advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

Nobody's listening.

REPUBLICAN LEXICON

By
Neal Boortz
@ May 11, 2009 8:17 AM
Permalink | Comments (48) | TrackBacks (0)

This is from a column in the San Francisco Chronicle ... a glossary of Republican doublespeak for all you right-wing conservatives. I'm ticked I didn't make the list.

No commentary necessary ... just read and enjoy.

Activist judges: Judges whose rulings are at odds with the perceived wisdom of Republicans.

Bankers: Stewards of the capitalist system who always know what's best for the economy, who deserve low taxes and big year-end bonuses no matter how poorly their institutions have performed.

Class warfare: Assaults on rich people in the form of the usual whining of poor people.

Clinton, Wm. Jefferson: Democrat president whose sexual dalliance sent the nation into a tailspin from which even George W. Bush could not save it.

Compassionate conservatism: Ignoring the poor, except for an occasional contribution to the collection plate at church. Also see "conservatism."

Democrats: Devil-worshiping scum, foes of free enterprise, champions of the shiftless and the lazy, enemies of hardworking Americans everywhere.

Energy policy: Drill, baby, drill.

Fairness Doctrine: A government regulation once imposed on broadcasters under the mistaken notion that the public airways were owned by the public. Wisely rescinded by Ronald Reagan, paving the way for the careers of Rush Limbaugh, et al.

Fox News: A place where failed newsmen go to live out their golden years (e.g., Britt Hume, Geraldo Rivera), with paychecks provided by an Australian capitalist intent on explaining America to itself.

Gore, Al: Democrat presidential candidate and sore loser who concocted the myth of global warming just to steal joy from the Republicans who beat him.

Greed: The emotion that drives food-stamp recipients.

Justice Department: Agency created to legitimize illegal acts of Republican presidents.

Liberal: Any of a species of lily-livered, weak and effeminate men, or pushy and overly masculine women who have either renounced men altogether, or turned them into "girly-men."

Limbaugh, Rush: A male Mother Teresa for the oppressed captains of business and industry.

New York Times: Propaganda organ, once affiliated with Pravda, now a subsidiary of Al-Jazeera.

No!: All-purpose reply to any idea that doesn't include tax cuts for the wealthy.

Obama, Barack: Inept, inexperienced and inarticulate Negro man elected to the highest office in the biggest mistake the American electorate ever made.

Patriotism: Hoping the nation's leader fails, if he's a Democrat. Hoping the nation's leader succeeds, if he's a Republican.

Pelosi, Nancy: See also "harpy," "harridan."

Poor: People born lacking the gene that creates a solid work ethic, but with an excess number of genes that prompt whining.

Profit: The most sacred goal of human existence. Anything that interferes with its pursuit or acquisition is an affront to God.

Republicans: 1) The only real Americans; 2) Those who uphold traditional American values, such as marital fidelity, and disdain un-American practices such as homosexuality. Republicans uphold these values in public, though they sometimes are found to betray those values in private. They're only human, after all. (see also Vitter, David, or Craig, Larry).

Saint: (n.) See Reagan, Ronald.

Secular humanists: See "spawn of Satan."

Victory: A word foreign to Democrats, who always favor retreat or capitulation to the nation's enemies, foreign or domestic.

Wall Street: The nervous system of America, linked directly to the heart and brain. In short, the essence of this great nation.

Categories:



0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: REPUBLICAN LEXICON.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/30463

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!


Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • Morals
    We have already witnessed the loss of many freedoms because somebody got their feelings hurt. People that want "gay marrieage" laws are the same kind of people that have tried to ban Christmas trees. You keep telling me that "Gay Marriage" does not force anything on me. You really don't get it. It will make insurance more expensive among other things.(if you can wrap your mind around that, let me know) If you really think that the people behind this movement aren't going to take away some of your liberties when they succeed,(maybe not right away, but it's coming) you are delusional. History is plainly before us and has told this tale many times. Get educated young man so you know what's really going on. Visit here: www.mytribaltent.com to see more about what I think. On that site is a way to contact me so we can continue this discussion at length and leisure.
  • Morals
    Red, you are really upset about my definition of morality. You are so upset that you would even imply that I am insane. Maybe I'm using the wrong definition. You seem really bent out of shape about this(telling me I must not be able to wrap my mind around reality). I wonder why you can't even see how you're argument(if you can call it that)only proves my point. Listen closely Red, just saying "wrong, because of the constitution", doesn't make your point any better. And when you do decide to state something besides your opinion, you get it mixed up. Yes, wild animals have been recorded demonstrating "homosexual" behavior. However, it's always young males on the cusp of sexual maturity and only during that transition time and even then it was for the most part only "mounting" and dominance, not full coitus. Never has it been observed to be a lifelong trait so don't tell me that is "proof" of a "gay gene". Please remember that you were the first to mention God. Since you bring Him up: God is the source of morality that I mentioned in an earlier post. Culture is the source you keep bringing up. He is never changing and so morality never changes. Culture changes constantly(as you have so eloquently pointed out). Only what you believe about morality is elastic. True morality is based on what God believes. I know I have opened a whole different can of worms here, but it really seems like you don't even read my posts. You keep saying "wrong, because of Life, Liberty, yada, yada, yada. You're missing all that I have said about what they(people who would redefine MY life) are really trying to do. Listen closely: there either IS truth or there is NOT truth. IF there is truth, then morals are absolute because they are based on truth. If there is no truth, then morals are a waste of time and you should do whatever you want. If you agree with the latter then you are "morally relativistic". Which means you can justify anything if you want to. That's NOT morality. That is what has opened the window for a socialist president and a congress that DOES NOT KNOW the Constitution, let alone honor it. The issue here is not simply about whether or not 2 homosexuals should be allowed to say they are married. There is more at stake here. The real issue at hand is allowing people to chip away little by little at what is right and good. "Gay" marriage is just one more chink in the armor. BTW, God, whom you mentioned earlier, has some VERY specific things to say about homosexuality as well as many other things that we as a nation say is OK. Go ahead and let them have it. They were already free to be as immoral as they like. You will soon NOT be free to be moral in public.
  • Burley Dad...
    Gays do not force anything on you. Gay marriage does not force anything on you. The only way they can, is to force you to get married to a man. Are you saying by gays getting married they are forcing you to marry a man? This is lunacy. They do not affect you at all. That is fact. What they do in their own personal time and relationships is their business. Not yours. Morals have elasticity to them, which is why different values and cultures exist. There is not one universal set of morals...not to the mind that is able to wrap itself around reality.To not recognize the reality of it is to suggest the entire planet shares one single solitary culture and set of values.....that would make you insane and worthy of a visit to lunatic assylum.

    "I think that the Mormons who practice polygamy are immoral and wrong about marriage."

    which is your own personal opinion that you don't get to force on them. Marriage is one way in your single solitary mind and is a completely different definition to them. As it is for muslims, as it is for gays.

    "I refuse to be forced to call it something it's not."

    Then don't call it that, we don't need a constitutional ammendment for you to stop calling gay marriage 'marriage'. All you have to do personally is not use the word. Others believe it IS marriage and WILL use the word. You both get what you want.What's the problem?

    Lifestyle choice? You realize animals in nature have displayed naturally occuring homosexual behavior right? Now you're questioning gods creations?
  • Red...
    ...I cant help but wonder:
    1. Your five year old is involved in some misconduct and lies to you about it. No violation of life, liberty or property. Is the lie moral?

    2. Your teenager takes your car for a spin without asking or letting you know where they are going or with whom. They return well after the normal time you expect them to be home. No real violation of life, liberty or property. Is "borrowing" and using your car without consent but returning it later moral?

    3. Your spouse/significant other is having an affair. No violation of your life, liberty or property...are your spouses actions moral?

    4. A man who breaks into your home. He is not armed but is obviously trying to steal from you and may possibly pose a threat to your family or yourself. You defend yourself resulting in his death. Were your actions moral?
  • Invective Disguised As Opinion SF Chronicle
    This is more of the same cr*p that has passed for argument since the election. Those of us who did not vote for Obama (and some who did) critize the way things are being handled and are invited to shut up and get in line with the program.

