And here’s the ad where he accuses Martin of killing children (or allowing them to be killed, it’s not very clear)
Really? Got a cite for that?
There were no ads comparing Bush to Hitler. There was an amateur ad submited to Moveon a part of a contest, but it was never actually run by anybody, unlike your draft dodging, scumbag man-crush Chambliss who approved and paid for and ran an ad calling a guy who lost three limbs in Vietnam a terrorist.
There’s also the ad where he gropes his grandaughter’s chest on camera.
Jog your memory some more. It’s not workin’ right.
Good bleeding fuck you’re an idiot. 4 posts down from a link to the actual ad(so anyone can click on it and see for themselves what actually ran), and you’re still yammering on about how Chambliss “ran an ad calling a guy who lost three limbs in Vietnam a terrorist.” when in fact he demonstratively did not. Hell, the linked Salon article (Salon for fuck’s sake, not some right wing blog) even says as much.
That was the intentional implication of the ad. I don’t care what Slate says (and even the Slate article calls the ad “sleazy”). I can see the ad for myself.
How about a cite for people “chortling” over Bush=Hitler ads?
As those of us not trolling know there were no Bush-Hitler adverts, just an entry to a Move-on competition so there can be no cite.
Let’s see if I have this straight: This Saxby person is a scumbag because his campaign ran ads against his opponent which were dishonest, unfair, and mean-spirited. Is that it?
No, he’s a scumbag because he’s a bag full of scum.
I find it odd that you asking me for a cite that someone chortled over an ad* when it’s Dio posting through his ass. He’s gone from “face morphing” to “calling a terrorist” to “uh, that was the intentional implication” in just over a dozen posts as he gets called on his lies and distortions. If I can keep him spinning like this, pretty soon he’s going to turn into butter.
*How about Margaret Cho, in her act: “they were saying that they’re all angry about how two of these ads were comparing Bush to Hitler? I mean, out of thousands of submissions, they find two. They’re like fucking looking for Hitler in a haystack. You now? I mean, George Bush is not Hitler. He would be if he fucking applied himself.” Sound like chortling to me. It’s funny too.
IOW, you got nuthin’.
Well there’s a cogent argument. :rolleyes: Seriously, can you articulate why? I don’t know him, or his policies, or anything else, other than the flap about his ads. Why is he scum?
You miss-quoted. I think you meant to quote post #47.
I didn’t ask you for a cite. There was no advert so there can be no cite.
As The Official Arbiter Of Scumbaggery, I have reached a verdict, and will render same… now.
- Did the ad imply or explicitly state that Cleland was a terrorist?
No. - Was the ad utterly, ridiculously inappropriate nonetheless?
Yes. - Does running one dick attack ad make Chambliss a scumbag?
It is our considered opinion that it does not. While the ad was a dick move, Senator Chambliss has not made any further public attempts to display the douchebagginess of which he stands accused; and this, has failed to reach the high threshold required by this Court for admission to the ranks of Scumbaghood. The charge is dismissed with prejudice, though the Court notes it would be willing to reopen this matter should additional acts of twattery come to light.
In so saying, XWalrus2’s personal experience with Senator Chambliss is duly noted.
Petitioner, Diogenes the Cynic, is hereby ordered to pay all court costs incurred by Weirddave in this matter.
The Court of Really Not All That Bright’s Opinion is hereby adjourned.
You want my personal experience with him?
He spoke at my synagogue a few years ago. He took a cross up on the bimah (a stage… thing. I think you’d call it a pulpit?) which is generally a big giant no-no. He spoke to us (a group of Jews) about how Jesus helps him make his decisions, and how whenever he needs guidance, he looks to Jesus. This might be acceptable in a church, but not in a synagogue. It was completely and utterly over the top offensive.
After telling us all about how much he loves Jesus, there was a question and answer session. A question was asked of him about what he thought of the situation in Darfur. He replied by going on for about ten minutes about how we needed to defend ourselves from terrorists by making sure that the Department of Homeland Security had the funding it needed. It was pretty obvious that he had no idea what Darfur was. Afterwards, I went up to him to shake his hand and talk to him, and I asked him if he had misheard the question about Darfur, and whether maybe he would like me to email his office some information on the situation. He said he was very sure that America needed to be protected from terrorists.
His aide gave me a card after I was finished speaking with him, and asked me to send the aforementioned information. I did, later that night, in fact. I never heard back from the aide, or from his office. He didn’t only not care, he didn’t care about not caring.
The man is a scumbag.
Careful, fellas… I think brazil84 might have somethin’ up his sleeve!
Was he, like, carrying a big wooden cross, or was he just wearing a little crucifix around his neck or something?
He wasn’t wearing it. He had it in his pocket, and pulled it out to show us and pontificate on. If he had been wearing it, it wouldn’t have ticked me or anyone else off. He called (a great amount of) attention to it, which was the problem. Usually when people bring crosses onto the bimah, it means trouble for Jews.