jawa.mee.nu

April 12, 2007

Fire Keith Olbermann

Olbermann wants Limbaugh fired for "racism." Olbermann conveniently forgets he imitated a Nazi, trivializing the Holocaust and offended Jews everywhere. The ADL even had to call him on it.

Firing Keith Olbermann, using his rules, for being a Holocaust-trivialising Jew-offending dolt?

"That's the best things I've ever heard."

Posted by: Good Lt. at 10:59 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Dear Old Keith is just another guy who's little dick can't get no attention so he uses his only gift, a vocabulary, to hide his severe depression which he heavily medicates...like that phony journalist greek ex clinton boob, George S.

Posted by: RJ at April 13, 2007 06:25 AM (yyxO/)

2 He's a pathetic little twit that deserves no attention whatsoever. How many people actually watch his "show"? 15?

Posted by: Insolent Infidel at April 13, 2007 09:05 AM (A5PXC)

3 According to Nielsen, Countdown averaged 709,000 viewers during February 2007 sweeps. That's up 59% from February '06. According to Arbitron, Limbaugh's listernship is down between 33 % and 38%, depending on the market, in the same period.

Posted by: Gleep! at April 13, 2007 09:19 AM (Zlbra)

4 Yeah. What a total dick. Who does he think he is coming out with all those valid points against the right?! Doesn't he realize that anything the rightwing does is okay, because that's what God wants for us?

Posted by: John at April 13, 2007 09:49 AM (S3Rzh)

5 And the number of listeners per week? What is it - 13.5+ million? Some Radio and Records articles put the number over 20 million.

He's got over 14 times the listeners weekly than Olberloon has viewers in a month.

I'm sure Rush is shaking in his boots.

PWNED.

Posted by: Good Lt at April 13, 2007 09:50 AM (yMbfY)

6 Yeah. What a total dick. Who does he think he is coming out with all
those valid points against the right?! Doesn't he realize that anything
the rightwing does is okay, because that's what God wants for us?

Firstly, you just admitted for him that he's not a newscaster or a journalist of any kind. Olbermann is a clown.

And secondly, Argue with the Anti-Defamation League, fanboy.

They're the ones that were offended by that "valid point" in the form of a Nazi salute.

Posted by: Good Lt at April 13, 2007 09:55 AM (yMbfY)

I think John seriously enjoys putting his foot in his mouth. What is your deal man?

Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at April 13, 2007 10:13 AM (JuCus)

8 You don't see the difference do you?

Olbermann wasn't doing the salute to say "yeah! Nazis rock!" He was doing to say that O'Reily is a repugnant swine. There is nothing racist about it. It doesn't defame anyone but O'reily.

At worst it's a boneheaded and insensitive move, but it's not even in the same ballpark as making a racial slur.

Imus has made repeated slurs agains numourous groups. This was the straw that broke the camels back. Now he can go start a stupid racist blog like this one, and say whatever looney bullshit he wants.

Posted by: John at April 13, 2007 10:24 AM (S3Rzh)

9 And the number of listeners per week? What is it - 13.5+ million? Some Radio and Records articles put the number over 20 million.

Radio listernship and television viewship cannot be accurately compared by the numbers. Cable is much more fragemented -- and still dominated by the networks--where as the 3-4 voices of talk radio have a virtual lock on the airwaves. So yes, it's possible a radio commentator would have listernship in the millions compared to a cable commentator's hundreds of thousands â€” and the cable commentator's numbers would be more impressive (add the fact that cable viewers tend to watch 30+ minutes, while radio listeners tend to listen for 6-8 minutes.)

If you want numbers, it would be more accurate to compare Olbermann to O'Reilly.

Posted by: Gleep! at April 13, 2007 10:41 AM (Zlbra)

10 Johnboy, you are seriously delusional. The only "valid" points he ever makes are simply lip service to the equally delusional lefturd moonbats. Perhaps you could enlighten all of us here with a selection of his "valid" points.

Posted by: Insolent Infidel at April 13, 2007 11:16 AM (A5PXC)

11 And secondly, Argue with the Anti-Defamation League, fanboy. They're the ones that were offended by that "valid point" in the form of a Nazi salute.

As an organization, the ADL specializes in looking for and typically finding things to be righteously offended about, ranking alongside the greats like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson ... if the ADL was offended by Olbermann, tell them to get over it, just like you would for those offended by Imus' comments.

Posted by: Gleep! at April 13, 2007 12:12 PM (Zlbra)

12 Keith is searching for his nappy headed ho. Perhaps Gleep?

Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2007 07:29 AM (2J0r9)

13 Stupid racist blog like this one. THEN WHY IS YOUR DUMB COMMIE ASS HERE? You love it. That's why. Not fooling anyone. leave you piece of Canadian dogshit. Can't do it can you?

Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2007 09:05 AM (2J0r9)

14 Fire him? Wow, that's kinda harsh, don'tcha think? You neocons sure are mean-spirited. /sarcasm

You know this asshole would gleefully narrate, and live on camera at
the scene, no less, the beheading of an American soldier, and you just
want him fired? He needs to be burned alive, along with all the other
lefturds. No mercy for enemies.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 17, 2007 07:47 AM (eGb9y)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 11, 2007

The Duke 88 (Bumped w/ Contact Info)

Below the fold are the names and publicly listed contact info of every "concerned faculty member" who failed to be concerned with the nature of factual evidence and presumptions of innocence that is characteristic of the American justice system while engaging in their Bacchanal orgy of race/identity politics. A fat lot of good those "enlightened positions" are doing them now.

Just for posterity's sake, here's a loving spoonful of their race-baiting tripe (emphasis mine):

The ad thanked "the students speaking individually and...the protesters making collective noise." We do not endorse every demonstration that took place at the time. We appreciate the efforts of those who used the attention the incident generated to raise issues of discrimination and violence.
There have been public calls to the authors to retract the ad or apologize for it, as well as calls for action against them and attacks on their character. We reject all of these. We think the ad's authors were right to give voice to the students quoted, whose suffering is real. We also acknowledge the pain that has been generated by what we believe is a misperception that the authors of the ad prejudged the rape case.

We stand by the claim that issues of race and sexual violence on campus are real, and we join the ad's call to all of us at Duke to do something about this. We hope that the Duke community will emerge from this tragedy as a better place for all of us to live, study, and work.

Heh. The academic geniuses were referring to this ad (in three screenshots):
Duke Ad 1
Duke Ad 2
Duke Ad 3

Let the Duke 88 know how wrong they were to presume guilt for these three students because of their rigid leftist political ideologies and dogmas. And don't give me the "listing this stuff is wrong" BS. This information was posted on the web 7 months ago. The numbers and emails are all Duke University listings, not personal numbers or home numbers. If the profs are going to gang up on three students pubicly, its only fair that they each get a little fire returned in their direction.

Educate them.
NO swearing or threats - its hard, I know.

NAMES/CONTACT INFO OF MOST OF THE DUKE 88 BELOW THE FOLD ---> more...

Posted by: Good Lt. at 10:36 PM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 1284 words, total size 12 kb.

1 Nice post.

These stupid fucking assholes should all be fired.

Posted by: QC at April 11, 2007 10:57 PM (tnATt)

2 I see 88 future defendants. The LaX coach should get a nice settlement out of this as well.

How about the skank having swimmers from 5 different guys in her shorts? Hell yeah! She the one you bring home to mom.

Posted by: Rome at April 11, 2007 11:05 PM (/GrlO)

3 "Terror robs you of language and you need language for the healing to begin."

From the Leftard ad condeming the Duke lacross players. Wow. What a bunch of claptrap. "Terror robs you of language". LOL. The entire ad is like that. Jack Handy sounding gobbledygook. Have you ever heard of a Leftard robbed of language? Not me. They're impossible to shut up.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 11, 2007 11:29 PM (8e/V4)

4 They write: "We heard that a woman hired to perform at a party..."

If you can't put write what she was really hired to do, then you are lying. Just like the nappy headed ho stripper.

Posted by: QC at April 12, 2007 12:16 AM (tnATt)

5 Fortunately, tenured faculty are not known for the real-life experiences necessary to successfully dodge certified mail.

Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at April 12, 2007 04:30 AM (K/lgF)

6 Thanks for the links. I shall forward my thoughts to them with class, correct spelling and grammar as only a conservative can do.
I still want to hear from Fat Albert Sharpton and Jesse Jackass about this, however, I'm sure hell will freeze over before those two insufferable liars/frauds/shysters/crooks/dick heads will apologize for their slanderous comments.

Posted by: Insolent Infidel at April 12, 2007 07:50 AM (A5PXC)

7 If the black whore who made the false claims isn't charged with a crime vengence should be taken. White people should boycott everything black. Thirteen months of horror is what these fine young men went through. Duke professors should be held accountable for the black kiss ass actions. Black panthers should be called what they are, a black racist terrorist group. Academia is a cowardly group who is as responsible as any party. As I've said before. Academia needs to be educated.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 08:20 AM (2J0r9)

8 You wouldn't hear from fat al sharpton or jessie the thief jackson because they are to busy causing Don Imus to be fired. The black worlds latest cry baby issue.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 08:22 AM (2J0r9)

9 Being a big, black man, it's hard to walk anywhere at night and have a campus police car slowly drive by me.

LOL! Every single campus I have ever been to has cops driving slowly around the campus. At mine they were everywhere all the time as protection of the students is a big thing when they get to screw you on tuition. Holy shit...I guess I was being profiled every day because of my 1/128 Native American blood.

I was talking to a white women student who was asking me "Why do people--and she meant black people--make race such a big issue?"They don't see race. They just don't see it.

OMG! Don't you just love presumptive liberals who go about telling people what their words mean. I thought we white people were evil because we look at a black person and see a black person...now we are evil because we don't? Arghhhhh!

Posted by: Randman at April 12, 2007 08:25 AM (Sal3J)

10 I've been tailed by the cops several times when I'm in south Texas driving north away from the border. Would the cops have tailed me if I had been an 80 year old grandma or 13 year old blond haired blue eyed girl? No. They tailed me because I was a young hispanic, wearing sun glasses and perhaps looking a bit scruffy at the time. They tailed me, drove up next to me and looked at me good and hard, checked my tags, ran my plates, etc. Did I give two shits? No. I fit their profile of a drug runner. Is that racism? No, it's a fact. So I politely nodded to the police officer and maintained proper speed limit and that was the end of it. That's happenned to me on at least 3 occassions and I'm none the worse for wear. I didn't die. I didn't suffer any psychological trauma. In fact I was happy to know our law enforcement officers have their eyes peeled for that sort of stuff. So all you little biatches crying about racial profiling can suck my dick. You're part of the problem.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 12, 2007 08:37 AM (8e/V4)

11 Oh, and I forgot to mention, I was actually stopped in Missouri for exactly the same reason. Racially profiled again. The highway I was driving on is a drug running corridor from Mexico into the mid-west. It traumatized me for life.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 12, 2007 08:41 AM (8e/V4)

12 "They don't see race. They just don't see it." - Ignorant Black Moron

"I have a dream that my four
children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the
color of their skin but by the content of their character." - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

How far we have fallen from his dream.

Posted by: Wearyman at April 12, 2007 08:44 AM (puky3)

13 Then you should run your drugs on a less used highway.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 08:46 AM (2J0r9)

14 Strange, but when I was in school we were followed campus security who were always little black pricks. Actually, they were hoping to get a view of one of us nailing a blond in the bushes.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 08:48 AM (2J0r9)

15 It was his stupid dream. Not mine. Not anyone living in the ghetto. I have dream where little white children can get a public education with being held back by black children using filthy language and fighting all the time. I have a dream where school yards will be cleared of black drug dealers and rap music. Yes! I have a dream. I have a dream where little white kids don't have a communist black man pushed upon them as a hero. I have a dream that the streets that little white kids live on cannot be renamed MLK. Yes! I have a dream.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 08:55 AM (2J0r9)

16 rooster,

just out of pure curiousity. What is your solution to the "black problem." Do you have one? Or do you just need a chance to vent.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 12, 2007 09:46 AM (8e/V4)

17 They tailed me because I was a young hispanic, wearing sun glasses and perhaps looking a bit scruffy at the time.

Carlos,
Were you driving a lowered F-150 with wide-set 13 inch wheels and a giant muffler?
That might it explain the profiling too. :p

Posted by: wooga at April 12, 2007 12:15 PM (t9sT5)

18 Not only has ACADEMIA at Duke assisted in ruining the lifes of innocent young students but the continue their bullshit agenda of alienating blacks to stupid to think for themselves. Liberals and their representatives in academia continue to feed blacks and other minorities a steady diet of propaganda blaming all their problems on others, depicting "society" as determined to keep them down, regardless of anything that American society does to try to lift them up. This deadly message is what triggered the Duke "rape" fraud and is merely another message that is is long overdue for academia and blacks to do some thinking. Which they won't do as they already know it all. Beside, Not it's best to consentrate on getting Don Imus "a jew" run thought the mill. Regardless of the charitable times he does for sick kids of all races. Instead of getting Nifong, instead of getting the lying black whore, instead of getting the professors at Duke the black community wants Don Imus's head. You blacks are were your at because you are stupid. Nothing easily manipulated dummies. And you are the reason I am a racist. Friggin zombies.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 01:51 PM (2J0r9)

19 rooster,

there are blacks that agree with just about everything you said. Are you racist against them too? This should be good.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 12, 2007 02:02 PM (8e/V4)

Jesusland Carlos: Of course I have an answer. RE-EDUCATION. Re-education of academia. Re-education of the entire black populance. Use the death penalty. Allow people to choose the schooling for their kids.(2) Every illigetimate child and your welfare check goes down. Not up. Your 2nd bastard and you get sterilized. Remove intitlements. Remove quotas. Remove job preferences. Remove minority requirements in hiring and government contracts. In other words, remove that great big tit that blacks have been sucking on. Re-educate in a way that explains that if your poor it's your fault not whiteys. Violently punish violence. Remove the idea that de govement is responsible for everything in your parasitic life. In other words teach self worth. If that doesn't work we may have to separate.

And what is your answer to the black problem? Or do you have one besides kissing their asses and allowing things to progressively get worse?

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 02:12 PM (2J0r9)

21 And what is your answer to the black problem?

You really think I kiss their asses
just because I'm not a racist? Cmon, now. Do you? Funny thing is I
don't have to be a racist agree with the jist of what you said.

You change the culture, and you'll change the people. That means
changing the culture of victimhood the Left has engendered in the black
community, and it's about encouraging blacks to return to the
traditional family values of their grandparents. That would help the black community more than any government handout would.