    Dissent is no longer patriotic. Dissenting from the current orthodoxy is now an invitation to be publicly ridiculed, defamed and marginalized. When problems with the current regime are spoken of, the answer is not a rebuttal or an arguement. It is simply invective and racial, intellectual and class based slurs.

    You aren't criticizing because you see problems, you're criticizing because you're a racist or greedy. You don't seen brilliance of the plans not because it is not obvious but because you're too dim or deranged to see it.

    No one will answer us because we are not considered deserving of an answer. Plus it is so much easier than trying to defend the current administrations policies.
  • Burley
    I am not sure you and I aren't saying the same thing or not. Of course no one HERE thinks it's ok to rape your wife, but it is ok elsewhere. Which means that what is perceived as moral does change based on where you are and what culture you live in. That in itself keeps morals from being universal. Muslims tell us we have no right to judge their morals based on Western culture. Of course at the same time, the extreme among them think ALL should believe the same as they do, so I guess they would say that morals ARE universal. As long as it is THEIR moral laws.

    Here in the US we for the most part, have the same morals or respect. Outside the US it's a whole different ballgame. I personally would not be allowed to post like I do, probably end up with my head off!!!
  • Logic
    When I see some, I will accept it RedLeader. You said "And you do not have the right to use the lethal and deadly force of govt to enforce your personal opinions on me at gun point." I ask: But gays do? Are you a member of the ACLU? Morals are not elastic. Only your view of them. Societies become more tolerant of immorality and some even accept what was once immoral to now be moral, but that doesn't make it right. Listen closely: morals are absolute because of their source. Governmental law and cultural opinion are elastic because of their source. You keep telling me I'm wrong, quoting "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" without hearing what I'm saying. Just because a bunch of people get together and agree that it's OK to hang some dude because he's the wrong color at the wrong time does NOT make it right! It only meant that that particular group was willing to compromise themselves for the sake of their desire! I note that you missed my point about the rape question. Do you agree that it's OK? It's a yes or no question. It's right or wrong. If you see it as an idiot question then you probably won't mind when the left begins to tax you for the healthcare of some gay man's "wife" who is having complications due to his "lifestyle choice". Reread my last post. I'm not insisting that they stop doing whatever it is they want to do. I refuse to be forced to call it something it's not. I think that the Mormons who practice polygamy are immoral and wrong about marriage. I have a prediction for YOU RedLeader: in the states where it has been mandated that same sex relationships be recognized as "marriage" it will become a hate crime to say they aren't. You want liberty? Try and be free in those states. I dare you. The issue at stake is bigger than simple morality. I am prepared to draw the line for the sake of preserving your "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" RedLeader, not simply my own. Did you read my other posts? It's a snowball trend, man. You will eventually find something they are trying to make OK that you are willing to fight for. John Adams once said, “Our constitution is only fit for a moral and religious people. It is wholly unsuited to the governance of any other kind.”
    You need to read this: http://thevalleytruth.wordpress.com/2009/04/09/the-constitution-and-religious-people/
  • Spot on
    Several of these are accurate.

    Liberal: Any of a species of lily-livered, weak and effeminate men, or pushy and overly masculine women who have either renounced men altogether, or turned them into "girly-men."

    Democrats: Devil-worshiping scum, foes of free enterprise, champions of the shiftless and the lazy, enemies of hardworking Americans everywhere.

    Obama, Barack: Inept, inexperienced and inarticulate Negro man elected to the highest office in the biggest mistake the American electorate ever made..

    Poor: People born lacking the gene that creates a solid work ethic, but with an excess number of genes that prompt whining.

