This is surprising? It's the National Review, one of the most biased publications in the U.S. This headline definitely belongs on Fark, because it's not news.

gay nazis.... mmmmmmmmmmm

godless gay Nazis who will kill you and everyone you care about

Well, that could be said about anyone. Jeez. Clintonist.

well yes... this is true. But it would be nice to have a woman President for a change.

FTA: Mitt Romney has a record as governor of Massachusetts and his father had a three-term record as government of Michigan.

A) governor, not government, imbecile
B) WTF do I care about his father's record?

Dogberry: FTA: Mitt Romney has a record as governor of Massachusetts and his father had a three-term record as government of Michigan.

A) governor, not government, imbecile
B) WTF do I care about his father's record?

Hillary is trying to get elected because she was married to someone who had the job.

Code_Archeologist: well yes... this is true. But it would be nice to have a woman President for a change.

Wish we had one running.

Siiigh.

A Hillary v Romney race.

See people, this is why we can't have nice things!!!

Subby's hyperbole bears no relation to the factual statements of Thomas Sowell

/Thomas Sowell is a brilliant person
//this was not one of his brilliant pieces

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Hillary is trying to get elected because she was married to someone who had the job.

Yeah, it's not like she has any government experience or anything.

Same old laundry list. So I'll instead focus on this:

Nobody running on the Republican ticket is as dangerous as the Clintons.

I beg, on bent knee, to differ: Giuliani.

CTRL-F-->"Nazi"

Phrase not found

FAIL

/Il Douchey nailed it

An article fellating Romney from a right wing rag that officially endorsed Romney? Pass.

I especially like how he implies that anyone that doesn't support Romney might be doing so because of religious prejudice- as if Romney isn't unattractive enough to many conservatives without considering religion.

He's asserting that enabling the Chinese to lob satellites has had a negative impact, given the state of international relations with China in the '70s and '80s, relative to those today ?

I presume that's what was meant by "he gave China the technology that can be used to enable their nuclear missiles to hit American cities" - although since the operational DF-5 pre-dates Clinton by 12 years and the DF-31 is closer to Russian technology, with a little input from our 'close allies' the Israelis, than US ICBMs, it's pretty laughable.

Il Douchey: Thomas Sowell is a brilliant person

Not on the evidence of TFA.

The short answer is that most of the Republicans are questionable and all three leading Democrats are dangerous.

While Barack Obama and John Edwards have been irresponsible demagogues, the Clintons have a record of lawless and ruthless corruption

the very dangerous possibility - that Hillary Clinton will become President

Nobody running on the Republican ticket is as dangerous as the Clintons.

With frenzies like this who need enemas?

I actually feel bad that I even clicked the comments link, much less actually wasting any time out of my life to read NRO. Blatant partisan sites are a waste of time.

I occasionally listen to the various radio sites while I am driving, but thats just to give me some exercise and increase my heart rate while sitting in traffic.

Pocket Ninja
Yeah, it's not like she has any government experience or anything.

She's been a senator for 6 years. That's 6 years of government experience. However, she's trying to run on the premise that her "involvement" goes back 20 years, which isn't true. Her HUSBAND'S involvement goes back 20 years.

If my husband was a cardiologist, and I'd lived with him for twenty years, and then I went to nursing school, would you let me do open heart surgery on your kids?

Man, I hate the Athegayzis.

They say "Godless gay Nazis" like it's a BAD thing.

what_now: If my husband was a cardiologist, and I'd lived with him for twenty years, and then I went to nursing school, would you let me do open heart surgery on your kids?

That's an absolutely irrelevant question. The only salient point is that she has government experience, all her own. It's a fact people like to gloss over, just like they like to gloss over the fact that she, like most other modern first ladies, was quite involved in policy when she inhabited the White House. Just because you might not like what she did concerning health care doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Pocket Ninja That's an absolutely irrelevant question. The only salient point is that she has government experience, all her own. It's a fact people like to gloss over, just like they like to gloss over the fact that she, like most other modern first ladies, was quite involved in policy when she inhabited the White House. Just because you might not like what she did concerning health care doesn't mean it didn't happen.