And I await your answer to my second question. I noticed you ignored it, probably because it shows how irrational your racism is.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 12, 2007 02:36 PM (8e/V4)

22 Wooga: It's not profiling when they can't see a head behind the steering wheel.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 03:06 PM (2J0r9)

23 My racism isn't anything but reality. If you don't believe it come on down to New Orleans, take the wrong turn and have your car break down. What liberals don't understand is that they will burn your car to.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 03:10 PM (2J0r9)

24 Carlos: "There are blacks that agree with just about everything I've said" Yea. Sure there are. But they sure as hell don't live in New Orleans. And at present they are destroying the best school district in Mississippi before katrina. It's turning into a jungle overnite with more and more white/asian/hispanic mothers having to quit work to be close by or do home schooling. I'm really not interested in those with blinders on.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 03:17 PM (2J0r9)

25 Jesusland Carlos: Says we need a cultural change. No thanks Carlos. I watch to much National Geographic. Wearing clay plates in my lips, scarring my body, running around naked and having a cow piss on my head is not the culture for me. Blacks will only accept one culture. Black. Muslims will only accept one culture. Muslim. Sometimes they get the cultures together and have a black muslim culture. Thanks but no thanks.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2007 03:58 PM (2J0r9)

26 You lose.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2007 08:37 AM (2J0r9)

27 In Communist revolutionary movements, one of the fundamental strategies
is to kill all the teachers. This also works the other way around.
These scum should be all burned alive.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 15, 2007 11:53 AM (eGb9y)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 26, 2007

Is Liberalism a Mental Disorder?

zombie's latest photo essay provides some disturbing evidence in the affirmative.

CONTENT WARNING. SERIOUSLY.

Posted by: Good Lt. at 10:27 PM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Zombie is so cool. Her/his pics are priceless(don't know the identify of zombie). What a bunch of idiots. Here in Austin, Tx there are a bunch of oak tree lovers. In fact someone spray painted on a house when the owners cut down a oak tree....."killers".....Gaad how stupid. . I am sorry but I may be old fashioned but how stupid can you be to pose for pix like this? I keep shaking my head and shaking my head and dive into my pschy books for an answer. None to be found...no where...zilch...

Posted by: allahakchew at March 26, 2007 11:59 PM (BrndJ)

2 #1Allahachew Embrace Islam as the answers are there.

Posted by: allah at March 27, 2007 12:02 AM (BrndJ)

3 #2 Allah The only embracing I am going to do with Islam is brace myself when a granade is placed on the Koran. I don't want sh*t to hit me in the face when it blows.

Posted by: allahakchew at March 27, 2007 12:07 AM (BrndJ)

4 #3 Fatwa on you. What is your address? May Allah give me the strength to destroy you. How dare you mention desicrating the beautiful Koran.

Posted by: allah at March 27, 2007 12:10 AM (BrndJ)

5 #4 Google me. I allready know your position so will give you a head start in 5..4..3..2..1.Sorry you lost.

Posted by: allahakchew at March 27, 2007 12:15 AM (BrndJ)

Allah lied, There is nothing here but "nothing" no virgins no nothing. Dark space that is very hot. How could this be? OBL, ummahs, immans, etc. YOU ARE GOING TO PAY.

Posted by: allah at March 27, 2007 12:20 AM (BrndJ)

7 I guess that's what 30k a year in tuition gets ya.

Dear Mom,

School is great, and I'm learning soooooo much. I met a really great group of folks up here. They are the kind of people that Dad would call dirty hippies, but I think they are awesome. So what if they don't shower or shave all that much? They are teaching me to not become part of the establishment and that sort of stuff.

Could you PLEASE send some cash to me. I need to buy a new dictionary so that I can look up the word establishment. I burned mine last week at a anti-war rally. That stupid dictionary actually had "Bush" in it, so therefore it had to be destroyed.

Here are also some great pics of our most recent rally where we are trying to save these sacred trees. You can spot me hanging upside down from one of the trees. It's hard to see my face, but you can spot my funny looking pecker if you get real close and squint.

Your Loving Son,

Phil McCracken a.k.a. "Bark Burn"

P.S. Be careful! I heard Haliburton was rounding up people and putting them in concentration camps.

Posted by: Rome at March 27, 2007 12:57 AM (/GrlO)

8 Bad bottled water must be the answer. I was radical in my time but never took my clothes off. Hug a tree naked, never. We are dealing with some really sick puppies/people. Why do we have to have so many crazys running around during a time of war with terroists. I am getting dizzy shaking my head. Vietnam was one thing but I think this is worse than Vietnam The leftys are selling us out big time and now we are facing confrontaion from Iran via proxy. I don't know about any of you but I have been making sure my ammo is sufficient.. I am not radical only realistic. I am sick of seeing stupid protests like this and have had it. Crawling around naked is so STUPID and only gives propaganda for the enemy.

Posted by: allahakchew at March 27, 2007 01:21 AM (BrndJ)

9 All I can say is "My God, where have all the people gone?" I'm sorry but this post really gets to me. Stupid peiople taking there clothes off for a photo op. It only makes me want to cry not laugh. As Papa Ray says....buy more ammo.......

Posted by: allahakchew at March 27, 2007 01:38 AM (BrndJ)

10 I get the "Sacred Oak" arguement when it is a valid one, but so much of the New Age religious culture is founded upon bullcrap interpretations of old pagan religions. It's likely none of these guys have an authentic viewpoint on what constitutes "sacred". In Wicca, and other related new age faith, going ritually nude is refered to as being 'sky-clad'. Other terms exist. I find this sort of boneheaded demonstration actually hurts understanding between Pagan religionists and more mainstream society. I don't want to bore anyone. There is a right way to take a tree, and a wrong way, but it isn't typically a prohibition. USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 27, 2007 01:39 AM (2OHpj)

11 And by the way, there was no evidence of 'ritual' in the pictures we were looking at, so I doubt thier was any honest religious effort put into it. If any Wiccans were present, I doubt they were there for any religious purpose. To be clear, don't blame the Wiccan's, only the tree hugging anarchists. USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 27, 2007 01:42 AM (2OHpj)

12 I'm mispelling stuff again. USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 27, 2007 01:42 AM (2OHpj)

Ppl calm down. Allah is your savior and is the right path. Jihad is your friend as it will set you free.

Posted by: allah at March 27, 2007 01:51 AM (BrndJ)

14 #13 shut up they are talking about wiccans. Something allah knows nothing about

Posted by: allahahachew at March 27, 2007 01:56 AM (BrndJ)

15 Witches and warlocks......tree huggers.....hmmmmm makes sense.

Posted by: allahahachew at March 27, 2007 01:58 AM (BrndJ)

16 Pardon my followers everyone. They do not want to give me any breathing space. They are cursed with the Koran.

Posted by: allahahachew at March 27, 2007 02:03 AM (BrndJ)

17 If they were really for peace they would go to Israel and pull a Rachel Corrie.

Posted by: Randman at March 27, 2007 02:19 AM (Sal3J)

18 Wife: "Why are those people naked?"
Me: "To save the trees."
Wife: "What trees?"
Me: "The oaks they are going to cut down to build an athletic facility."
Wife: "But those people NEED an athletic facility..."

Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at March 27, 2007 06:22 AM (tM5S2)

19 Gives new meaning to the word Leftardism.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 27, 2007 10:16 AM (8e/V4)

20 John Lyin in Central park.

Posted by: greyrooster at March 31, 2007 02:27 AM (LDOOz)

21 Allah: Friggin phoney. Shut the fuck up and grow up. We're not playing games here. Back to your play station or I'll tell your mommy you're playing adult dress up again.

Posted by: greyrooster at April 02, 2007 10:10 PM (9nRcM)

22 rpxczlw sqjdrpwu wcmjoa ihybomn sznbt iqtdg ehvjcp

Posted by: yrxlw hnuzorb at June 14, 2007 08:25 PM (qNrvx)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 13, 2007

**Gathering Of Eagles: Moonbat Safety Tips

I'll be there and will have a full report with vids and audio (it may take a little bit to assemble.) Hope to see you there (even though you'll have no idea who I am!)

Take it away, Uncle Jimbo!

Posted by: Good Lt. at 09:28 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

March 06, 2007

McCaskill Given 'Rubber Stamp Award'

From our friends at The News Buckit, comes word that the Missouri College Republicans somehow got Claire McCaskill to agree to accept their "Rubber Stamp Award" for tossing Missouri overboard in the name of liberal Democrat solidarity. more...

Posted by: Bluto at 12:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

March 05, 2007

Liberal Hate Speech

Markos "Kos" Zuniga on the death of American security contractors in Iraq by al Qaeda linked terrorists after their bodies are publicaly desecrated:

I feel nothing over the death of merceneries [sic]. They arenâ€™t in Iraq because of orders, or because they are there trying to help the people make Iraq a better place. They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them.

Patterico has more. Much more.

Posted by: Rusty at 09:07 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.

March 04, 2007

Cindy Sheehan stars in yet another media fabrication.

According to WCAX-TV:
Cindy Sheehan's anti war message rolled into Montpelier Friday. Her son Casey was killed in an ambush in Iraq three years ago.

"He didn't believe in the war," said Sheehan, "he didn't want to go over there, he didn't support George Bush, he didn't support the war and he died saving his buddies lives so I'm sure that he is supporting me on the other side."

Sheehan caught the nation's attention when she camped outside President Bush's Texas ranch in 2005, demanding a meeting. She never got it and since then has traveled the country, calling for the impeachment of President Bush and an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq.
(Emphasis added)

She never got it? That's an outright lie.
She got to meet with the president, in June of 2004 at Fort Lewis, and afterward she even expressed her appreciation for his genuine concern for the troops. She then demanded a second meeting, which was refused.

Once again, the liberal media is fudging the facts to support it's own agenda.

Posted by: Kafir at 10:30 AM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.

She may be pathetic, but at least she drives a hybrid

Posted by: Ragnardo Di Canneskjold at March 04, 2007 01:07 PM (b0FZu)

2 Just another leftarded "victim" who thinks her victimhood status makes her beyond reproach.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 04, 2007 01:31 PM (8e/V4)

3 (tapping the face of his watch furiously...)

Isn't her 15 minutes up YET?!?!?!?

Posted by: Lonevoice at March 04, 2007 02:28 PM (r0XEd)

4 that's a face only chavez could want to hump. What a disgrace to the memory of her son and dishonor to her family and our nation.
leftwing stooge.

Posted by: wb at March 04, 2007 04:15 PM (GRjob)

Her comments about her son's interests seem to be categorically opposed to those made by her son.

Posted by: The Gentle Cricket at March 04, 2007 05:04 PM (47W8i)

6 Not just her late son, but many others in the family.She's just an exploited media stooge for the left wing agenda..... but that's all Pres. GWB's fault.

Posted by: wb at March 04, 2007 06:19 PM (GRjob)

7 Where dose she get all that money to do all that traveling im sure its not from a welfare check could she be getting help from GEORGE SOROS the wealthy socialists?

Posted by: sandpiper at March 04, 2007 07:54 PM (vnSBY)

8 #1

You know, if someone had made a wager with me, I'd have guessed she had a hybrid for some reason or another. Nice pic too!

Posted by: RicardoVerde at March 04, 2007 08:01 PM (yZ0Nx)

9 She lies about the fact that Casey re enlisted in the Army knowing that he would be sent to Iraq and ignores the fact that she has another son in the military who has nothing to do with her. She cheers our nations enemies. All she wants is publicity for her own sake, ignore her and she'll soon go away. Cindy who?

Posted by: Buzzy at March 04, 2007 09:53 PM (CXz7T)

10 She makes me want to vomit. I can understand her not supporting the war b/c her son was killed, but going around gladhanding with every anti-American scumbag she can find makes her a fucking traitor. She has tarnished her son's memory and should go crawl in a hole somewhere and take the hole in with her.

Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at March 04, 2007 10:54 PM (fgmnP)

11 Nothing nice to say here. I wish someone would splash a bucket of water on her so she could hurry up and melt. USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 05, 2007 02:06 AM (2OHpj)

12 Cindy She-hag is the public face of the left. That tells us all we need to know about them.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at March 05, 2007 02:12 AM (Dt3sl)

13 Where the hell did you get osamaisawigger's picture?

Posted by: greyrooster at March 05, 2007 08:18 AM (criip)

14 In truth her son Casey joined the military to get away from his bitch of a mother. That's why her husband left her. Her actions merely reflect what she knows in her heart. Namely, she drove Casey into the military. She knows she is to blame as much as the terrorist scum that killed him. Easier to point the finger at the President of the United States than to admit her part in the loss of her ex-husbands son. Typical lefturd response. Can't accept what is real? Blame Bush.

Posted by: greyrooster at March 05, 2007 08:28 AM (criip)

If ever there was a cry for help, she's it. It would seem she has been in denial in dealing with her loss and supplanted it by being a patsy for the left and enemies of our nation.If she'd of put that energy into coming to terms with reality, she'd already be better. The real shame is in the ones who exploit her to further their agenda in blaming Pres. Bush and trying to redistribute the wealth of America. That seems to be one of the typical personalitiy quirks with these people is a big denial of reality and the rest just sort of follows. Pathetic.

Posted by: wb at March 05, 2007 10:46 AM (4DPNw)

16 Said that right.

Posted by: greyrooster at March 05, 2007 08:15 PM (criip)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

February 24, 2007

What Happens When Bush Is Gone?

Its gonna be like a bunch of crack addicts without their daily fix, running around in a confused and debilitated state of confusion. I predict massive bouts of depression, widespread questioning of the validity of life, and drug relapses.

This Salon article (painfully revelatory and candid/casual) goes miles to validate and vindicate the criticisms of many critics.

Maybe we Bush-haters are extreme and obsessive. But Bush made us this way.(ed. - Blame shifting? Check.) We didn't want to hate (ed. Hate? Check.) the guy -- he left us no choice. And the respectable people calling for us to calm down and go to our rooms are the same good Germans who somehow didn't notice he was taking us down the garden path to hell.(ed. - Violation of Godwin's Law? Check.)
But after the high-fives, the partying, the Red Auerbach victory stogies and the cries of "Thank God almighty, we are free at last" have faded from the land, we'll be faced with a whole new landscape -- not just political but psychological. (ed. - realization that they may be totally insane and they don't care? Check.) And I suspect we're going to have a serious Bush hangover.

Gee. Ya think?

Who would've guess that living on years of visceral hate for a distant object of derision you've never even met might yield mild psychological damage? Surely not I, nor others.

Cross-posted at Mein BlogoVault.

Posted by: Good Lt. at 08:23 AM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.

1 So they actually admit they have a mental disorder. LOL.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 24, 2007 09:51 AM (8e/V4)

2 The "reality based community", lamenting the therapy bills inevitable when their raison d'etre ceases etre.

Amazing.

Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at February 24, 2007 10:45 AM (vRnST)

3 not to worry "HillaryCare" will pay for all the therapy needed to demoonbatize all those poor bleeding hearts.

Posted by: FireFireFire at February 24, 2007 11:30 AM (pjXcC)

4 There will be no Bush hangover, these imbeciles will simply find another conservative to fixate upon pouring out all their hatred of all things that disagree with their obsessive fantasies of how the world is and should be upon their new scapegoat.

http://www.mp3.com.au/artist.asp?id=16834

Posted by: doriangrey at February 24, 2007 12:22 PM (JeeIJ)

5 "There will be no Bush hangover, these imbeciles will simply find
another conservative to fixate upon pouring out all their hatred of all
things that disagree with their obsessive fantasies of how the world is
and should be upon their new scapegoat."

acutally quite the opposite, those moderates, and the people "sitting on the fence" will be against whatever liberal canadite wins and it will be just like back in the clinton days.

i've got 5 on the next guy/chick being ousted for jaywalking.