    Victory: A word foreign to Democrats, who always favor retreat or capitulation to the nation's enemies, foreign or domestic.
  • I predict that Burley Dad...
    ....will now completely derail, reject plain logic and have an absolute melt down. Completely ignoring all I have said about not violating people's life,liberty or property...hence asking idiot questions like whether its ok to rape someone's wife. Burley Dad wake up...accept logic.
  • Burley Dad you are wrong...
    That's just the long and short of it. Like I said gays in relationships do not affect you. I do not understand gay relationships but they do not affect me. In no way do gays force me to re-arrange my lifestyle and the same for yours. What will gay marriage force you to participate in a gay marriage? No you still live your life as it was.They do not violate my life,liberty or property. Morals have elasticity. Period. Again as life,liberty and property are not violated. And you do not have the right to use the lethal and deadly force of govt to enforce your personal opinions on me at gun point. The only question left to answer here is whether you understand that or not.....sorry to break it to you. The only absolute, is that morals are NOT absolute. Look through history ....marriage has been defined differently for thousands of years by different cultures...talk to a fundamentalist mormon lately? Leave it up to the states to ban it or not ban it.
  • comments in SF
    Check out the comments to the article! Horray! There are some real folks living in the Bay Area.
  • re;Morals
    Raise your hand if you agree that it is morally acceptable to rape your wife. Anyone,....Anyone,....? No?!
    Actually Joyce, you make my point rather than break it. I would wager that no one that posts on this comment will think it's OK to rape. ever. Same with murder, embezzlement, and a long list of others. But what if some bank robber convinces you that he "can't help that he likes to carry weapons into financial institutions?" or that he's "just made different" and that what he does is a "lifestyle choice" not a "crime" or "sin"? What if "scientists" discover a "thief" gene? What about that. You keep giving and they'll keep taking. What is moral is absolute. If your morals are "elastic" then you may be thinking like a democrap. Right and Wrong do not come from public opinion. Again I say, one telling another that it's OK does not make it so. Morals are absolute. That's why we have laws. Culture is what is elastic. Don't y'all understand that? What we have is a bunch of people who want to change the law so they don't feel immoral anymore. A backwards proposal that Americans have been making for many years. Joyce, you are right about respect. When you respect those around you you tend to treat them constitutionally. That doesn't mean that you have to redefine wright and wrong to do so.
  • What an idiot
    Whoever wrote that column is a complete idiot. It should be named what Democrats think Republicans mean when they say certain words.

    Liberal Doublespeak

    Activist Judges- A judge who is a Catholic and at some point mentioned that they are against abortion.

    Bankers- people who donate money to the Democrat party in order to get bail outs but are later called greedy capitalists

    Class Warfare- War between white collar workers or professionals and intellectuals and welfare recipients renamed "the Middle Class" during election years

    William Clinton- president of one of the best economic times EVER! Awesome guy whose sex life is nobody's business Han Solo to Rush Limbaugh Darth Vadar

    Compassionate conservatism- ha ha ha!

    Democrats- will save the world from caveman republicans.

    Energy Policy- shopping at Trader Joe's and driving a Prius taxing the crap out of selfish rednecks in their giant red trucks

    Al Gore- the John the Baptist of Obama

    Fox News- propaganda of Neo-Nazis and the religious right

    Greed- Christians who have 10 children (they are destroying the environment!!)

    Rush Limbaugh- fat, drug addicted, cigar smoking devil who brain washes simple minded rednecks and evangelicals.

    Barack Obama- he is just sooo awesome and will bring world peace and his wife is soooo fashionable, he will bring like change and stuff, who cares what he will do because he like talks real good you know. . . he said some funny stuff about Dick Chaney ha ha ha!

    Patriotism- the right to complain against Republicans

    Poor- "People born lacking the gene that creates a solid work ethic, but with an excess number of genes that prompt whining." They must be aborted.

    Saint- FDR, JFK, Woodrow Wilson

    Wall Street- donate big money to the Obama campaign because that is what cool people in Manhattan do. Only graduates of community colleges vote Republican. I work in Wall Street and graduated from an Ivy League University. I am too smart for Republicans.
  • Morals Universal?
    Is that why a new law in Afghanistan makes it legal for a man to rape his wife?

    And many cultures agree, marriage is between a man and a woman, or two or three or oh heck 50.

    Nope, morals change based on your personal history. Or if you've pulled away from that, then whatever you decide is right. I get my morals from respect. I respect myself first, then respect those around me until they do something to lose my respect.

