OMG!!! This is HUGH!!!1!1!11

[globalvillage]

Actually, it's not, but the irony of the title of this dreck had me close to spitting out my coffee this morning.

"Excuse Me, Senator Kerry, You’re Qualifications, Please?"

Now, I don't typically jump on someone for grammar, usage or spelling errors, but in the TITLE?

Unless he intended to call the Senator "qualifications"?

What, Mr. Salvato, are "you're" qualifications? Obviously, not a firm grasp of proper English usage. I would think that might be handy for a writer. Go ahead, blame it on the copy editor of this on-line rag. It certainly wouldn't be out of character for a bushie to both mangle the language and deflect responsibility.

The piece is so fraught with inaccuracies (he conveniently neglects to mention any of the Senator's accomplishments since 1971), it's not worth reading, but the I just had to share the title with you all.

There's a picture of the bush* kisser at the link. I won't post it, as I'm sure some of you are eating breakfast.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12838

What a Moran.

If they fix it, this post will look pretty stupid, but that's OK. I have a screen capture.
:-)

[MH1]

1. Freepers are so entertaining sometimes, aren't they?

:rofl:

Too bad the people running the country (into the ground) have so much in common with their fans.

Morans.

[fedupinBushcountry]

2. I googled the asshole

he was all over the place saying what great guys the Swift boat liars were. He is also on GOPUSA/Gannon, remember him.

The one thing that struck me is that one of the featured writers at the American Chronicle is David Swanson, from After Downing Street.

[fedupinBushcountry]

3. Author agreement on this site

Not make any statement that Author knows, or should have reason to know is untruthful and/or unlawful.

The Content is based on true facts and diligent research.

The only responsibility of the Chronicle/Sentinel will be to use its reasonable efforts to correct any errors of fact, timing, or omission brought to our attention.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/notices/author_agreement.asp

[wisteria]

4. Non-Partisan? Sure he is, he comes off as fair and balanced to me-

not at all.
Your right, I shouldn't have wasted my time reading this cheer leading piece for Bush.

[whometense]

5. Last desperate measure of scoundrels

who are sinking fast.

NOT to blogwhore (well, maybe a little...), but if you didn't see last night's Daily Show, you MUST check out this video.

[beachmom]

6. One teeny quibble, guys

If you guys are going to call this guy a "moran" for his bad grammar, you might want to spell it right. It's M-O-R-O-N. One more quibble: it's "huge", not "hugh", which is just a name, not a word. I have a trusty old dictionary next to my computer always, and it never lies . . .

[MH1]

7. Heh heh

"Moran" and "hugh" are traditions at DU. (Anyone got the pic that started "moran"?)

Wasn't sure if you were kidding...

[beachmom]

8. Please do tell -- it makes me wince every time I see those two

words misspelled!

[fedupinBushcountry]

10. Here is how it began

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Moran




I'm not sure why the HUGH is spelled that way.

[beachmom]

11. Yeah -- I've seen that before -- pretty funny!

But . . . why do people want to emulate a freeper idiot? Call me a "moran", but I'm going to plan on spelling everything correctly. Not everyone is in on the joke, and if somebody new goes through DU and sees it, they'll say, oh I guess the freeper term "DUmmies" is correct.

But now I understand why some people type that, and will not say anything anymore.

[whometense]

12. It's not emulating -

it's mocking.

No biggie either way, but it's just an in-joke. That's all.

[WildEyedLiberal]

16. Yeah, I think it's hilarious

"Moran" is the perfect word to describe freeptards. Plus, that picture is a classic. I only regret that the moran in question is wearing a Cardinals shirt. x( Oh well, every fandom has its wackos, I suppose.

Or, in keeping with the spirit of this thread, perhaps I should say "every fandom has it's wackos."

:evilgrin:

[MH1]

13. Hmmm... you have a point there

Not everyone is in on the joke, and if somebody new goes through DU and sees it, they'll say, oh I guess the freeper term "DUmmies" is correct.

Maybe we should make a rule, to always post the explanatory picture when someone uses the word.

;-)

[ginnyinWI]

17. I'd simply suggest putting it in quotation marks.

While we're on the subject, it also bothers me that we repeat "The Internets" or "Strategery". It just makes the Idiot more legit.

[WildEyedLiberal]

15. It was a Free Republic thread originally

Some freeper posted a thread titled something like "This is HUGH everyone!!!" Thus, "HUGH!!!!" was born.

I thought everyone knew about moran and hugh by now... :shrug:

[whometense]

9. This?

:rofl:

Edited to add: If you google the word "morans" you'll get 50 variations on this photo. :D

[ProSense]

14. The wingnuts write nonsense, then proudly

distribute it through syndication. Even if they corrected the headline, the article is still fraught with punctuation errors. What's this: pre-mature?

They simply can't get over the fact that their hero is the worst president ever!

[karynnj]

18. This is pure garbage

Even on Vietnam, he ignores that Kerry spoke in 1971, the war ended several years later. The recent Kissinger documents show that in 1970 - before Kerry spoke - Kissinger was trying to get Chinese agreement that NVN would not take over SVN until a decent interval after we left. Kerry was right on target in 1971 when he said men were being asked to die so politicians could save face.

As to Cambodia, throughout the war, Price Sihanouk tried in vain to maintain Cambodia's neutrality. It was our covert activities and the bombing in May 1970 that destabalized Cambodia giving power to the horrendous Khaymer Rouge. Pol Pot should be on Nixon and Kissinger's conscience - not Kerry's.

Even though he ignores everything after 1971, consider what 27 year old Kerry's credentials were then:

- He spoke so well before the SRFC, that a Senator publicly said he hoped he became a member of that body. The Senators covered a huge array of VN/veterans/military etc issues in the question and answer segment - because they were impressed by his answers. (After a couple years of watching the Senate - I've seen nothing like it. He really held his own.)

- In Madeline Albright's new book discussing her current foreign policy beliefs, she very positively quotes John Kerry - not the 2004 JK, or even the 1971 JK, but the comments made when he graduated Yale in 1966. His comments as a 22 year old man sound fresh and current now - and they are not at variance with his 2006 comments.

These in and of themself are pretty impressive credials for speaking on foreign policy as they indicate a good track record. Then look at 2002-2004, how long is the Kerry was right list? Tora Bora, the comments on the danger of rushing to war, Kerry's recommendations for fighting the WoT, listen to the link Ginny posted - his comment that he didn't know what the situation in Iraq would be in January 2005, he could "be handed Lebanon" - which is a good description of the current Iraq situation. His track record on being right is amazing.

The serious conservatives and moderates are admitting that the Bush policies aren't working. The more honest are admitting that on terror, Kerry was right. Rep Shays is almost using his words on Iraq. So, I see people who thought Bush was right, admitting that he wasn't and Kerry was. I don't see anyone saying they thought Kerry was right in 2004, but now believe Bush is.

Kerry's current credentials are that he has expressed on inteligent views on foreign policy for 40 years!