Posted by: shoogie woogie at February 24, 2007 03:02 PM (AeRA2)

I hope BDS'rs start throwing themselves off of cliffs when he is gone! It's one thing to dislike a leader, but it is another thing entirely to suck the life out of any good he might accomplish because your a small minded illogical hater!

GW Bush was never my first choice, but it was either him, or Gore the first time, and either him or Kerry the second time. Given the choices we are stuck with in this two party circus of fools, I think I made the better choice both times. Between suicide, and slow death with a chance for a cure, what do you choose? I went with hope ... because the the left, there is none.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 24, 2007 04:29 PM (2OHpj)

7 Are you also including the real conservatives who hate Bush ?

Posted by: JOHN RYAN at February 24, 2007 09:45 PM (TcoRJ)

8 Shag a wookie:

Clinton was a predatory criminal who the medis adored.

Try again.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 25, 2007 12:07 AM (Dt3sl)

9 John Lyin:

Real conservatives don't suffer from BDS.

Back to Iran with you!

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 25, 2007 12:16 AM (Dt3sl)

10 "Clinton was a predatory criminal who the medis adored.
Try again."

LOL!!

you don't really believe that do you?

i really do feel sorry for you.

Posted by: shag a wookie at February 25, 2007 01:27 AM (AeRA2)

11 Shag a wookie/osamabinsucking:

You don't believe what you wrote. Everybody knows Clinton was a predatory criminal and media darling. Claiming otherwise only showcases your inveterate dishonesty.

Tell us about the religion of peace, why don't you.

Fucking cretin.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 25, 2007 02:54 AM (Dt3sl)

12 John Ryan doesn't understand that BDS isn't rational! I don't like a lot of Bush's decisions, but I don't equate him with Hitler, or Satan like stupid lunatic BDS'rs do. And disliking some of his positions isn't the same as 'hate'. The closest I have to a BDS type of symptom is when I think of Murtha, Kerry, or Pelosi. Even still I don't equate them with Hitler or Satan. I reserve such comparisons for Saddam, or bin Laden. Pretty much anyone who demands the "submission" of the USA. USA, all the way!.

Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 25, 2007 03:18 AM (2OHpj)

13 hee hee. predatory criminal.... you're such a card.

Posted by: shag a wookie at February 25, 2007 01:31 PM (AeRA2)

14 Jeffy Lube, you're the cretin. I didn't even post on this thread and you're still attacking me as if I did. You and Gayrooster need to lay off the sauce before you comment.

Posted by: osamabinhiding at February 25, 2007 02:43 PM (JVqe0)

15 Osamabinbuttpoked:

Who are you going to transfer your mindless BDS to in 2009? It looks like you're already transferring it to me. I guess you can call it Bargholz Derangement Syndrome.

Your obsession with me is getting creepy. You search the web for photos of me to jack off to, don't you? Whack job. (Literally and figuratively.)

Stay on topic or play with yourself. Think of somone else when you're doing it, though.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 25, 2007 08:04 PM (Dt3sl)

16 You know what you just described in the main post my friend? America's next revolution, that's what!

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 26, 2007 02:56 AM (eGb9y)

17 A lot of people (read Liberals) realized after Chavez attacked Bush at the UN, that you might dislike him and his policies but he is still our president dammit.

Posted by: tbone at February 26, 2007 11:19 AM (HGqHt)

18 tbone: I've never liked Bush, but when foreigners start taking jabs it pisses me off. It's best to just ignore Chavez. Like some other people.

Posted by: osamabinhiding at February 26, 2007 12:10 PM (JVqe0)

19 I didn't like Bush when I voted for him each time, so what does that say about the quality of our leaderhip across the board? The last Presidential candidate I liked was Ronald Reagan. After that, it was all basically choosing between "Stinks" and "Stinks to high heaven". I despise the BDSr's because they abandon reason. They extend their hatred of Bush to everything he touches, and that is not good for our country. It feeds the Chavez's of the world red meat. BDS'rs have earned my disgust, and I can't wait fot them all to spontaneously combust when Bush is gone. USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 26, 2007 06:52 PM (2OHpj)

20 Osamadonalbincarpetmuching:

If you don't like foreigners, why do you support their killing of American soldiers in Iraq? Why do you want men to run from animals?

You dykes all have the same self serving agenda. Misandry and misery.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 27, 2007 03:38 AM (Dt3sl)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

February 13, 2007

The Dixie Chicks : "Vindicated"?

The New York Times claims the Dixie Chicks wins at the Grammys represent a "vindication" of their anti-Bush antics:

The awards amounted to vindication for the Dixie Chicks, who found their career sidetracked in 2003 after the singer Ms. Maines told a London concert audience shortly before the invasion of Iraq that the band was â€œashamedâ€ that the president hailed from their home state, Texas. In the furor that followed, country radio programmers pulled the multiplatinum-selling trioâ€™s music from the airwaves and rallied listeners to destroy their CDs.

ABC News claims that Grammy night marked the Dixie Chicks' "comeback":

The Dixie Chicks won all five awards they were nominated for, sweet vindication after the superstars' lives were threatened and sales plummeted when Maines criticized President Bush on the eve of the Iraq war in 2003. Almost overnight, one of the most successful groups of any genre was boycotted by Nashville and disappeared from country radio...
The standing ovations the Chicks received Sunday illustrated how much the political climate has changed regarding the Iraq war, and even Bush.

So, the entertainment industry, which is dominated by hard left-wingers, gives an award to some chicks who gave the middle finger to a Republican President overseas in the middle of a war, and this represents some huge "change" in the political climate? Are y'all buying this?

Posted by: Ragnar at 09:54 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

1
Leftards live in their own bubble and use the MSM to pass that off as reality.

Standing ovations and awards by like-minded Leftards doesn't equal sold out concerts and record sales.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 13, 2007 11:31 AM (8e/V4)

2 Yeah, I'm sure that now we'll see lots of anti-American bumperstickers at this year's NASCAR events.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 13, 2007 11:52 AM (p52Ne)

3 The only things that could vindicate The Dick Eating Chicks would be a nationwide validation of their BDS, and an increase in paying customers. Ain't gonna happen.

Everybody knows why they were handed these empty awards. The hard left entertainment industry and "news" media aren't fooling anyone with their partisan crowing disguised as zeitgeist reporting.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 13, 2007 01:08 PM (Dt3sl)

4 JC, true that. The Bush-haters may be giving the Chunks their awards but they've had to cancel concerts all over America. If they weren't so transparent, it would almost be sad.

Nah.

Posted by: slug at February 13, 2007 01:08 PM (z/oJX)

5 She's still a fat simple minded bitch. A canary can sing but should it open its mouth about world politics?

Posted by: greyrooster at February 13, 2007 01:11 PM (E0zAj)

6 Homer Simpson threw his Grammy in the trash.

Posted by: Fred Fry at February 13, 2007 01:20 PM (JXdhy)

7 The dick deserves a whole lot worse than the middle finger. Give him a gun, and send him into the mess he's made. Chances are he'd be fragged in less than a week.

Posted by: John at February 13, 2007 02:05 PM (qiTAx)

8 Johke:

Spoken like a true infant.

Idiots like you should be used for human shields for iraqi civilians. The terrorists should have to work their way through some trash to reach their innocent victims.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 13, 2007 03:11 PM (Dt3sl)

www.princeton.edu/culturalpolicy/workpap26.html

â€œThrough analyzing airplay from a national sample of radio stations, this paper finds that contrary to prominent allegations grounded in the political economy tradition of media sociology, this backlash did not come from owners of large chains. Rather, I find that opposition to the Dixie Chicks represents grassroots conservative sentiment, which may be exacerbated by the ideological connotations of country music or tempered by tolerance for dissent. â€ Spring 2003

Posted by: Beansox at February 13, 2007 06:33 PM (gFtE6)

10 Didn't Milli Vanilli win a grammy? case in point? I guess I too can win a grammy and while I am at it a Nobel peace prize too.

Posted by: DAT at February 13, 2007 07:04 PM (KPQyo)

11 The Dixie Chicks are fine. The album has sold three million copies worldwide. The tour ended up grossing 32 million. Even sold out in Dallas the last night.

I think you Chick haters think that if you keep telling the same lies over and over that it will somehow become true.

Natalie Maines was right. By the way, it was the best album of 2006. THat is why nashville's top critics voted it "Country ALbum of the Year" TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE GRAMMY'S.

You all might want to shut Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'reilly, off for a while and get a grip on reality.

Posted by: Davis H at March 14, 2007 10:20 PM (vS3MS)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

February 11, 2007

Stupid Quote of the Day

When responding to criticism from Australian Prime Minister John Howard, Barack Obama spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said this about the Iraq war:

More of the same is only going to attract more terrorists to Iraq and make our country less safe.

Wait a minute, isn't that our line? Fight them there so you won't have to fight them here. I've been saying that for a while; now it appears that fighting them there somehow endangers us here. Well... that makes sense in a flip-flop, hippie, "We'll confuse them into voting for us," kind of way.

BRILLIANT!

Originally Posted at

Posted by: Chris Short at 03:14 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 102 words, total size 1 kb.

1 "More of the same is only going to attract more terrorists to Iraq and make our country less safe."

what did you misread that quote? it means that the longer we are in iraq the more they'll want to kill us

"us being Australia." my suggestion, delete this post quietly.

Posted by: Jake at February 11, 2007 05:07 PM (AeRA2)

2 Gibbs statement was: "The United States has sacrificed more than 3,000 brave young men and women and $400 billion, only to find ourselves mired in the middle of a sectarian civil war," he said. "Even Republicans ... know that more of the same is only going to attract more terrorists to Iraq and make our country less safe."

Gibbs went on to say that Howard was not in a position to be overly critical." (Gibbs is a member of Obama's campaign staff = duh).

Someone needs to remind the Democrats that their unwillingness to fight Islamic terrorism and to only treat it as a law enforcement matter led us directly to September 11, 2001 and that their doing little or nothing did not make the US a bit safe even though during the Clinton administration the US was attacked by Islamic terror groups 9 times.

While we're on the subject of Iraq, maybe Obama might want to read the Clinton Justice Dept. indictment of al Qaeda which mentions in part.
"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq," the indictment said.
http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive_Index/Bin_Laden_Atef_Indicted_in_U.S._Federal_Court_for_African_Bombings.html . Clinton mentioned these ties himself in the spring of 1998 in several public speeches, yet did nothing about them.

Posted by: Buzzy at February 11, 2007 05:51 PM (CXz7T)

3 Gibbs statement was: "The United States has sacrificed more than 3,000
brave young men and women and $400 billion, only to find ourselves
mired in the middle of a sectarian civil war," he said. "Even
Republicans ... know that more of the same is only going to attract
more terrorists to Iraq and make our country less safe."
Gibbs went on to say that Howard was not in a position to be overly
critical." (Gibbs is a member of Obama's campaign staff = duh).

Someone needs to remind the Democrats that their unwillingness to fight
Islamic terrorism and to only treat it as a law enforcement matter led
us directly to September 11, 2001 and that their doing little or
nothing did not make the US a bit safe even though during the Clinton
administration the US was attacked by Islamic terror groups 9 times.

While we're on the subject of Iraq, maybe Obama might want to read the
Clinton Justice Dept. indictment of al Qaeda which mentions in part.
"In
addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq
that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on
particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al
Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq," the
indictment said.
http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive_Index/Bin_Laden_Atef_Indicted_in_U.S._Federal_Court_for_African_Bombings.html . Clinton mentioned these ties himself in the spring of 1998 in several public speeches, yet did nothing about them.

you should have written this article then

Posted by: Jake at February 11, 2007 06:06 PM (AeRA2)

4 what did you misread that quote? it means that the longer we are in iraq the more they'll want to kill us

"us being Australia." my suggestion, delete this post quietly.

Jake,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq
They wanted to kill you before, they'll want to kill you after. The only way to avoid attack is either to submit, kill all Islamists, or make the Islamists afraid to attack.

A falling camel attracts a thousand knive - Arab proverb.
Withdrawing will only cause the Islamists to attack Australia even more - that has been the arab mode of warfare for thousands of years.

Posted by: wooga at February 12, 2007 01:44 AM (2YapR)

Jake, Islamists between 632, and 732 AD, had conquered a larger empire than any that had ever existed before, and the were invading FRANCE! Arabian penisula to France, and India, in a hundred years! Do you have any idea what a military acheivement that was? Do you have any idea what that meant in those days?

An army of vast size was marching into France, with a large cavalry contingent. Only a few years previous, Islamists had over-run Spain, and there was no reason to believe they would ever stop. They intended to subjugate, and plunder the whole world in Allah's name. Like today. But back then France wasn't the cesspool of leftist/appeaser thinking that it is today.

A man who wasn't even a king, gathered up all the warriors, and farmers, and coopers, and smith's, and shepherds, and marched them to a well chosen position directly in the enemies path. His name was Charles Martel. He was lucky to have gathered a solid core of brave fighters, and who could fight in formation. These bolstered the civilians, and they stood as one force. With spears, wearing furs against the cold, they waited.

In all the contest lasted a week. There was skirmishing, and finally the battle commenced in full. The men with Martel held on, and at the end of the last day, the enemy general was dead, and the Islamists retreated. Martel kept them from eating Europe like an apple, and as a result the western civilzation you find yourself blessed to be a part of, was saved. When you die and go to heaven, it would only be fair if you kissed Martel's ass!

'Frankly' there is only one thing an Islamist will negotiate with. Whoever has the power to kill him! Anyone else is just on the menu. Liberals will supply their own condiments.

We don't need any more excuses to take the fight to them. The world doesn't need another fourteen hundred years of this shit. Islamism, the hate filled ideology that says Muslims must rule all others, needs to be ravaged, gutted, and destroyed for all time, and there is no good reason to wait. Not one!

So basically, you should be picking your side. I'm on Martel's side, and the side of enlightened western civilization. HOW ABOUT YOU JAKE?

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 12, 2007 04:33 AM (2OHpj)

6 Speech is long but the message is short. Whenever the world allows muslimes to become powerful they attack others using their filty religion as an excuse.

Take a look at the world today. On every continent problems with muslims. That is why I continually scream OUTLAW ISLAM.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 12, 2007 07:32 AM (OSM9f)

7 George Bush has more in common with Abe Lincoln than Obama. Think about it. Lincoln was disliked by most of the people but he got the vote for being the better of bad choices. Lincoln fought for freedom against great odds with fe believeing he could or would win. His actions and policys at the start of the war failed and were criticized. Of Lincolns presdency about the only goiod thing that happped was the souths eventual surrender. But unlike the south our enemys don't have honor enough to surrender becuase they don't care about the suffering of their people. I found Obama's claims of Lincolns heritage empty and a cheap political ploy and an offense to Lincolns memory.