    I cannot think of a single crime or "sin" that is not the result of a lack of respect.
  • re: Moral Elasticity....
    Again, Red Leader, morals ARE absolute. Technically not universal to use your wording. The only thing that changes is your standard. If you say that a Rastafarian can't force me to smoke pot, then why is it OK for a homosexual to force me to devalue the meaning of my Lifesytle and accept something that is clearly a counterfeit? Behavior is either moral or immoral. You saying it's OK doesn't make it so. Homosexuals have always been free to be just as immoral as they like and even pretend to be married. They are not free to FORCE me to rearrange my morality to suit their lifestyle. They are free to live together and play house but they are not free to FORCE me to change a definition that has been defined for thousands of years. They can call it anything but Marriage and I am willing to spell it out in the constitution. If you think that these "gay marriage" movements are anything but a DIRECT ASSAULT on the American family you have gotten quite a few fundamentals WRONG! You need to examine your last statement and see who's forcing who.
  • Democrats
    At least the got the definition of a Democrat right!
  • Um, yeah...
    Copyleft,

    We realize we're being mocked. We also realize that the SF-Chronicle is only mocking itself.

    While attempting to criticize conservatives and Republicans, the Chronicle only displays its ignorance to economics, the true meanings of liberty and the role of government under our Constitution. While lots of Republicans get the details wrong, their basic ideals are correct.

    Just because a statement is intended as an insult does not make it so. Calling a homosexual "queer" is not necessarily insulting him, as many adorn that as a lifestyle nickname. Similarly, using the terms listed above to insult conservatives, while intended as an insult, is in actuality a sermon that is preached to the liberal choir. Nothing more.

    Many of the details are even wrong. I challenge you to find a conservative who actually thinks the listed definition of "Justice Department," "Patriotism" or "Profit" are true, for example.
  • Liberal Doublespeak Part 2
    LOL @ Jim's list. I couldn't agree more. Here are a few more:

    Tax Cut: Taking money earned by someone who actually earned it and giving it to people who don't pay taxes in the first place.

    Working Families: Welfare recipients.

    Terrorist: Soldiers returning from Iraq or Afghanistan.

    Feminist: Any Liberal woman.

    Hate Crime: Any crime comitted by a white heterosexual male.

    Hate Speech: Any speech contradictory to liberal dogma.

    Civil Rights: Liberal rights.

    Free Speech: Liberal speech. For conservatives, see above definition of hate speech.

    Tax Cheats: Any conservative who the left feels doesn't pay their fare share of taxes. Also, any conservative who did hold back on what they should have paid. For liberals, however, this is just an honest mistake and if you do such an act, you may be offered a cabinet position in the Obama Administration.

    Right To Life: Convicted murderers on death row.

    Woman's Right To Choose: Right to kill innocent babies.

    Racism: Any negative thing said by a white person about a non-white person in any context regardless if the statement is a statement of fact.
  • Slander!
    Neal, I am surprised that you would repeat such blatant slander such as this:

    "Democrats: Devil-worshiping scum, foes of free enterprise, champions of the shiftless and the lazy, enemies of hardworking Americans everywhere."