No, I DID like what she did involving health care. That's the thing I like the most about her. BUT, she's trying to paint Obama as inexperienced when he HAS MORE LEGISLATIVE experience than her, AND she's trying to say she's "not the voice of establishement", at the same time!

She is absolutly piggy backing off of Bill Clinton's presidency, while downplaying the negative aspects of it. Of course she has government experience, all her own. Just like a nurse has medical experience. But that nurse STILL can't claim to be a heart suregon.

Pocket Ninja: That's an absolutely irrelevant question. The only salient point is that she has government experience, all her own. It's a fact people like to gloss over, just like they like to gloss over the fact that she, like most other modern first ladies, was quite involved in policy when she inhabited the White House. Just because you might not like what she did concerning health care doesn't mean it didn't happen.

While she may have put her time in as First Lady, the fact is I doubt she was heavily involved in policy decisions, though it's hard to know because you never seem to get a straight answer from either her or Bill on the issue. Okay, fine, she was "involved" in policy at the White House. Fine. Let's name some of her policy initiatives that were implemented, then.

Is that a headline or a Love Camp 7 synopsis?

what_now: BUT, she's trying to paint Obama as inexperienced when he HAS MORE LEGISLATIVE experience than her, AND she's trying to say she's "not the voice of establishement", at the same time!

Oh, I agree, it's an absurd argument. I was more addressing the sort of person who likes to say that she has no experience aside from being a president's wife.

So, basically, if you just make shiat up in a headline and submit it, you get a greenlight.

Doctor Funkenstein's next submission:

Newsflash: Bush declares war on Egypt in order to install Christian leaders to boost the production of foreign made Chevrolet's.

Actual story: There's a possibility of scattered showers in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania this afternoon and continuing into the early evening.

Pocket Ninja I was more addressing the sort of person who likes to say that she has no experience aside from being a president's wife.

She HAS experience of her own. But she can't claim Bill's experience, which is what she's trying to do.

what_now She's been a senator for 6 years. That's 6 years of government experience. However, she's trying to run on the premise that her "involvement" goes back 20 years, which isn't true. Her HUSBAND'S involvement goes back 20 years.

If my husband was a cardiologist, and I'd lived with him for twenty years, and then I went to nursing school, would you let me do open heart surgery on your kids?

She managed Bill's bimbo eruptions for 35 years. That's somthing she can put on her resume.

She knows how to campaign. That is all.

Wow, hey Thomas don't sugar coat it ..... what do you really think?

Doctor Funkenstein: So, basically, if you just make shiat up in a headline and submit it, you get a greenlight.

Welcome to Fark.com

ohh noooes it's the clintons! boogity boogity boo!

My god, what a hack of an article and writer.. do these people have no scruples at all?

This guy is whats wrong with our political system.

somehow they are worse than the current boob in office!...boogity boogity boo!

Doctor Funkenstein: So, basically, if you just make shiat up in a headline and submit it, you get a greenlight..

The only hyperbole in the headline is Godless Gay Nazis. The rest is a screed about the Clintons fraternizing with China to nuke the poor American people too stupid to vote for Thompson -- which means we probably deserve it according the NRO.

Strangely absent is any mention of the brown people in the way of our oil.

Would someone vote against Rudolph Giuliani because he is a Catholic? John F. Kennedy put that issue to rest nearly half a century ago.

Well JFK did pave the way for all of the Catholic presidents that followed him.

Would someone vote against Rudolph Giuliani because he is a Catholic? As with Romney's Mormonism, there are plenty of better reasons not to vote for Rudy.

The only candidate who's religion scares me is Huckabee, because he doesn't get that he can't legislate from the bible.

SherKhan: The short answer is that most of the Republicans are questionable and all three leading Democrats are dangerous.

While Barack Obama and John Edwards have been irresponsible demagogues, the Clintons have a record of lawless and ruthless corruption

the very dangerous possibility - that Hillary Clinton will become President

Nobody running on the Republican ticket is as dangerous as the Clintons.