Posted by: Howie at February 12, 2007 09:32 AM (YHZAl)

8 In the lefturd strategic manual, retreat = victory, and treason = bravery. A good lefturd is a dead one. Everyone please vote dhimmicrap in '08 so we can get the war kicked off.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 12, 2007 10:37 AM (6zYAC)

9 Bluto:

Jakeass looks like an islamopithecine troll posting under a fake Western name. If his IP address isn't hidden, I'm sure it's in a Western country. He sees himself as part of the scruffy koranimal vangaurd of a conquering horde. Scum like him are infesting Europe, Australia and Canada.

Jake is a short form for Jacob--which is Hebrew for supplanter, or substitute. He thinks islamopithecines are going to supplant civilization.

Like most idiots, Jakeass fancies himself as being clever. He probably gets a little girl giggle out of assuming a Hebrew (dirty Jooo,) alias. I'd say his low animal cunning is on a par with a circus trained chimpanzee.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 12, 2007 04:16 PM (Dt3sl)

10 Jakeass looks like an islamopithecine troll posting under a fake
Western name. If his IP address isn't hidden, I'm sure it's in a
Western country. He sees himself as part of the scruffy koranimal
vangaurd of a conquering horde. Scum like him are infesting Europe,
Australia and Canada.

Jake is a short form for Jacob--which is Hebrew for supplanter, or substitute. He thinks islamopithecines are going to supplant civilization.

Like
most idiots, Jakeass fancies himself as being clever. He probably gets
a little girl giggle out of assuming a Hebrew (dirty Jooo,) alias. I'd
say his low animal cunning is on a par with a circus trained
chimpanzee.

omfg, you nailed it. praise Allah! what will happen to me! i will be banned forever from a pithy republican warmonger website. then i will be unable to spread my lies to those who don't believe them anyway. ook ook!

haha. jews.

no seriously though. Jacob is my NAME.

lol i also have a french last name. Germain. yeah.

Posted by: Jake at February 12, 2007 09:19 PM (AeRA2)

11 Jakeass:

I believe you. The last name in your alias looks as authentic as the first. After all, you've been nothing but honest so far.

There's a reason I used to call you "Fake." You're either a muslim supremacist (is there any other kind,) or a leftist supremacist who thinks his ridiculous ideology will supplant civilization.

If you aren't an islamopithecine, prove it by making some rude and accurate comments about the child molester, prophet pretender Muhammad, and that chunk of black rock the 'pithecines worship. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting, Khoos.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 13, 2007 02:33 PM (Dt3sl)

12 I believe you. The last name in your alias looks as authentic as the first. After all, you've been nothing but honest so far.

what are you talking about? can you even point at one lie? or are you just slandering?

i should look up khoos...

mohammed was a muslim prophet. legend has it he bedded hundreds of women many of whom were as young as 12 or 11. mohammed taught peace and understanding to his fellow man, much like jesus christ, the savior of christianity. recently mohammed has had his religion come under fire for the acts of revisionist priests of islam, whom who have been teaching the opposite view of islam. some would say that this parallels the acts of modern day christian minister, whom have been preaching intolerance and hate for their fellow man. jesus is probably pretty ticked about that.

source for islam teachings:
http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/

seriously, what do you think you gain by refusing to learn anything?

Posted by: jorge at February 13, 2007 06:06 PM (AeRA2)

13 Jerke:

Who do you think you're fooling with your crude taqiya? The idea of a stone aged islamopithecine lecturing a human being is hilarious. Almost as funny as thinking a proto-hominid like you has the cranial capacity to decieve me.

Muhammad was a flea-bitten, cowardly, genocidal, thieving, raping, epileptic, illiterate lunatic who forcibly married a six year old and consumated the "marriage" when she was nine. (Piss be upon him.)

Seriously, what do you think you gain by refusing to learn anything?

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 13, 2007 07:55 PM (Dt3sl)

14 Jake/Jorge:

You screwed up and used both aliases over on the "Bullshit Environmenatl Hysteria" thread.

Thanks for proving that you're a taqiyah spouting, islamopithecine piece of troll shit. Idiot.

Back to calling you Fake.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 13, 2007 08:18 PM (Dt3sl)

15 i think i mentioned the mistake.... but yeah "repeat the same lie loudly enough..."

Posted by: Ilya kresnovitch at February 13, 2007 08:49 PM (AeRA2)

16 You forgot to hide your alias again, dipshit.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 17, 2007 12:07 AM (Dt3sl)

17 Your site is very convenient in navigation and has good design. Thanks!:

Posted by: BeorlotG at July 07, 2007 11:10 AM (B39/n)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

February 09, 2007

Rosie Goes Truther?

Just when you thought it couldn't get any stupider...

ht: Screw Loose Change

Posted by: Good Lt. at 11:28 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

February 08, 2007

A Note On PandaGone

Let's be honest. All humorous IMPORTANT ACTION ALERTS and rants aside, John Edwards has no chance to win the Presidency, let alone the nomination. He never did - he's a joke. A joke living in a huge, patriarchical estate, but a joke never the less.

First of all, everyone take a deep breath - the election isn't for almost two years.

No matter how many nutroots threaten refuse their support for him (if it was really there to begin with), there simply aren't enough of them to really make a difference in the general election.

And lets pretend that Edwards does win the nomination. Do you really think any of the nutroots are going to sit out a chance to vote against a GOP Presidential candidate in a critical election? The nutroots shot their wad in 2004 on Kerry and still lost by 3 million votes. Now they think they're going to sit out an election in 2008 because John Edwards canned two staff bloggers two years back?

Puh-lease.

The feminimrods he hired and fired won't really have an impact on his chances, because they speak to a limited and quite frankly fickle part of the electorate for the Democrats. And they aren't making any converts.

Its Ned Lamont all over again. Lotsa hope and hype, little substance when it comes to the long and hard slog of the general election.

Step away from the keyboards and wipe the spittle from the screens, nutroots. Take a mental health day. We'll all be here when you get back.

Posted by: Good Lt. at 08:05 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 261 words, total size 1 kb.

1 On a side note I'm really looking forward to watching Hillary gut Edwards like a fish during the primaries. It's going to be ugly and entertaining.

Posted by: blackflag at February 08, 2007 09:56 AM (Mq5jS)

2 For the nutroot leftards, every day is election day. Usually with those dastardly republicans stealing the election, primarily by screwing up the voting machines and causing long lines in precincts run by Democrats.

Damn that Diebold!

Posted by: William Teach at February 08, 2007 07:14 PM (doAuV)

3 stop parroting leftard comments and make up some wingnut ones, and BY GOD I HATE THESE STUPID BUZZWORD REFERRALS TO THE OTHER SIDE. THEY ARE JUVENILE AND ANNOYING.

Posted by: Jake at February 08, 2007 08:04 PM (AeRA2)

4 "feminimrod" is copyrighted to me, thankyouverymuch.

What's stopping you from making them up, Jake?

Posted by: Good Lt at February 08, 2007 08:44 PM (D0TMh)

5 i cant handle em they're sooooo annoying... its like thos kids on those goddamn shoes with wheel in them, i get so pissed when i see one rolling around in target or some other store. its like WHAT THE FUCK!?!? IS WALK TOO FUCKING GOOD FOR YOU YOU LITTLE BITCH!!!?!?

but i dont say that because im usually a fairly reasonable guy.

Posted by: Jake at February 08, 2007 08:57 PM (AeRA2)

6 I'm calling the ACLU, I think Jake is infringing on my civil liberties.

Insert the F word at random points

Posted by: William Teach at February 08, 2007 09:13 PM (doAuV)

7 Fake:

"im usually a fairly reasonable guy."

Obviously.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 09, 2007 08:32 AM (Dt3sl)

8 John Edwars doesn't have any better chance than that asshole Al Sharpton. But they do recieved a large ammount of tax payers dollars for attempting to run. Wth Sharpton that is the game he plays.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 09, 2007 08:34 AM (ap7th)

9

"im usually a fairly reasonable guy."

Obviously.

your marvelous irony went over my head.

Posted by: Jake at February 09, 2007 08:46 PM (AeRA2)

10 Jakeass:

Is there anything above a 13 year old's level that doesn't go over your pointy head?

You really are a masochist, aren't you?

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 10, 2007 01:38 PM (Dt3sl)

11 "Jakeass:

Is there anything above a 13 year old's level that doesn't go over your pointy head?

You really are a masochist, aren't you?"

no, i just like seeing you shoot yourself in the foot.

Posted by: Jake at February 11, 2007 05:08 PM (AeRA2)

12 Jakeass:

Do you have a relevant point to make about Pandagone or anything else?

That was a rhetorical question.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 12, 2007 06:41 PM (Dt3sl)

13 oh you must have missed it, it was right next to the comment you replied to

"actually i have an honest question. if you were offered the position of
head blogger at some nice gop candidate's site, would you do it? and
then later take heat for the number of times you outrageously
proclaimed outrageous things? oh wait, it wouldn't come up... what with
the right wing media and all..."

like to posts down.

Posted by: Jake at February 12, 2007 09:44 PM (AeRA2)

14 Still waiting for something besides a locical fallacy.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 13, 2007 03:03 PM (Dt3sl)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

February 03, 2007

Leftists Spit On Our Soldiers, Then Deny It

Leftards spit on soldiers and vets (per Vietnam era leftards). Soldiers report on their blogs and in print that they have been spit on by leftarded wastes of life.

Leftards deny spitting on soldiers. Leftards, using Media Matters and similar sites, then attempt to deny and pretend they didn't spit on soldiers. Leftards try Google scrubbing and bombing to divert attention from these stories.

Leftards accuse soldiers and vets of being liars, while they try to switch subjects and scream about Bush-made global warming and FOX. Leftards obviously don't know that they're screwed because of the hard evidence of their disgraceful histories.

We're onto them, and they're just squealing because they've been caught.

ht: Insty, CounterColumn

Posted by: Good Lt. at 10:54 AM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

1 What are our soldiers turning into? Why don't they kick some asses. Someone spits on me or a fellow marine I will stomp his teeth out. I heard about these assholes when I came home from Viet Nam. Never was lucky enough to have one try it with me. I would love to make an example and trust my luck to a jury.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 03, 2007 12:50 PM (0W1Sk)

2 They're in the service Grey Rooster. It's not allowed.

But there's nothing in print other than the local laws that says we can't beat some punk half to death.

Posted by: Dick at February 03, 2007 12:55 PM (XlQVK)

3 I would not be member of any service that said I could not strike back at people spitting on me. When I was in the Marine Corps I would have gotten my ass whipped if I didn't fight back. If not. Why be a Marine? That's what we are trained to do. Kick ass anyway we can.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 03, 2007 01:27 PM (0W1Sk)

4 Leftwing moral relativists don't believe these people are evil:

Terrorist kills 120 in Baghad

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070203/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_070203184740

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 03, 2007 03:30 PM (8e/V4)

5 I don't get it, can someone please explain that to me? why "that they have been spit on" rather than "have been spat on"? If I had written that I would've used the Past Participle form of the verb, according to the dictionary. What am I missing here?

an Israeli being a nag in an attempt to get her English together.

Posted by: an Israeli at February 03, 2007 06:55 PM (7A241)

6 The NYT uses "spit" for the past tense form.

The lefties don't feel like they have to pretend, anymore.

Posted by: The Sanity Inspector at February 03, 2007 07:09 PM (Uznpi)

7 anisraeli: If one is planning to spit at me it hasn't happened yet. If I have been spat upon some lefturd would be missing his teeth.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 03, 2007 07:29 PM (0W1Sk)

8 I was once asked while waiting in the airport if I would vote for Hillary. Does this count as spitting? (PS I was uniform at the time).

Posted by: DAT at February 03, 2007 07:36 PM (DZE4e)

9 A vote for Hillarious Clinton would be the same as spitting on this nation.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 03, 2007 08:11 PM (0W1Sk)

Someone over at HotAir commented that there is a legal precedent for 'fighting words' and that they do not constitute legally protected speech. In other words they are verbal assault, and considered provocation, which may help you get a reduced sentence. It is true our service people aren't suppossed to get into brawls with civilians (expecially these days) but as noted above, nobody says we can't step up and take care of things in their place.

I hear some of these 'spitters' run like little cowards after they pull their stunt. Can you imagine the satisfaction of even just sticking your foot out, and watching the one of these idiots skid face first into a row of chairs? I know I can

Anyway, in Montana, we're still a bit rustic, and I'd take my chances with the local judge. In SanFrancisco, they might sentence you to 10000 of community service. To avoid that hellish sentence, I'd probably have to go to plan "B". Stalking, and ambush.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 03, 2007 08:31 PM (2OHpj)

11 I'd either beat the shit out of anyone I saw spit on a soldier, or I would get my ass beat. But one of the two would happen.

Posted by: templar knight at February 03, 2007 09:40 PM (LFjVi)

12 Having seen this kind of thing in the bad old Vietnam days, I can say that the reason the soldier or Marine does not beat the piss out of said spitter is that they are usually alone and the spitter is not. Either that or vastly outnumbered. And by not alone, I mean the shitheads are in a pack. Something about having a 5 or 10-1 advantage makes these douchebags brave.

Additionally, imagine getting hauled in and your First Sergeant or CO getting called to haul your ass out of jail. That is a career limiting move. And these turds are counting on you being disciplined and not retaliating.

Saw one of these guys try to spit on my old man in San Diego back in 1972 after he returned from Vietnam and was in uniform after work. I say try because this twit would not cross the street to face my old man, a big Italian guy with a bad temper. He sort of spit in the general direction from across the way and ran like hell when the old man man a move towards him. Unfortunately, a lot of the EM's in the squadron (VAW-111) were not so lucky.

Posted by: The Opinionator at February 03, 2007 10:20 PM (u6A+L)

13 Perhaps we could form a group like the patriot riders where we surround a uniformed serviceman, have a couple folks with video camers catch the spit (ala Seinfeld) and them the designated retribution sqad stomps their guts on the spot. The remaining individuals act as block to prevent the aprehension of the hammer crew them we all disperse into the crowd searching for another spitter.

Posted by: SeeMonk at February 04, 2007 11:25 AM (yKwZ2)

14 thanks, The Sanity Inspector & greyrooster- you've got a unique approach to explaining

thankyou

Posted by: an Israeli at February 04, 2007 06:42 PM (7A241)

15 You are welcome. Keep up the fight.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 04, 2007 10:38 PM (9p0PD)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

February 01, 2007

EXTRA!! Liberal Professor Is A Drooling Imbicile

Not news, I know. Interesting and ironic, though, that a liberal divinity professor doesn't have a clue about what she bloviates:

Do some people take their faith far too dogmatically? Sure. Are some of those people politicians? Sure. But Prof. Dongier talks as if this were a nation full of Christian zombies. (An assessment I often encountered during my sojourn on the far side of the Atlantic.)
Prof. Doniger continues:

I pledge allegiance to the first amendment, which I interpret to mean that government shouldnâ€™t traffic with religionâ€”neither promote it nor persecute itâ€”and this means that, in the public arena, the candidate should not use religious rhetoric, which does nothing but harm, fogging over the clear lines of argument on the issues and eliciting irrelevant and irrational choices in the electorate.
I'm sure Dr. King would beg to differ with the passage in boldface. As I mentioned just yesterday, conservatives love it when liberals fall into this trap. And in this instance, a professor at a divinity school, who really should have a somewhat broader view of the potential that relgion has to inspire us. Or was supporting civil rights one of thsoe "irrational choices" about which Prof. Doniger is so concerned?