    Really, Neal, you know that most Democrats do not worship the Devil. They worship Obama.
    Oh, wait. Never mind, Neal. Carry on.
  • Greed
    Re:Greed -- The person who has more than you have is greedy. You, however, have just the right amount.
  • Burley Dad...
    Im sorry buy no morals are NOT universal. There is an elasticity to morals. The key is to respect the constitution, in other words do not violate anyone's life,liberty or property and we should be fine and protected from the things you are talking about. From what you are saying if morals are universal then an American of the Rastafari religion should be able to force you to smoke marijuana or certain types of catholics should be able to force you to flog yourself at certain times of year. Or maybe religions that practice animal sacrifice should be able to force you to do that, or maybe a fundamentalist muslim then can consider you immoral for allowing females in your family to have their knees and ankles exposed. There is no need for a constitutional ammendment against gay marriage, America is not a centralized, soviet style one fits all country. Leave something like that up to the states along with abortion. Do you really think gay people will stop having relationships if you ban gay marriage? Do you think they'll just go away? How does gay marriage keep you personally from getting married? It doesn't. I get my morals from my parents and family which are different from yours. You do not get to force your own personal opinions onto me by lethal and deadly force of govt and vice versa, that is ANTI-AMERICAN. The founders of this country knew that living in a free society meant you would come across things you don't like. Which is why the constitution is written to protect differences in society, not to enforce uniformity. People hate to admit it but think of morals as one big game of street soccer, we make up the rules in constant negotiation as we go along. This is why different cultures value different things, and therefore have different morals. Hence the elasticity of morals.
  • I thought. . .never mind
    What do you think the first comment under the article in the SF paper is? Some conservative decrying hate speech, heh, heh.
  • republican lexicon
    i don't get it, really. what's wrong with not liking what the other party thinks? i don't like some of the definitions, but we can hardly expect a newspaper like that to publish a list describing all the alternate meanings for words that bill clinton gave us. example "i feel your pain" means "i know you are angry and hurt but i don't really care"..."i did not have sexual relations with that woman" means not that particular woman, if you re-define the meaning of sex and question what the meaning of the word "is" is.
  • Is this exaggerations or how they really think?
    I can't help but wonder if this lexicon is an exaggeration, blowing the proportions of who they think we are, or if this is how Liberals actually think of conservatives. I would be shocked if Liberals ACTUALLY believed that this "Lexicon" was how conservatives actually think. Shocked, because it's DEAD WRONG on most points. The problem is, the author took what conservatives say about an issue and twisted it to meet their own liberal views of conservatives and put that down. Never mind actually finding out what conservatives actually mean. I guess it's easier to throw your own liberal emotions into the mix than to listen to conservatives explain their positions.

    And all of these people on this page saying basically, "I'm conservative and they got it dead wright." I CALL BULLS**T ON THAT!!!!! Just liberals trying to reinforce their own illusions.
  • Democrat Doublespeak
    Charity: Forcibly taking money from someone to give to a more deserving poor person, but not my money. I can’t afford it. See also: tax relief

    Climate Change: The belief that a dynamic universe’s natural state is static.

    The Constitution: The what?

    Corporation: An economic vehicle with the sole purpose of providing more tax revenue for the government.

    Fairness Doctrine: A belief that the government owns the very air we breathe.

    Freedom: Exercising the rights that the government bestows upon me.

    Government: Mommy

    Hate Speech: Criticism of a Democrat’s position on a topic for which there is no logical retort.

    Job Creation: Hiring more people to work for the government.

    NPR: The only real talk radio. Should not be subject to the Fairness Doctrine.

    Teleprompter: The word of God.
  • you made it
    neal, boortz: a talk radio host. a LINO. a mouthpiece for the wall street party {read republican party) see rush limbaugh, sean hannity.
  • Morals ARE Universal!!!!!!!!
    Red Leader, morals ARE universal. They have to be. What if I decide that it's OK for me to murder you because I don't like the way you drive? One of our biggest failures as a society is allowing people to believe what you believe. Today in this once great nation we have a huge problem created by some people's belief that it's OK to tell the governmemt to take money from one group and give it to another group. Other people believe that an individual should fend for themselves. Both groups call the other greedy! One group is wrong. So I ask you this Red leader, where do you get your standards for morality? Public opinion? There was a time in many countries when "public opinion" held that it was OK to OWN another person as well as have sex with children! Do you agree with either of these moral codes??!!! I bet that you WILL say at some point that a line has been crossed. If you allow people to think that morality is relative then you may find yourself the victim of someone else's moral code. I would support a U.S. Constitutional Amendment that would declare marriage as being an exclusive union between a MAN and a WOMAN! People who say it can be same-sex are stealing from everyone who is in a REAL Marriage!!! Marriage was not defined by the Repugnican party. It has been held sacred for eons by ALL cultures. Only in America can people be so stinking spoiled as to insist that we pass a !@(#*&! LAW that subverts thousands of years of human tradition and allows them to PRETEND that they are married. I will support this amendment because I believe it is my RIGHT to say that I am Married. Only recently has that right been threatened. So, Red Leader, you'd better think again about your morals. Some people's moreal code allows them to take all you have.
  • He's also a nyt contributor, go figure.
    They've got their heads so far up their rears they can't even mock us anymore without making themselves the real butt of the joke.