With frenzies like this who need enemas?

DANGER DANGER DANGER

Headso: somehow [the Clintons] are worse than the current boob in office!...boogity boogity boo!

Good stuff.

Are godless gay Nazis anything like Illinois Nazi's?

From TFA: The only real conservative candidate is former Senator Fred Thompson, but his low vote totals in all the Republican primaries thus far make him a one-man endangered species.

There's so much fail in this it's not even funny. Thompson may be a faux Gucci conservative prancing around like a federalist, but that's the best he can do. Somebody should really make him dance by asking him if he thinks the Bill of Rights should apply to the states, and point out that federalists would prefer to allow each state determine what individual rights and liberties their citizens deserve.

noYOUare: Well, that could be said about anyone. Jeez. Clintonist.

I prefer the nomenclature, "Clintonista"

President for Life!!!!

I loved him in the Outsiders and Soul Man.

There's no love like conservative love.

The headline has to be the stupidest group of words I've ever laid eyes on. Good to hear it's not directly from the article, but I'm still not clicking on the link.

Calling Bill gay... That's good comedy.

ifarkthereforiam There's no love like conservative love.

Yes us conservatives love all gods children.

Now get off your farking a$$ and go get a job.

FTA: People like this are not to be trusted with the highest office in the land in an era when Iran is moving toward nuclear weapons that can easily be turned over to international terrorists.

Iran has had active chemical and biological weapons programs for decades. Yet they've never been accused of supplying chemical or biological weapons to "international terrorists" bent on destroying the US.

The bottom line is this: Sowell has the position and prestige that he does, not because his words contain truth or insight, but because he and his masters believe that he's an effective scaremonger and that they will derive benefit if everyone else buys into his malarky.

/additionally, Subby blows

"The Clintons are godless gay Nazis who will kill you and everyone you care about"

As opposed to Mike Huckabee, a God-fearin' married Nazi who will kill you and everyone you care about.

And as long as I have the floor, I'll go crazy with my big belief again:

The Republican Party, as currently headed by the neoconservative movement, is the largest terrorist organization in the world today.

/Thank you. You may continue with your ongoing flamewar.

ManRay: CTRL-F-->"Nazi"

Phrase not found

FAIL

/Il Douchey nailed it


THIS.


Jon Snow: An article fellating Romney from a right wing rag that officially endorsed Romney? Pass.

I especially like how he implies that anyone that doesn't support Romney might be doing so because of religious prejudice- as if Romney isn't unattractive enough to many conservatives without considering religion.


FAIL. Did you even read it?

The article wasn't "fellating" Romney. Part of it mentioned the issue which everyone in the newsmedia has discussed numerous times already: that his Mormonism may turn off some voters. I don't agree with it, I think it's not going to matter to most voters, but it isn't exactly an issue out of left field.

I'll quote TFA and bold the important part for you:
Some of the objections to former governor Mitt Romney raise a disquieting question as to whether religious differences alone are enough for some voters to pass up a candidate whom they would consider voting for otherwise.

It is one thing to say that particular policies of a candidate go against fundamental moral principles derived from your religion and something very different to be against a candidate whose actual policies are consistent with your principles but who simply attends a different church.


And the really important part - the point of the article - is spelled out explicitly:
The stakes are too high to do anything other than select the best person available, even if none of the candidates seems ideal.

Pocket Ninja: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Hillary is trying to get elected because she was married to someone who had the job.

Yeah, it's not like she has any government experience or anything.

She's demonstrated a pronounced capacity to do things wrong, then deny she screwed it up and continue to do the same thing over and over while blaming the successive failures on mysterious conspiracies by her political enemies (See: her health care plan). Just having experience means nothing, you have to have demonstated a capacity to gain some sort of competence from that experience.

Il Douchey: /Thomas Sowell is a brilliant person
//this was not one of his brilliant pieces

Sorry, but that doesn't un-make the asshole, and it certainly doesn't excuse the broad-brush BS he's trying to pass off as mainstream thought.

And the Democrats aren't "dangerous" enough.