Of course it is irrational. Dr. King may have been inspired by G-d and not by the Democrats in Congress, rendering him a knuckledragging Christian robot with no mind. Don't you know anything?

Posted by: Good Lt. at 09:58 AM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.

1 What's this lady so upset about? If she had ears and a brain she'd know that her precious Democrats are far more likely to use religious rhetoric in public than are Republicans. They're allowed to because everybody knows the Dems are lying through their teeth when they do it.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 01, 2007 11:51 AM (8e/V4)

2 The majority of professors are drooling imbeciles. Ultra liberal US universities wouldn't hire them if they weren't. It's a meathead thing going back to the 60's and they just can't kick the habit. Worse than crackheads.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 01, 2007 12:51 PM (E7ALy)

3 The University of Chicago divinity school was traditionally one of the best. Unfortunately, it became inbred and succumbed to group think, dropping it in the academic toilet in the late 80s. I took some religion courses with ex-Chicago profs who had grown tired of the nonsense.

Posted by: wooga at February 01, 2007 03:16 PM (t9sT5)

4 religious rhetoric, which does nothing but harm, fogging over the clear lines of argument on the issues and eliciting irrelevant and irrational choices in the electorate.

Clearly her constitutional analysis has absolutely nothing at all to do with her christophobia /sarcasm off. Unfortunately for her, the 1st amendment still guarantees freedom of speech in this country.

But now you know, the Left stands for LESS freedom of speech and religion, not more.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 01, 2007 03:29 PM (8e/V4)

I get this sort of crap from my Atheist friends a lot of the time. It's also cute, how they deny that Atheism is a religion because their belief is that there is NO God. There is plenty of evidence that Atheism is as faith based as any other 'religious' belief. Check Webster's dictionary under 'religion', "3, a doctrine or custom accepted on faith."

Check around and you will see Atheist religious groups recieving tax exemption, and you will see Atheist proselytizing. Atheism expresses itself through 'doctrine' and 'custom' which relies on concepts which cannot be proven, and so are faith based. These behaviors are followed as dogmatically as any other religion. My Atheist friends always deny the 'dogma' of their belief. I'd like to point out that that IS part of Atheist dogma to have such denial.

Dogma is "a rigidly held principle, or doctrine, esp. in a religion" and 'dogmatic' is "adhering rigidly to a tenet", and a 'tenet' is "any OPINION, principle, or doctrine held to be true." So YES PEOPLE, Atheism IS a religion. it is rigid, and it has behavior that is expected from it's believers.

Clearly many Atheists aren't for freedom of expression, because they only want people to be allowed to express Atheism publically. They are like Muslims who enforce the Dhimma. 'It's ok to have your Christianity, but don't you dare express it where we superior Muslims might be offended by it.' Just put the word 'Atheist' in place of the word 'Muslim' and you'll see where I'm going with this.

Now any religion can have followers who are intolerent. Christianity has some black marks right along with Atheism. Neither so far, is as intolerant as fundamental Islam. But followers of Atheism are like followers of Islam, in pursueing the public dominance of their own religion, over others. This means that Atheism as a political force, is anti-American, and anti-Constitutional. Like Islam, they want to enforce a public 'establishment' of religion, by silencing all other voices.

As much as some of us are willing to risk our lives to prevent Sharia coming to this country, we should give some similar thought to the imposition of Atheism in the same way. Both should be prevented, as both suppress religious freedom, rather than protecting it. As an affront to our First Amendment, neither of these 'doctrines' may be left unoppossed.

Atheists, Muslims, Jews, or whatever, are entitled to their rights to 'free expression' ANYWHERE, as long as they are not enforcing supremecy of their religion in the process. We can all be offended by each other, but we have no right to enforce shutting anyone up over their religion. As our Founding Fathers agreed, we human beings are "endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights", and when they referenced a creator, it was in the most public of forums. The Declaration of Independence was the most public kind of document.

Ben Franklin, as recorded by James Madison, during the Constitional Convention, in particular the day of June 28, 1787 ...
"I have lived, sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth - that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"

Yet another public endorsement ... without the ACLU to bring a self serving lawsuit and cash in on it.

We need to remind ourselves that choking off such speech, or expression of belief, is contrary to the wishes of our Founding Fathers, even the least religious among them.

Political Atheism may be seen as having only one goal, and that is domination of the public spaces. Fight back, and keep those spaces free!

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 01, 2007 05:19 PM (2OHpj)

6 Well said Michael. However I still plan to be an agnostic until the day before I die.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 01, 2007 08:07 PM (E7ALy)

7 I like how my comments get deleted just because I disagree with
someone. You assholes are getting as bad as the lefturds. Maybe the
lefturds are right; maybe you are just a bunch of Jebus-Nazi's after
all.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 04, 2007 10:45 AM (eGb9y)

8 IM: Call them stupid idiots. Words for me.

Posted by: greyrooster at February 04, 2007 10:50 PM (9p0PD)

9 Improbulus Maximus; For the record, I'm curious what you were going to say, so if you want to e-mail it, feel free

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 05, 2007 06:22 AM (2OHpj)

10 94653d996b62a7c8127fb330b9a63155 Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. ccd528092cd05238abc8e07b30350146

Posted by: Cody at April 11, 2007 08:25 PM (Aevr7)

11 7a312bccbfbddcda2ac29bd4634502cc Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. 4af9adb4c2eaeffc72371b0e4c09c10b

Posted by: Kenton at April 12, 2007 05:35 AM (5sJ7S)

12 fbc33f18ad8a9ae09098a5d2c62b0f51 Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. dde4a870c0fa3bbb82db5fa1b8553b72

Posted by: Ronaldo at April 12, 2007 02:20 PM (nRZfR)

13 1e3c4d1d01c7c1c7648f484cf90bb04e Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. 5ffc7dc148d3c97c27ff70b9c497645a

Posted by: Omar at April 13, 2007 12:45 AM (w7Joy)

14 0510d7c2cf4e9eee7652ad0dce5d0a01 Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. 2132dbc2be113fecaec5cde4791c304f

Posted by: Bo at April 13, 2007 08:02 AM (gzDEW)

15 dced3943dd06979e72b79756bf9d49ad Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. 89338efc43c42e21ab22a4942b868449

Posted by: Billy at April 15, 2007 08:17 AM (PtogB)

16 7851471a7365ac128bf1e2d23500d8b3 Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. 59e584280b17eeed2f34ea2e27d45433

Posted by: Maxim at April 16, 2007 12:22 AM (FyCjW)

17 ff7b3ed21d4789dfeb822f9b72bffe55 Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. f26aa7f1efeefe71d38addca0308c8cc

Posted by: Cordell at April 16, 2007 08:50 AM (nuOj8)

18 e36534afa867e2aad7580fffa6a35c5a Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. 8ae00bc4c0da9b7e4bd8f2b72581fd42

Posted by: Tucker at April 17, 2007 12:24 AM (Q69NZ)

19 f800100be65f7a1dac261616585404af Independent newsletter from our foreign friends points our attention to your web project. We are very proud to communicate and colaborate with such partner. Don't be surprised of being noticed. 696ab587edf732e22b0ac8d4aa234f91

Posted by: Gene at April 17, 2007 11:08 AM (hNDp3)

Posted by: at June 14, 2007 01:00 AM (b9SZR)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

January 31, 2007

May We Please...

...question their patriotism now?

Quite possibly the most vile display of the true face of modern leftism in print since Michael Moore's "minutemen" comment or Kos' "screw them" remark.

The post positively screams "douche." So does the Post, for that matter.

IMHO at least.

Also burning up the intertubes at:

The blog grandfather

Hot Air

Blackfive

Powerline

Ace

Michelle Malkin, with even more links. more...

Posted by: Vinnie at 08:57 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

January 28, 2007

Uh.....

.....okay...

DAVENPORT, Iowa -
Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday that
President Bush should withdraw all U.S. troops from
Iraq before he leaves office, asserting it would be "the height of irresponsibility" to pass the war along to the next commander in chief.

One word response? Kosovo.

Interesting, considering that she's officially in the run for '08. If she's in it to win, you'd think she'd want the troops to stay so that she could do the cut and run herself after she's inaugurated.

Posted by: Vinnie at 07:09 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 84 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday that
President Bush should withdraw all U.S. troops from
Iraq before he leaves office,

For one simple reason, she wants Bush to go down in history as the one who surrendered, not her. No such luck, Hilary.

Stay the course.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 28, 2007 08:39 PM (8e/V4)

2 On December 1, 2003, George W. Bush <a href="http://www.unknownnews.net/031202bushlies.html">said</a>:

"I came to this office to solve problems and not pass them on to future presidents and future generations."

You do want him to keep his word, don't you?

Posted by: Len at January 28, 2007 09:28 PM (kZ74G)

3 You do want him to keep his word, don't you?

Oh, absolutely. Without a doubt.

Which is exactly why Bush will settle for nothing less than a complete victory.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 28, 2007 09:49 PM (8e/V4)

4 Define "complete victory." The definition seems to be changing daily.

Posted by: Len at January 28, 2007 09:59 PM (kZ74G)

5 Hillary is a disgusting piece of human trash. She's sure gotta a purty mouth, but I bet she never put it to any good use.

absurd thought -
God of the Universe thinks
Hillary can fight a war...
.

Posted by: USpace at January 28, 2007 09:59 PM (k40nO)

6 I'm looking for a leader who will take up the problems and work to solve them, not one who wants them solved as a pre-condition to take office.

Put the finger in the air Hilary, Keep it up, things will change b-4 Nov. 08.
Shit, what a POL.

Posted by: Brad at January 28, 2007 11:44 PM (Ignlt)

7 Speaking of Hillarious - "American Idol, The Lost Audition"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHNnVdujcwk

Posted by: rtheyseryus at January 29, 2007 12:03 AM (MAPKL)

8 Define "complete victory." The definition seems to be changing daily.

I wasn't aware that the definition had changed even once. But then again I'm not listening to the same people you are. Bush's definition of victory is a democratic and stable Iraq (same as always).

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 29, 2007 12:04 AM (8e/V4)

9 Carlos, you have to remember that these types don't understand that Iraq is a battle in the war, not the war itself.

They can't tell the difference between victory in a single battle and victory in the overall war in general.

Hence their confusion, and the claim that the definition of victory keeps changing.

Posted by: Vinnie at January 29, 2007 01:31 AM (fdAim)

10 Len's been given the definition of victory. He just refuses to
accept it. He's probably still wondering what "is" means too.

Posted by: Oyster at January 29, 2007 08:03 AM (YudAC)

11 Len:

Define "defeat." That's something the left has never done, because it would expose their empty rhetoric and outright treason for what they are.

I won't hold my breath waiting. You simps avoid that definition at all costs.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 30, 2007 12:33 AM (Dt3sl)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Special Olympics

Nuff said:

stein hoist: Age of Hooper via the blog grandfather.

Oh, they did it here, too:

And in Omaha, dozens stood on a footbridge over Dodge Street to bring their message to passersby.

Posted by: Vinnie at 06:03 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

January 24, 2007

Petitions? We Don't Need No Steenking Petitions

Below the fold is my NSFW open letter to Chuck Hagel originally posted back in December 2005.

GRAPHIC LANGUAGE WARNING

stein hoist: Bluto, for reminding me, and who will be sad that I won't record my phone call. more...

Posted by: Vinnie at 11:49 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.

Chinese and US Lefties Agree on Dangers of Free Internet

Hu Jintao wants to purify the internet:

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese Communist Party chief Hu Jintao has vowed to "purify" the Internet, state media reported on Wednesday, describing a top-level meeting that discussed ways to master the country's sprawling, unruly online population.

The Chinese are pikers next to America's liberals, who are taking aim at not only the internet, but cable TV and talk radio, too, using the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."

Posted by: Bluto at 01:21 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 79 words, total size 1 kb.

January 12, 2007

My Liberalism Says You're Guilty of Rape (Updated)

**Note: I put this up a day late because I wanted to tweak it a bit. Enjoy.

This is a long post. Greenwaldian long. So pull up a chair. You may learn something, and I don't need to be the one to teach it. It will teach itself.

So the Duke non-rape case is teetering on the edge of being thrown out of court before it even gets to court. As it should. Nifong should be imprisoned, the accuser should be thrown in the cell next to him, and both should be forced to pay all legal fees and compensatory damages. We don't, however, live in a just society.

The Duke Lacrosse Incident has revealed a lot about some of our friends on the left. In particular, it has shown that a contingency of them are willing to indict, convict and sentence people based strictly on their worldviews and not on the merits of the case or on the preponderence of evidence.

READ MUCH MORE BELOW THE FOLD --> more...

Posted by: Good Lt. at 04:40 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 2905 words, total size 21 kb.

The Minimum Wage Hike : Apparently, Not So Good for the Gander

Posted from Fox & Friends by Kathryn Jean Lopez at The Corner:

STEVE DOOCEY: We teased you with this a moment ago. On Wednesday the U.S. House passed a bill that says the minimum wage in this country will rise over time from $5.15 an hour to $7.25. Now, here's the thing. Included in the small print is the fact that the minimum wage will now include the islands of the northern marinas but it exempts American Samoa which is the only U.S. Territory not subject to minimum wage laws.
BRIAN KILMEADE: What's the big deal about that?
DOOCEY: It covers all islands except American Samoa. Why American Samoa?

Why, indeed. A very plausible answer here.

Posted by: Ragnar at 03:13 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Pelosi's spin doctors are throwing out the irrelevant fact the she didn't sponsor the Samoan exemption, and that Del Monte began processing there a year after the exemption was enacted.

Well duh, little Dhimmiecrats, Del Monte wouldn't operate the plant prior to the enactment, now would they?

Plastic Pelosi has been sloganeering about a Republican "culture of corruption" and raising the standards of the working poor ad nauseum. She was perfectly happy to fuck over the working poor until she got caught doing it. She's definitely an ignorant twat who is unqualified for her job, but her office is perfectly aware of any business and tax exemtions in her district. Now she claims to want to help the poor, underprivileged Samoans, who suck at the teat of American "entitlement' programs like hogs, without offering anything in return, much like the thoroughly worthless Marianans.

Still no word about the peons on her vinyards, but then, why should a Congresswoman be expected to obey the laws the rest of us do regarding illegal employees, industry standard wages, unions, or any other issue the hypocrite Dems preach about endlessly.

Golly little lefturds, are beginning to realize your beloved Dhimmiecrat party is only interested in power, the American people be damned? Only those of you capable of rational thought, who will all become neocons when you finally grow up.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 12, 2007 05:51 PM (abVz3)

2 Pelosi lied, tuna died, and Samoans are screwed! Impeach the Speakerette! Stop the corrupt war against Samoan paychecks! Pull the StarKist forces out of Samoa now!

Wow, that felt good to go full blown liberal nuts on them...thanks for providing the excuse Ragnar...

Posted by: Jim C. at January 12, 2007 08:05 PM (1ISxl)

3 funny how selective you guys are. That tuna stinks on both side of the 'aisle'.