    The print msm are dinosaurs bellowing from the tar pit as they sink. The dp will likely run out of money before they get around to saving them.
  • This is sick
    Don't you love how they put us against each other and divide us? There is a better way, but first we have to destroy the NWO.
  • Don't get it
    Some of these are accurate and I thought this was supposed to insult conservatives.
  • SF fishwrap
    Don't worry, the Chronicle is about to go belly up anyway. As the old joke says, "no need to amputate! Fall off all by itself in week!"
  • San Fran Comical
    San Francisco Chronicle just recently was up for sale. No takers. They will wait for bail-out.
  • Insult?
    Maybe this is why liberals can't stand to have thought based rather than emotion based policy discussions. Every time they intend to insult I say thank you for noticing.
  • list
    Some of the poor liberals treat the list in jest. The only problem is that most of the negative democrat stuff I saw has more than a grain of truth to it.

    Class warfare
    democrats
    gore
    poor
  • idiocy
    you think they TRY to be this stupid or does it come naturally?

    these people need to be locked away in a mental asylum and put on medication for the rest of their lives.This is an illness.
  • Bankers and Wall Street
    I guess that the SF Chronicle didn't do their research. The Banks and Wall Street gave a lot more money to Obama that to any other candidate. These organizations also provided a large amount of campaign contributions to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.

    It appears that these organizations are in bed more with the Dumbicrats that the Repulsivicans.
  • Ha!
    He beat me!
  • Definitions
    The definitions for Democrat and New York Times are the most accurate, succinct descriptions of those two organizations that I've ever seen.
  • democrat lexicon
    liberal definations are even more revealing although much simpler. CLIMATE CHANGE=EXCUSE TO SEIZE MORE POWER & TAXES,ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT=A WAY TO SEIZE MORE POWER,CARD CHECK= A WAY TO SEIZE MORE POWER,CAP AND TRADE=A WAY TO SEIZE MORE POWER(are you beginning to see a pattern here?)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE=A WAY TO SEIZE MORE POWER,BAIL-OUTS=A WAY TO SEIZE MORE POWER...I could go on but I think you get it. Everything democrats do is ONLY to increase their control and power to keep them in office.This makes for a dull, boring lexicon but its simple enough for even a democrat to follow.
  • LOL!!!!
    Countdown, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.....
  • Well, the DID get a few of them right.
    Well now. A liberal with a sense of humor besides Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Some definitions are dead-nuts on:

    Democrats
    Energy Policy
    Pelosi, Nancy
    Saint

    Gore, Al is close. He's actually in it for the money.
  • Doublespeak?
    Where's the doublespeak? Aren't those the definitions straight from Websters? If not they should be.
  • Republican Lexicon
    Pathetic: see also "printed media", "San Francisco Chronicle"
  • Hee hee!
    Pretty funny stuff! And all too accurate, judging from the commentary we see here on the blog.

    The sad part is, a lot of Nuze fans are probably nodding their heads in AGREEMENT with this nonsense, not even realizing they're being mocked.

    Which makes it all the funnier! Kudos to Neal for having the guts to post some humorous commentary from the "other side."
  • 22 out of 26
    I agree with 22 out of 26 and I'm a conservative.Gee,I guess I should thank another obsolete, leftist newspaper for enlightening me.Now I must abandon my core beliefs and become a liberal or maybe slit my wrists from the shame of the right.
  • oh yeah....
    As nutty as these definitions are, I believe fully that these people and their henchmen will be making gains in this country and will increase their power if the GOP does not find a way to come out against the Patriot Act, support withdrawing troops from around the planet where they are causing America to go bankrupt and aiding islamic fascists with their recruitment numbers and start championing the things like the Fair Tax, the constitution and leaving things like gay marriage up to the states since the GOP does not have a monopoly on morality, and morals are not universal.
  • dunces....
    Why didn't these idiots take the time to figure out what is in the constitution and the intentions of the founders of this country. Oddly enough a great number of neo-cons out there are just as mislead as the liberals who believe this stuff.
  • wow....
    liberalism really is fascism with a smile.
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement