke about some sort of trauma causing your extreme psuedo-gentleman stance is in no way related to the truth, correct?


Excuse me. Where does the pseudo fit in?

Timing? I could've sworn I was saying something about finding out who did it.
Let's see.

It wasn't a problem at the hosting company, so it must have come from outside.

Let's see - who would want to crash it, repeatedly, all during election day.

Occam's razor.

Excuse me. Where does the pseudo fit in?

Somehow threatening folks with a week's hard labor doesn't strike me as a true gentleman's way of things.


Also, didn't hear a no.

Let's see.

It wasn't a problem at the hosting company, so it must have come from outside.

Let's see - who would want to crash it, repeatedly, all during election day.

Occam's razor.

Umm...anyone who doesn't like him?

Let's see - who would want to crash it, repeatedly, all during election day.

Because Lieberman and his crew would NOT want to crash it themselves and blame it on Lamont?

Because Lieberman and his crew would NOT want to crash it themselves and blame it on Lamont?
Very good point - If it actually was Lamont, he would be hurt more by crashing the site because of the negative publicity than he would gain by crashing it.

Even the National Review doubts the story.

While it’s possible that someone actually hacked joe2006.com, from what I’ve seen, this seems to be the least likely option. More likely, this whole episode started last night with a simple over-usage of bandwidth. In the rush to get the server back up, a temporary site using minimal bandwidth was likely uploaded — “Vote for Who You Know, Vote Joe.” I looked at the source code on this particular page, and it didn’t appear to be coded by a hacker — the code was much too fancy. (Who ever heard of a W3C-compliant hacker?) Probably, the page was put together in DreamWeaver or FrontPage. My instinct tells me FrontPage since cPanel can be setup with FrontPage Extensions. (Nevermind that a hacker would be more likely to say something obnoxious about or denigrating of Lieberman.)

Because joe2006.com appeared to have been hacked (a sensible guess when the site went down on election eve), bandwidth problems were complicated by the ensuing deluge of hits, finally bringing down the entire server this morning. Drudge links and heavy traffic tend to do this when there isn't a backup plan in place. The site has been up and down ever since.

As for a staged operation, that seems unlikely given all of the above. This looks to be simply the work of an inexperienced technical consultant, but that’s just my guess.

http://sixers.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTJlYzgwYjAyNWZiMDlhODIyYWI3MzZkYjM5NTEyYmI=

I dont doubt an overusage of bandwidth, it WAS an election day.

Very good point - If it actually was Lamont, he would be hurt more by crashing the site because of the negative publicity than he would gain by crashing it.
Doesn't have to be Lamont, but it could very well be one of his supporters.

Considering the severely threatening tone that a lot of Lamont supporters took (I refer to comments by Lanny Davis in his op-ed), I wouldn't be surprised at all if they discover it's an irate Lamont supporter.

Let's see.

It wasn't a problem at the hosting company, so it must have come from outside.

Let's see - who would want to crash it, repeatedly, all during election day.

Occam's razor.
The same people that crash a thousand other sites for no reason ... hell some anti-israli hacking team brought down berkly.edu for some odd reason ...

In that case I can say: those who don't uphold moral strictness look best when dancing at the end of a rope.

Bondage from the moral majority?

Doesn't have to be Lamont, but it could very well be one of his supporters.

Considering the severely threatening tone that a lot of Lamont supporters took (I refer to comments by Lanny Davis in his op-ed), I wouldn't be surprised at all if they discover it's an irate Lamont supporter.

Well, unless the irate supporter was payed by Lamont, I return to my "it's an internet thing" stance. If enough people on the net don't like you, you'll get messed with.

Somehow threatening folks with a week's hard labor doesn't strike me as a true gentleman's way of things.


Also, didn't hear a no.

You did not hear a yes either.

Meanwhile, sir, since you do have a roof and all, you have obsolutely no excuse not to be cleanshaven. Unless it be some religious principle or other.

And, thus, sir, you do not qualify for the privilege of being treated with the slightest degree of of sociability. Unless some religious principle or other compelled you to comport yourself like human detritus.

Somehow threatening folks with a week's hard labor doesn't strike me as a true gentleman's way of things.

Unless some religious principle is at work, it is obvious that you are no gent, and therefore unable to be stricken, other than with a cricketbat.

You did not hear a yes either.

Exactly, that's why I'm stil waiting.

Unless some religious principle is at work, it is obvious that you are no gent, and therefore unable to be stricken, other than with a cricketbat.

Cricketbats...that's the gentlemanly thing to do? You sure you were telling the truth in response to me second question? "the way you're acting lately makes me doubt"

Oh, ask Thatcher. She'll explain you about bats and there uses.

Meanwhile, I'm leaving you to stew as human detritus.
Bit smelly, actually.

Oh, ask Thatcher. She'll explain you about bats and there uses.

Meanwhile, I'm leaving you to stew as human detritus.
Bit smelly, actually.

Okay, seriously, joke's over. You got me, where are the cameras? You're some kind of set-up right?

Hey, I still wanna picture of the ass-sucker. Screw politesse, baby wantsa reaction shot. Now make with the goods, already.

Hey, I still wanna picture of the ass-sucker. Screw politesse, baby wantsa reaction shot. Now make with the goods, already.
Here, look at this (WARNING: Wear goggles)

http://www.peteykins.com/images/FarkDec03/Hannity.jpg

...I was hoping for something significantly less Photoshopped than that...