Posted by: tbone at January 13, 2007 12:52 PM (HGqHt)

4 Tboner:

If we were selective, we wouldn't condemn Republican malfeasance--which we do on a regular basis. No, it's you hopeless tards on the left who march in lockstep with every instance of Dem corruption imaginable. As the far more corrupt party, that's really saying something. Something bad.

Fucking little hypocrite. So much for the "Republican culture of corruption."

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 13, 2007 05:54 PM (abVz3)

5 Tboner:

Both sides of the aisle didn't run on a phony "culture of corruption" platform, and Repulsive Plastic Pelosi is responsible for her own fucking district.

Moron.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 13, 2007 05:56 PM (abVz3)

tbone,

Pelosi is a lying, power hungry, hypocrite who rewards her scummy friends while pretending she is Joan of Arc. She is the last person in DC who should be lecturing about ethics.

She is Satan's stool sample.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 15, 2007 03:52 AM (2OHpj)

7 has this bill been passed with the exemption? HAS THE NEW YORK TIMES PRINTED THIS STORY?
HAS ANY OF THE PEOPLE AT STAR KIST HAD ANY REACTION TO THIS BILL. ?

Posted by: r j rousseau at February 25, 2007 08:20 AM (pzSrg)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

January 10, 2007

Somalia : Lefties Unhinged

TalkLeft wonders:

...do we just believe we can go anywhere in the world and kill people because they might be al-Qaida followers?

If by "we," you mean the U.S. military, the answer, of course, is "yes." Most Americans believe the U.S. military is capable of going pretty much anywhere in the world and killing just about anyone. But that's not really the question. The question is: should the U.S. military kill people in war zones who they have good reason to believe to be key al-Qaeda agents? Spending too long pondering questions like this one is exactly the kind of activity that kept the Democrats from taking out Osama back in the 1990s. If we continually pass up opportunities to take out our enemies' leadership, we deserve to lose this war.

This Kossack is convinced it's all just for show:

The notion that we have any idea of whatever structure something called "al Qaeda" may have, sufficient to be able to ID who's in charge of what, is laughable. The idea that some notional "our man in Modagishu", ever alert for these key al Qaeda operatives that our expertise has identified, and probably circulates packs of playing cards with their pictures, spotted our intended target and dogged his footsteps to the Kenyan border to call in this airstrike, is ludicrous. I doubt that even the con men in charge of the whole operation believe that they have any idea who or what may have been at ground zero of those smoking holes. The only thing one can be confident of from this report, is that there would be no report were there not a need for some positive news of progress in the GWOT on the eve of Our Leader's inspiring speech outlining the Glorious Way Forward. Onward, to ever more and larger smoking holes, in ever more countries! The brown people will get the message sooner or later.

The Kossack fantasizes about killing Republicans with an AC-130 gunship, but laments that he wouldn't know who to kill:

I have been a keen observer of the US political scene my entire adult life, and I wouldn't have any idea who in the Republican political machine to send the AC-130s after, or any confidence that knocking off any or all of them would improve the world, despite an utter confidence that they have fucked up the world mightily.

Posted by: Ragnar at 02:49 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 396 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Typical lefty BS.

Just who would they get to fly the AC-130.

Funny how they condemn violence unless it is against those trying to keep us all in the first-world.

Funny how the Dems in Congress are so-far pretty silent on the matter. Even stranger is how this operation remained secret until it was just about over. That required some pretty decent planning to work around our own 5th column.

Great job USA!

I look forward to hearing the rest of the story. You can bet that this was just the tip of the iceberg!

Posted by: Fred Fry at January 10, 2007 08:23 AM (JXdhy)

2 Their reaction is reminisint of the Grenada operation. They're ticked that the US military hasn't given them operational information that they may be able to relay to our enemy in order to undermine our effort. Heck, remember the last US involvement in Somalia? I remember it like it was yesterday. The reporters stood on the beach at night with their camera lights illuminating THE FIRST WAVE (!!!) of our troops hitting the beach in inflatalbles !!! Yeah, want to piss off the left? Show them for the impotant lilly livered cry babies that they are.

Posted by: Billy at January 10, 2007 08:48 AM (lrjEn)

3 Rule of thumb: If the left is outraged, then it must be a good thing.

Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at January 10, 2007 09:51 AM (oC8nQ)

4 ...do we just believe we can go anywhere in the world and kill people because they might be al-Qaida followers?

Why of course we can you effing moron. Was that a trick question? or are Leftards really that dumb.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 10, 2007 11:00 AM (8e/V4)

5 Ya gotta love the Kossack. He's been a keen observer of the political scene -- all his life, he has -- yet he hasn't any idea who to target. That would be enough to fall in love with the guy but he's not through thinking; he has a nifty solution but has zero confidence it will solve the problem he's positively identified.

That puts "the" notion Kossack describes at length, earlier, in perspective: it's how well the GWOT would be run if he were in charge.

I'll be reading some great stories about Dick Durbin in the next two years. No. Doubt. About. It.

Posted by: Dusty at January 10, 2007 12:03 PM (1Lzs1)

6 Yes, neocon-men and warpigs will say or do anything for the opportunity to murder "brown" people around the world. They just use Al Qaeda as an excuse to shoot and bomb people of "color," because killing darkies gets them off. Republicans are the source of all evil and suffering in the world. Save the terrorists!

How stupid do you have to be to believe this shit? How scary is it that many people actually do believe it, and where were they when Bill Clinton was carpet bombing Serbia to aid the terrorists?

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 10, 2007 12:12 PM (abVz3)

7 The Serbs are white. That makes it okay to a lefturd or a Clinton.

Latest news on James Brown. Al Sharpton is preventing his burial. Didn't Brown die on Xmas? They must be making a mummy out of him.

Posted by: Greyrooster at January 10, 2007 02:06 PM (w+w6p)

8 Oh, of course! The President's speech!

Now I can question the timing. Whew, for a minute there I thought the President was defending the country.

Posted by: hadsil at January 10, 2007 09:24 PM (OeDQr)

..eve of Our Leader's inspiring speech..

It's always some conspiracy, the way leftists want this war to go, as soon as
there is some good intel that some al-qaeda ratbag is in some location on the
other side of the world, the USA will have to fly over a battalion of lawyers,
aclu, peace activists and loony judges over to that location to establish a
court, to try the ratbag, only after the trial [which must be deemed fair by
some group of nuanced unhygienic french tossers]and numerous failed appeals,
will the left allow said ratbag to be brought back to the USA to serve his
sentence in some cushy jail. Heaven forbid the death sentence be handed out,
unless you want your streets renamed and a public holiday for the leftists to
remember the departed ratbag.

Posted by: MK at January 10, 2007 11:29 PM (pVHqF)

10 "Oh, of course! The President's speech! Now I can question the timing. Whew, for a minute there I thought the President was defending the country.
Posted by: hadsil "

Yeah, and he did a good job keeping the NYT from giving it away! The hype before the speech did make good cover for the Op didn't it. Caught the lefties flat footed. And it showed.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 12, 2007 04:01 AM (2OHpj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

January 05, 2007

Barney Frank Accuses President of "Ethnic Cleansing"

Poor audio quality, but Barney Frank does accuse President Bush of using "ethnic cleansing" to make New Orleans more Republican after Katrina. This is the most grossly irresponsible public political slur in recent memory. Frank should either apologize or resign. Immediately

You can call Congressman Frank's office at (202)225-5931.

Along with Bryan at Hot Air, I've made my own copy of this video in case Matthew Stoller, who posted it, decides to delete the original.

Via Michelle Malkin.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:46 PM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 85 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ho hum. I am no longer shocked or surprised by such Leftist antics. If they've been trying to desensitize me to their insane moronity they've succeeded.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2007 05:25 PM (8e/V4)

2 Well Bluto as you suggested I telephoned Frank's office at about 5:30 p.m. The man I spoke with said he was unsure of how many others had responded to your alert as they always have at least 2 or 3 people answering the phone but he said "a fair number had called". When I asked for an estimate he said perhaps 2 or 3 or 4 dozen.with some 80% holding some sort of anti-Frank position. Of those 80% when asked, he said a "fair number" had also expresssed anti Semetic feelings, but refused to give any percentage.

Posted by: John Ryan at January 05, 2007 06:09 PM (TcoRJ)

3 I think that CNN should be bombarded with emails and phone calls as to why they REFUSE to carry a story about a UNITED STATES CONGRESSMAN accusing a sitting PRESIDENT of THE UNITED STATES of AMERICA of GENOCIDE of HIS OWN PEOPLE DURING A TIME of WAR !!!!!!!! If it were a republican congressman they'd be all over it. That is how they influenced the last election. SELECTIVE AND BIASED REPORTING. We can't continue to let them get away with it. The 2008 election starts now and apathy or ho hum has no place if we want to regain control. PLEASE JUMP ALL OVER CNN......DEMAND HIS RESIGNATION !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Billy at January 05, 2007 06:27 PM (lrjEn)

4 I guess Frank has to have something to do when he isn't fagging off with teenaged prostitutes.

Something else CNN doesn't report.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 05, 2007 07:01 PM (abVz3)

5 I guess Frank has to have something to do when he isn't fagging off with teenaged prostitutes.

Don't be so intolerant. It's only an "alternative lifestyle" when Democrats do it.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 05, 2007 08:07 PM (8e/V4)

6 He meant to say anal cleansing.

Posted by: SeeMonk at January 05, 2007 08:32 PM (n4VvM)

7 The quality of the video is so poor that you can't possibly accurately translate what was said here. For you to go wasting your time calling the office of Barney Frank over some imagined insult is staggeringly ignorant of the real issues at hand.

You probably didnt call Hastert's office when it was discovered that he covered for Foley's buggery.

Posted by: Wormpaste at January 05, 2007 09:52 PM (XM56o)

8 I know my voice sounds funny, Like there was some kind of liquid rolling around inside my big puss.
You'ed sound like this too if you were chewing the roots of young men all night long.
Bush, Cheney, Halaburton, Ethnic Clensing,.....They all want to put us in camps....... now errrrr where is that Penis I was eating?

Posted by: Barney at January 05, 2007 10:01 PM (Ignlt)

9 Wormpaste:

Why am I not surprised a leftist hypocrite would try to excuse Franks' repulsive pederasty by pointing his finger at Foley? I guess if Foley is bad, Franks is allowed to bugger all the boys he wants, become a pimp, turn his house into a boy bordello, and pay boys to let him blow them. He's just a man of the people.

Must be how the Democrats fight the Republican "culture of corruption."

For the record, Foley sent a naughty instant message to an 18 year old man who was a former page. Your butt-buddy Franks has been taking it up the ass from underaged boys for God knows how long. (I'm guessing about 6 inches.)

Franks is a pederast and a criminal. I cant even count how many laws he's broken with his queer pajama parties at taxpayer expense.

Foley is neither. Foley resigned under pressure from the "corrupt" Republican leadership.

Franks is verbally fellated with encomium by the Democrat leadership, as was the equally repulsive Gerry Studds. Studds used to fly 16 year old fruits around the world for jet-setting gay romps and chocolate bon bons at tax payer expense.

Why am I not surprised that Dems think they're the only ones allowed to be criminal felchmongers? They also think they're the only ones who deserve praise for being Black, Latino or women.

Why am I not surprised a fairy named wormpaste would take it on the chin for Franks? I guess you were seduced by his sweaty, porcine sensuality, and his self righteous lisp.

2 years of you guys controlling Congress? Oh, joy.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 05, 2007 10:41 PM (abVz3)

10 I think that pretty clearly said ethnic cleansing

Posted by: RepJ at January 05, 2007 11:36 PM (rqlgb)

11 Just get a fricken rope , or is it soap on a rope, or big fat
slobbering slob on the end of a rope with soap , Ahh!! fire the
...... Ethic police! ethics police! woooo!woooo! pull ova. What
the fricken use. There wouldn't be a democrat party if they were
punished for their crimes and incompetance.

Posted by: Rob LA Ca. at January 06, 2007 12:20 AM (wuhXN)

12 Barney

From your homoerotic braying you definately got some repressed issues. Why dont you come out of the closet and stop hating yourself.

Posted by: Wormpaste at January 06, 2007 02:33 AM (XM56o)

Hey worm you little bitch, lets get some popcorn, go down to planned parenthood today and watch some babies get offed. I don't know about you, but it always gets my motor running.
Then I'll take you back to my Georgetown love nest for a little actiooooooon!
Remember, no matter how many babies we kill, if we take it up the ass, were the compassionate ones.

Posted by: Barney at January 06, 2007 11:43 AM (Ignlt)

14 BARNEY FRANK whats with this nit wit any way what this blabbering idiot trying to prove

Posted by: sandpiper at January 06, 2007 03:46 PM (A09bm)

15 Barney Frank, not enough perfume in the world to make him smell as good as a backed up toilet. Maybe in his next life he can be Satan's stool sample.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 06, 2007 11:16 PM (2OHpj)

16 Barney Frank needs an inema. Naw, he'd like that. Friggin faggot is an embarassment to this country. What the hell is a matter with the idiots who continue to re-elect him.

Posted by: Greyrooster at January 07, 2007 07:26 PM (ovoks)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

December 31, 2006

UK Has KosKidzesque Traitors, Too

Palestinians aren't alone in mourning the passing of their sugar daddy, Saddam, who liked to donate money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Traitors in the United Kingdom are upset as well, as evidenced by the comments on this Northern Ireland message board run by the BBC:

Message 2 - posted by Kaido-K (U4078238) , Yesterday
Maybe, as in biblical times, there should have been three gallows raised on the reincarnated Hill of Golgotha and the three tyrants each responsible for the multiple deaths of innocents of this world hung side by side.
Wonder if Blair and Bush would have gone to their own deaths with the equanimity of Saddam.
Message 3 - posted by andy gallagher (U4413173) , Yesterday
"Wonder if Blair and Bush would have gone to their own deaths with the equanimity of Saddam."
I doubt the thought even enters their heads mate.

Almost makes one nostalgic for the days when the Crown punished High Treason accordingly.

Posted by: Bluto at 03:51 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Wonder if Blair and Bush would have gone to their own deaths with the equanimity of Saddam.

Move over Che, the Left has a new hero. LOL.

Liberalism, it's a mental disorder.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 31, 2006 05:19 PM (8e/V4)

2 Thanks Bluto! High treason indeed!

Randman! Quick, get the copyright!

Greyrooster! I 'd bet your right

Happy New year!

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 31, 2006 05:49 PM (2OHpj)

3 Move over Che, the Left has a new hero. LOL.

Lets corner the tee shirt market and make a fortune off those leftist pukes.

Posted by: Randman at December 31, 2006 05:56 PM (Sal3J)

4 One must remember that the UK allows muslim dogs to immigrate to their country to. The poster was probably just another shit for brains muslime.

Posted by: Greyrooster at December 31, 2006 06:34 PM (fVQPt)

5 Everyone stop over and say hi to my new best friend:

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=persianguyagain

He's entertaining to say the least!

Posted by: Max Power at December 31, 2006 11:37 PM (PM8kH)

6 Max Power:

Yeah, I jumped in front of him once. I posted some negative remarks about Persia cause he was being a little bitch. It WAS fun.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 01, 2007 06:36 AM (2OHpj)

7 It must be a blue day in SAN FRANCISCO becuase SADAM is dead

Posted by: sandpiper at January 01, 2007 09:25 PM (2cLBb)

8 Nothing brings lefturds down like a murdering dictator getting his comeuppance.

Now, as an aside, I have to honestly say I felt sorry for Saddam. I
can't explain it, but I did. Maybe it's because monsters aren't born -
they're created, and he was made one just as surely as the weaver makes
a rug.

Just so everyone knows, my last bit of humanity is alive and well, but I still want to show gregturd what his guts look like.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 02, 2007 09:46 PM (v3I+x)

9 Improbulus Maximus:
I never made a rug! Whachyoo talkin bout! Anyway, I read something about 'celebrities' taking a position in our lives similar to neighbors in the old days. You knew the guy you shared your fence with really well, but you knew the guy further down, a little less well. because you see them all the time, you get used to them, and they become part of your comfort zone.

That is why Saddam, and Paris Hilton, and Rosie, and all them folks get so much gossip. Its like they were neighbors. Saddam is the town asshole. Kind of. His (barely) human qualities were still visible to you and as another human, you felt that loss.

BTW did you ever se the movie "Manhunter"? It was the first version of "Red Dragon" and a much better film in my opinion. The hero in the film says something similar about the main killer in the story. This monster was once a child. We still have to stop the monster he has become.

USA, all the way !

Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 04, 2007 05:02 AM (2OHpj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

December 30, 2006

Saddam Is Dead - The Left is Apoplectic

You can practically taste the tears of sympathy and feel the tangible pangs of moral outrage through your screen. Outrage, I tell you!!!

Ragnar highlighted the initial reactions of some Kos Kidz - Bush sucks!!11!!

Gateway Pundit has another roundup of lefty reaction- pure and unvarnished America-hatred and BDS drip from these links (especially in the comment sections of these sites).

Kevin Drum tries to convince us that the execution will cause a sudden "spiral of violence" that has yet to materialize anywhere but in the fervent imaginations of the news media and in the fever swamps of the leftosphere. CNN reports that audience members were dancing with joy.

HuffPo morons Raed Jarrar and Martin Lewis lament and wax tragic over the death of the Butcher of Baghdad. A maroon at some site called "Shakespeare's Sister" is also not happy about justice being administered to Hitler, Jr.

Steve "Blackface is Groovy" Gilliard calls it a murder by the Iraqi government (the one that the left claims doesn't actually exist).

Sheldon Dronby, Air America's founder/sugardaddy? Bush is worse, you stupid neocons.

Because, you know, Bush is worse. Or something. Poignant stuff, all this.

Nothing gets the moral compass of the left out of whack quite like the deserved death of a Jew-hating, anti-American tyrant.

ht: Radio Equalizer, Jules Crittenden

Posted by: Good Lt. at 08:53 AM | Comments (42) | Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Judging from the comments from the left, they must all be suffering from anoxia-caused brain damage.

The air must be pretty damn thin way up in those ivory towers

Posted by: lonevoice at December 30, 2006 10:03 AM (eP161)

2 Wow, some of those comments at Kos are downright morally
bankrupt. The butcher of Baghdad has finally been served his just
desserts and all those whiny little emotionally retarded brats have to
say is "Bush deserves the same"? Only in their depraved little
minds can they hold the opposing thoughts that capital punishment is
wrong, but Bush should be hanged.

These people vote? I'm scared. Hold me.

Posted by: Oyster at December 30, 2006 10:24 AM (YudAC)

3
These people vote?

Yup. Truly scary what passes for moral outrage on the Left.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2006 10:27 AM (8e/V4)

4 If the Lancet study is correct and the statistics of refugees fleeing Iraq is also correct then there is inarguably about a million and a half people who are either dead or have had to flee from their homes that were better off under Saddam. In less than four years. It took Saddam more than 21 years to reduce the population by at the highest count 500,000. Heck, we achieve that population decrease in ten years by automobile deaths alone.

What 70% of Americans also realize is that you bring order to Iraq by doing what worked for Saddam, secular nationalism. The same reasons why 80% of Americans work hard every day for a living so the 20% can live in splendor is the same system that Saddam had working in Iraq. He shared the oil wealth with the top 20% Sunni's. No different here. Bush does the same thing.

So when will the 10% of the 30% percenters realize they are being chumped by the guys in the $5000 suits. If god told GW Bush that we needed to invade a nation that held the oil that powered our SUV's so we can remain superior to the rest of the world then "bring it on" right? We are superior, we have all the answers, and we want all the rest of the world to share in it, right? Just like the top 20% shares with the other 80%, right? Whew, you guys really believe this democracy rules stuff don't you?

Foolish Americans........

Posted by: civilbehavior at December 30, 2006 10:33 AM (SGHzB)

5 civil,

if you are not going to respond to people's comments and responses to your comments, and are just here to bloviate you can forget it.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2006 10:52 AM (8e/V4)

6 ...
absurd thought -
God of the Universe wept
when Saddam was killed

he wanted him pissed on
being dragged through Baghdad
...

absurd thought -
God of the Universe sings
DING DONG THE BUTCHER'S DEAD...

if there is a BIG bad HELL
Saddam's registered by now
...

Posted by: USpace at December 30, 2006 10:58 AM (HMm2Y)

7 civilretard,

You just don't get it, do you?

Posted by: Dick at December 30, 2006 10:59 AM (XlQVK)

8 You, on the other hand, are just so happy about the fact that Moqtada Al-Sadr, whose followers in the black hoods ("long live Moqtada Al-Sadr!") executed this infidel dictator, finally got his vengeance. Once Iraq finally turns into Shia theocracy you will probably feel exulted.

In case you didn't notice, or in case you can't read, this was the point that Kevin Drum made: the execution was carried out in a way of just another sectarian killing, and _this_ is what made him feel unhappy, not some mysterious love for Saddam.

Posted by: Nikolay at December 30, 2006 11:14 AM (mS6dz)

9 If the Lancet study is correct

Its not. It uses very shoddy methodology so cry all that you want that
Saddams children prisons aren't open anymore or that Uday is not
choosing which 12 year old he wants to abuse this week.

is that you bring order to Iraq by doing what worked for Saddam, secular nationalism

Wow...are you really this fucking dumb. You think it was patriotic
posters and songs that kept people in line or the fact that they knew
if they got out of line they could be put into a shredder feat first or
watch their entire village die from nerve gas.

The rest of your drivel is too fucking stupid to respond so go weep over your lost hero. Boo fucking hoo!

Posted by: Randman at December 30, 2006 11:21 AM (Sal3J)

10 Randman,

Exactly what part of "Mission Accomplished" are we in at this point?

90 body bags of American kids in December one it the highest death tolls yet for American troops. October it was 105 body bags full of American kids.

Iraqi's close to 3,000 dead in December.

Merry Xmas.

Not enough yet huh?

Posted by: civilbehavior at December 30, 2006 11:40 AM (SGHzB)

11 The Lancet study have been completely discredited. If you are going to quote some figure, use the one from iraqbodycount.net, which put the number in the 50 thousands. Of course, that number is suspect too as they use the MSM as the source of their numbers.

Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at December 30, 2006 11:55 AM (/wT0K)

12 Civil. Where did I mention "mission accomplished"? I understand you
love the terrorist and excuse anything they do but you are one brain
dead fuck. You don't give a fuck about the troops so shove that crap up
your ass.

Posted by: Randman at December 30, 2006 12:06 PM (Sal3J)

13 " Where did I mention "mission accomplished"?

Nobody did. That's his scattershot attempt at defending the actions and legitimacy of the Hussein regime, because his blind hatred of George Bush won't allow him to see Saddam Hussein as a tyrant. He was a foil to US power, and now he's gone.

Mission accomplished.

Besides, that banner was put up by the military members on that ship to indicate that the mission of toppling civil's hero from power was accomplished. Which it was.

Facts. Liberals. History.
One of these things does not belong.

Posted by: Good Lt at December 30, 2006 12:31 PM (D0TMh)

14 " Where did I mention "mission accomplished"?

Nobody did.

You didn't have to mention it. Leftists like snivel have a script and they read from it. That's all. They doesn't have to address what you actually say. See my comment at #5.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2006 12:39 PM (8e/V4)

15 "Iraqi's close to 3,000 dead in December.

Merry Xmas.

Not enough yet huh?"

Civilbehavior has become the resident dipsh*t here. Maybe I can put his "logic" in terms that leftarded morons can understand. Here goes.

We totally should have left Europe in WWII after the death toll of US troops surpassed that of Pearl Harbor. After all, Hitler never attacked the US. Neither did Mussolini. What an unjust incursion into other's affars. None of our business. Practically a war crime. We were wrong to inter Japanese citizens of the US under a Democrat president in order to secure the internal security of the nation.

We decimated Germany and killed millions of civilians in all theatres of war all over the Earth. What warmongers we were. We invaded Normandy and lost thousands in a single day in a country that wasn't even involved in the war (except when it surrendered to Hitler, who never attacked the US and had no WMDs).

Would've been better off if we left Hitler alone and retreated from Tojo. Nearly 1 million American troops came home in body bags - some didn't even make it that far. FDR's war was a disaster.

This has been civil's lesson in retarded leftist history. Apologies to normal people who have been injured mentally by reading this. We now return you to your real life.

Posted by: Good Lt at December 30, 2006 12:42 PM (D0TMh)

16 the execution was carried out in a way of just another sectarian killing, and _this_ is what made him feel unhappy,

He got a fair trial, with a horde of Leftwing defense lawyers defending him for over 3 years. That's just "another sectarian killing"? LOL. Folks, now you know why Liberalism is considered a mental disorder.

You people make me ill.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2006 12:44 PM (8e/V4)

17 Four lawyers and a judge murdered during this farce of justice. How many children killed in what was once the most developed infrastructure in the Middle East reduced to poverty and ruin?

Let's see who can we compare Hussein to:

Pinochet?
Duvalier?
Mobutu?
Stroessner?
Banzer?

This list goes on but you get the point. All tolerated and accepted by the "great democratic nation" when it served their interests. What fficial&hs=FIN&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=hypocrisy&spell=1" class="p">hypocrisy.

I'm sorry, but this simple does not make me feel safer in my home.

Posted by: gentleman at December 30, 2006 12:46 PM (nX3GV)

18 To make it even sweeter, Ramsey Clark is now weeping with the lefties highlighted here.

You remember him, don't you civil? A Democrat defense attorney who ran for Congress in 1974, if I'm not mistaken. A former Attorney General under failed President Lyndon Johnson (the escalator of the Vietnam War).

And Democrats wonder why they're percieved as siding and defending the enemies of the United States.

Wonder no more. Here's what the Iraqi judge presiding over the trial had to say about the Democrat disgrace defending this piece of human debris:

"Clark was ejected from the trial of Saddam Hussein after passing the
judge a memorandum claiming that the trial was a travesty. The Chief
Judge Raouf said to Clark in Arabic, "No, you are the mockery...get him
out, out". Abdul Rahman then told Clark, in English, "You come from
America and ridicule the Iraqi people."

Posted by: Good Lt at December 30, 2006 12:52 PM (D0TMh)

19 Pinochet?
Duvalier?
Mobutu?
Stroessner?
Banzer?

What, no Castro? No Ceacescu? No Pol Pot? LOL. You get the idea. These are darlings of the Left and are never mentioned by them.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2006 12:54 PM (8e/V4)

20 Four lawyers and a judge murdered during this farce of justice.

Rhetorical nonsense. For every lawyer that was killed, another one replaced him. Saddam got better representation that I'll ever be able to afford-- and I'm not a mass murderer.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2006 12:56 PM (8e/V4)

21 Four lawyers and a judge murdered during this farce of justice. How
many children killed in what was once the most developed infrastructure
in the Middle East reduced to poverty and ruin?

Translation - we should have let Saddam continue to fill the mass graves. It was none of our business. Despite his violations of UN resolutions. despite his hostility to his neighbors and the region. Despite his hostility towards us and Israel. Iraq was a peaceful place before the US came along - rainbows, infinite productivity for the world, chocolate rivers and kids flying kites (unless they were Kurds or Shiites).

If they keep going along this route of 'reasoning,' I'm placing bets that the leftards will be defending Hitler by nightfall.

Posted by: Good Lt at December 30, 2006 12:58 PM (D0TMh)

22 Pinochet?

Duvalier?

Mobutu?

Stroessner?

Banzer?

This
list goes on but you get the point. All tolerated and accepted by the
"great democratic nation" when it served their interests.

Let me see if I have your logic right. We are evil for taking Saddam
the tyrant out. We are evil for not taking those other tyrants out. If
we buy their oil at market prices we are stealing their resources. If
we don't buy those resources we are starving their children. Have you
always been a self righteous America hating twit?

what was once the most developed infrastructure in the Middle East

God your stupid. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and now the
big one that will make you cringe....my favorite....Israel. Would you
like to play again.

Posted by: Randman at December 30, 2006 01:10 PM (Sal3J)

23 This is simply my observation, and I mean this to be general, and without intended malice (my bias is not a secret, and isn't the point):

civilbehavior doesn't actually do anything to promote a real discussion around here.

By way of comparison Nikolay (who I hope will not be ofended by my usage of him here) has comments far superior. Though I disagree with him a lot of the time, I would say I find his comments to have some individuality, and thought put into them. He doesn't finish off his comments with "foolish Americans" either.

Now if Nikolay was an English patriot, and said "Rule Britania!" at the end of his comment, he is entitled to his loyalty. If he was french, he could say "Vive La France" or something. Like I say "USA, all the way!" Just who is civilbehavior loyal to? Hmmm.

I don't see Nikolay, or myself using routine and formulaic slander as a feature of every comment. I would say if either of us is getting heavy with slander, it is in reaction to a specific arguement, or emotion, not as part of a dogma of hate. (And Death to AP! OK, so I'm not perfect!)

For example, I might say we need to fight back against the 'Jihadists', but turn around and say we need to try and save the 'moderate Muslims'. This is more of a limitation on language, than a true desire to generalize.

I see dogma in civilbehavior's comments, and to me, that makes them uninteresting. I tend to skip them. When I get to Nikolay, I stop, because there is something to read. I may disagree, and he may recite a leftist talking piont, but he isn't a droid.

I understand that many will feel a need to react to civilbehavior. At times one accidentally notices the dead and irrelevant horse he keeps beating, and must, out of shock, say something.

I found PuddleDuck at least a hundred times more interesting than civilbehavior, and I disagreed with him lots. I kinda miss him. I feel that way about No Fear.

So it's not about ideology. civilbehavior is boring! I wouldn't miss him. I wouldn't notice if he disappeared. I usually only notice him when Jesusland Carlos, or Jeff Bargholz reacts to him, because THEY ARE NOT BORING!

My advice to civilbehavior would be to stop repeating mindless dogmas from the left. Stop saying "foolish Americans" unless you want to attach it to a real sentence. Like "those foolish Americans at 'Daily Kos' really made me mad today!"

Do some of your own research. Have a point of view that is your own, and not borrowed from Michael Moores collection of leftist CrackerJack toys. In short, unplug yourself from the matrix.

One of my main dogmas is that I talk to much

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 30, 2006 03:09 PM (2OHpj)

24 Yeah, the phony Israeli-owned neocon Right loves the failed war. As the Russian press said, this is not a milestone but yet another
millstone re US occupation. As a Buchanan Traditional Rightist
I oppose the war and the Empire and yes, as Buchanan explained
(and the America Firsters of both Right and Left then agreed) Hitler
was no threat to a strongly defended America had we stayed out
of THAT war too-for which France and the bulk of Europe no
longer seem to thank us!

As to Iraq, many of Saddam's worst enemies long for his rule by
way of comparison to the essential long-term anarchy Bush and
his neocons implanted in Iraq. The Lancet study has been backed by most of the world's leading epidemiologists who have studied
it-and that means the totals of innocents killed resembles the above
quoted.
40% of Iraq's professional class have voted with their feet and fled
Iraq. The Shias who dominate the ineffectual government are
pro-Iranian and have every intention of instituting a system which
is even stricter than Baathism-already noticeable in the Iraqi
women who are now veiled and have less rights in marital law,for example.
Yet the 20% (and that is all you Bushies compose of the electorate,give or take) go on crowing about the punishment
of Saddam as if it will usher in peace to a destroyed nation.
Less than 50% of all self-indentified conservatives still support
the war and the February Zogby Poll of US troops in Iraq
revealed 72% believed the mission would have failed if Iraq was
not stable by December 2006,and beleiving they should leave then if instability still reamined. It does. So the chickenhawks and others
on this site who do not recognize an Iranian victory as well as
an insurgency which has fought the US to a successful stalemate
for nearly four years should start reading amconmag.com for the
harsh truth.

Posted by: Ken Hoop at December 30, 2006 03:36 PM (DZbll)

25 Ken Hoop;

Buchanan was wrong about Hitler if he said that.

Go find out more about the concept of the 'World Island'.

Also consider the sheer quantity of materials Hitlers Germany fought against, and how much of it we supplied. Most of the weapons used (and to a large degree even in the USSR) were produced by America. Every ally used American equipment in combination with their blood. They died till we could mobilize trained military that could help.

If we had skipped out in the 1940's, we would have later ended up fighting Nazi's coming up from mexico, and down from Canada, not to mention the Japanese imperialists. I bet we would have been glad we didn't waste our energy helping out earlier. Heaven forbid we should have fought them 'over there'.

Also consider the enslavement of Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, moving on to South America ... while we sit on our hands claiming we are doing the right thing? Just minding our own business?

Zogby is biased, and the Zogby polling style produces the results Zogby wants them to.

As for your claims about Iran, and the Insurgency, I credit you that Bush has failed. He should have taken the gloves off, and kept them off until both iraq, and Iran had clearly been crushed, and had surrendered. Yes, I said Iran.

However Bush's failed to keep defeatists at home muzzled! Yes I said Muzzled! We are at war! There are requirements of all people of every station, in a war! If you aren't goint to help, SIT DOWN, AND SHUT UP!

Bush failed when he involved the UN. He failed when he defined the captured terrorists as enemy combatants, instead of enemy soldiers. He failed when he didn't attach the realese of those POW's to the defeat of the Taleban, Iraq, and Iran. He should have made it clear that enemies loyal to Hamas, and Hezbollah would be treated the same.

As far as I'm concerned, any Islamist taken on US soil should be held as a POW, until the war against the parties I listed is over.

Further, Bush failed when he neglected to mention that the Gitmo creatures are still fightinfg a war against us. They want to die fighting their jailers, or they want to get out and do some real damage. These are not SHOPLIFTERS! They are jihadist against the west. For them the war will not be over till they die. There is no releasing them unless they know they are defeated.

Getting out is stupid. We need to mass up, and take out Iran, and capture the evidence to go after all their little pawns, like Hezbollah, and Syria. We need to FIGHT the war! Not play act it. The only stalemate is political. The left has got you believing that we have lost.

If we are only 'losing' we can fix that. Frankly, the Democrats can only make it worse. Buchanan can only make it worse by making more useless comments.

Buchanan has picked up a nasty aroma, and I no longer like him. I don't like quiters, and I don't like people who walk past a mugging, and pretend it isn't their business. Like Hitler wasn't our business.

Have a good one.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 30, 2006 03:47 PM (2OHpj)

26 Hey Ken , take your stupid bogus polls and Hoop them up your ass.
You think you speak for the people like your pig Rodham? YOU DON'T.

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY IS A PERPETUAL FRAUD.

DEMOCRATS ARE LIARS AND CRIMINAL FRAUDS.

OVER 90% OF THE PUNKASS POLL LOVING MSM ARE DEMOCRATS.

OVER 85% OF FELONS VOTE FOR THE RATS , JUST ASK PIG RODHAM CLINTON AND FRAUD KERRY.

So which which one are you? A liar , felon, stupid or all the above?

Posted by: Rob LA Ca. at December 30, 2006 04:35 PM (wuhXN)

27 shorter Ken: it's all the Jooooo0000oooo00ssssss!!!!! fault.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2006 04:45 PM (8e/V4)

28 New Bumpersticker idea:

"Saddam died, Democrats cried!"

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 30, 2006 06:09 PM (2OHpj)

29 LOL! Where can I buy one of those Michael?

Posted by: Randman at December 30, 2006 07:16 PM (Sal3J)

30 Gentleman Jerk:

Are you defending the intimidation of lawyers and judges by murder? Does the fact that there were a legion of people ready to take their place at great personal risk somehow make the trial a farce?

Are you saying Hussein was innocent?

Iraq under Hussein was never even close to being the Middle East's most developed infrastructure. Even the original Iraq democracy created by the British was a joke compared to Israel or even the other big oil producing islamopithecine countries.

Iraq's infrastructure, economy, oil production, and per capita income have all improved exponentially since Hussein was deposed. You can thank George Bush for that. While you're at it, thank him for handing Iraq one of those democracies you moonbats are always screeching about.

Let's see who can we compare Hussein to:

Hitler
Tojo
Mussolini

The people you mentioned were loathed but tolerated by America. They were never removed from power by America. They were never darlings of the right, either.

Let's see who we can compare you to:

Hitler
Lenin
Stalin
Mao
Castro
Pol Pot
Kim Jung Ill
Robert Mugabe
etc.

This list goes on but you get the point. All embraced and celebrated by the "morally superior" left despite their manifold crimes. What hypocrisy.

Leftists all, and also history's most prolific murderers. More than 300 million in the last century alone.

I'm sorry, but it simply does not make me feel safer in my home knowing that raging cretins like you have the capacity to vote.

Hussein the genocidal tyrant is dead, and Bush is not the devil. Get used to it, little man.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 30, 2006 09:55 PM (abVz3)

31 Ken Poop:

An article on the well deserved death of Saddam Hussein wouldn't be complete without an anti-Semite crawling out of the gutter. Thanks for spreading the world's oldest and most pernicious libel.

Buchanon is a crank and a hatemonger. He's so far to the paleocon right that he's crossed the top of the circle into leftyland. Nobody who thinks Hitler wasn't a threat to America is rational enough to take seriously. Then there's that inconvenient fact of Hitler declaring war on America.

I guess the only thing that could make WWII worthwhile would be the thanks of France and the other Eurotrash countries. That should become the focus of U.S. foreign policy: convincing countries that suck to love us.

The only thing less reliable than a Zogby poll is the Lancet "study" which was debunked the day it was released to loud guffaws and knee slapping.

What the polls are deliberately skewed to conceal is the fact that only the lunatic fringe wants America to cut n' run from Iraq.

Your election figures are equally spurious. Bush won both of his elections with a clear majority, and only 70 million people out of a population of 300 million voted in the last congressional elections. If it weren't for the constant anti-Bush indoctrination of failure and quagmire by the Establishment Media, the Dhimmicrats would never have won Congress.

No worries. We're just two days away from the Djimmies taking office and transforming America into Utopia.

Saddam's worst enemy was Iran. You claim Iran pines for Hussein's return, but is trying to conquer Iraq. Which one is it, you dyslexic moron?

It never ceases to amaze me that chickenshits like you can claim the terrorists ("insurgents" my ass,) have fought America to a stalemate rather than the Establishment Media. Your beloved "insurgents have failed to accomplish a single one of their stated goals. Elections were held, a Constitution drafted, infrastructure built from the ground up because Hussein never had one, the rial's value up, agriculture and commerce up, economy up, oil production up, a free press and media up, etc., etc., etc.

The Coalition has accomplished every goal it laid out so far. The only goal left is to leave Iraq sttanding on it's own two feet, but maggots like you are trying to take that away from them. I'll be sure to read acumrag.com for the truth.

What makes you think Bush is going to let the mullahs in Iran continue their misrule. He has two more years in office, Iran is surrounded by battle hardened veterans, and Iraq will soon be largely self sufficient.

Bush says he will probably send more troops to Iraq--which borders Iran, by the way. Gee, I wonder why?

There's no excuse for going apoplectic over the execution of a genocidal monster who fed live people to dogs and used power tools on children. You are beneath contempt.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 30, 2006 11:04 PM (abVz3)

32 It's these ignorant Un-American stupid POS's that are
destroying this Country and I wish our Dictator in Chief would start
feeding them feet first in to wood shippers. Then execute the
Traitorcrats that keep commiting treason and undermining our President
in a time of War.

Uhhh ... wait a second.... if he really was a dictator like the
Democrats claim then none of the above would be taking place and the
Media is over 90% democrat. It's the Democrats and their 90% of the MSM
that is dreaming of a Democrat Dictatorship. They have already talked
about banning Republicans from running for office.

When will be ok to exterminate these sick fucks or throw them in unpadded cells?

Does the false claim of "Freedom of Speach" by the party
of Criminal Democrat Frauds trump acts of TREASON , SEDITION and
MALICIOUS LIBEL?

Nov 7th was a result of allowing liars to lie and cheaters to
cheat until they created the conditions where they all got it just
right. Democrats celebrate their unmeritted and undeserved victory and
our Country will suffer from it once again as we are still suffering
from the damage of 8 years of the criminal Clintons.

Posted by: Rob LA Ca. at December 31, 2006 12:40 AM (wuhXN)

33 28 New Bumpersticker idea:

"Saddam died, Democrats cried!"

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 30, 2006 06:09 PM

29 LOL! Where can I buy one of those Michael?

Posted by: Randman at December 30, 2006 07:16 PM

SORRY Randman, but I only just thought of it. I'll have to see what it costs to make up some, and if I can run some off I'll send you one. If you do it first, keep me in mind, that's all I ask

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 31, 2006 05:04 AM (2OHpj)

34 ..
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
admire brutal dictators

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
mourn evil tyrants...
..

Posted by: USpace at January 01, 2007 06:08 PM (HMm2Y)

35 The Left wouldn't be saying a damn thing against Saddam's execution if it happened under a President Clinton, Gore or Kerry. Since it happens under a President Bush the Left shows their Hypocrisy, don't forget when Clinton was President Saddam was a threat and had to be removed aka the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act. Bush is President Saddam isn't a danger, Iraq is a country with Rainbows and sunshine under Saddam's regime..

Posted by: Johnny Utah at January 01, 2007 08:31 PM (27PLw)

36 Jeff and Rob La-the only reason I bother with you guys is I know how appalled you are going to be at the war's outcome-and I could care less who you blame. See, I'm further to the so-called "right" than you on the Mexican invasion/illegal immigration. You support
the war of a president who is SOFT on the real battle which can
unravel American apart at the seams if it loses, and you grumble because he doesn't declare a police state and imprison war opponents. This tell me all I need to know about your intelligence. You believe a softie on immigration a cheap labor lovin' middel of the roader, has the balls to attempt to round up war opponents?

Like Buchanan says, Bush and the neocons want to protect Israel's borders more than America's borders. The Iraq War was lost in 2003, the Sunni insurgency has years of life left in it until the
Shia-dominated Iraqi government grants it amnesty, including killers of US troops. Whatcha' gonna say when that happens and the new
Iraq government is as anti-American as Saddam was? Much to Iran's delight.

Oh, Jeff-I didn't say Iran wanted Saddam back, only that many Iraqi Shias have been quoted as saying as much as they hated Saddam, he at least kept law and order and didn't kill you unless you crossed him. America has created the anarchial law of the jungle with 650,000 innocents killed-a tally worse than Saddam's per time occupied by far..But no matter, Iran wins, the Sunni insurgency gets amnesty and the Israeli owned neocons lose.
Put the troops on the Rio Grande where they might win, but let
'em force Israel off the West Bank on their way home.

Posted by: Ken Hoop at January 02, 2007 02:50 PM (DZbll)

37 Ken: I have to laugh that you say America is adhering to some law of the jungle.

That sort of law is what the Jihadis are operating under.

You seem so eager to blame America that you have no sight of the real problem... the revival of Islam from a 200 year nap.

This "war" is not going to be over anytime soon. Indeed it's been waging since 700AD.

Posted by: James A Pacella at January 02, 2007 07:20 PM (WFl1e)

38 James Pacella says the war has been on since 700AD. Funny how the US wasn't involved from 1776 until 2003,but Jimmy infers
from now on we must be. With a depleted military and 20%
war support for Bush, I doubt it, James.

Posted by: Ken Hoop at January 03, 2007 04:47 PM (7GYBH)

39 Ken Hoop:

Study, William Eaton, Tripoli, and the United States Marine Corps. Muslims chose to demand tribute from America, when our nation was still in diapers. WE were declared war on.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 05, 2007 05:03 PM (2OHpj)

40 Were we? I missed the Congressional war response.Let's return
to the post-Bush and many other US officials have retreated from their initial joy at the Saddam execution and are expressing regret.
Must have got a touch of that "Baker realism."

Posted by: Ken Hoop at January 05, 2007 05:23 PM (7GYBH)

41 "Baker" realists apparently don't pay very good attention. You took a shot at James Pacella. He is correct in that Islam is at war with the world, and it doesn't care much if you want to be involved or not.

As for Iraq, we had, and still have plenty of good reasons to be taking action. Deny all you like. baker, like Buchanan is not expressing wisdom.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 05, 2007 09:59 PM (2OHpj)

42 Ken Hoop:

I think your a liberal trying to dress yourself as a Conservative. I'd like to know what you call yourself, and how you define that. You use what seem to be core liberal talking points, so its hard to believe your not play acting.

And seriously, you should consider the high price of isolationism, and apathy. The world is far to small for these concepts to survive.

USA, all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 05, 2007 10:13 PM (2OHpj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

269kb generated in CPU 0.0818, elapsed 0.1257 seconds.
55 queries taking 0.0669 seconds, 548 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

April 12, 2007

April 11, 2007

March 26, 2007

March 13, 2007

March 06, 2007

March 05, 2007

March 04, 2007

February 24, 2007

February 13, 2007

February 11, 2007

February 09, 2007

February 08, 2007

February 03, 2007

February 01, 2007

January 31, 2007

January 28, 2007

January 24, 2007

January 12, 2007

January 10, 2007

January 05, 2007

December 31, 2006

December 30, 2006

Recent Comments