Among other effective notes in Barack Obama’s convention address, he took on directly the GOP’s attacks on the Democratic Party’s patriotism, saying:
“The times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same partisan playbook. So let us agree that patriotism has no party. I love this country, and so do you, and so does John McCain. The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America — they have served the United States of America.”
He’s not going to let McCain get away with questioning his patriotism.
As this blog notes, John Kerry — in his strong speech, which didn’t get as much attention as it deserved — also said important things about the meaning of patriotism, and he challenged those who, four years ago, turned his Vietnam protest into something un-American:
“Years ago when we protested a war, people would weigh in against us, saying, ‘My country right or wrong.’ Our answer? Absolutely, my country right or wrong. When right, keep it right. When wrong, make it right. Sometimes loving your country demands you must tell the truth to power.”
Amen.
275 Comments
Randy you are one hypocritical piece of work. You do not mean that, you rather mean “make it left.” I stood up against the state for what I perceived to be right, and what the majority of Americans at that time perceived to be right (against abortion at Tillers). Judge Paul Clark even ruled for me, calling the arrests unconstitutional.
I also went to jail (civil contempt) in my stand against forced pledges of allegiance to unconstitutional federal orders. I was exonerated when Kelly’s order was struck down.
But you and the Eagle pilloried me — 12 years later.
So set down and shut it, Randy. You are showing your left cheek to the world.
Bryan J. Brown
“He’s not going to let McCain get away with questioning his patriotism.”
_________________________________________________
Of course, McCain has been very clear about his criticism of Obama. He questions his judgment and experience, not his patriotism.
The democratic playbook does not allow a candidate to address valid criticism, you misdirect and whine. Good to see that Randy isn’t deviating from the failed policies of the past.
The difference is Dr. Scholfield, is that patriotic Americans walk the talk. They don’t have to make any extra effort to show their patriotism, it’s part of their character, part of their way of life.
Being a part time patriot is an excuse for the apathetic and the disobedient.
Spitting on the flag one day and giving mock praise the next just because someone you know is watching is not patriotism, it’s patronizing and deceitful.
One thing the Liberals of today have never understood is how our forefathers were patriotic regardless of position and weren’t afraid to show their patriotism.
The so-called intellectual elite of the liberal mindset (so-called, because most of them are frauds) think it’s cool to be reactionaries while fist bumping the Marxist philosophy and generally playing the anarchist in a system that requires consistent behavior and cooperation.
There is no such thing as a weekend patriot or a patriot of convenience. Either you are or you aren’t.
Well, no open topic yet. Here’s a story about New Orleans levies. Only a tiny piece of the puzzle, I admit
http://www.nola.com/hurricane/index.ssf/2008/08/corps_levee_officials_prepare.html
Also ran across a story: Inadequate Dykes Failed to Protect New Orleans.”
but which country does he love? The former Democrat deputy attorney general of Pennsylvania, Philip Berg, has filed a lawsuit against Obama..claiming, among other things:
1. Where was Obama born? Hawaii; an island off of Hawaii; Kenya; Canada; or ?
2. Was he a citizen of Kenya, Indonesia and/or Canada?
3. What was the early childhood of Obama in Hawaii; in Kenya; in Indonesia when he was adopted; and later, back to Hawaii?
4. An explanation as to the various names utilized by Obama that include: Barack Hussein Obama; Barry Soetoro; Barry Obama; Barack Dunham; and Barry Dunham.
5. Illinois Bar Application – Obama fails to acknowledge use of names other than Barack Hussein Obama, a blatant lie.
reference: Berg vs. Obama, Civil Action No. 08-cv-4083, seeking a Declaratory Judgment and an Injunction that Obama does not meet the qualifications to be President of the United States. Filed 8/21/08
And the right continues to be a total piece of trash.
Bjb, nobody questions your right to protest abortion, it is the MANNER IN WHICH YOU DO IT.
Kerry tried to stop a mistake in the war and save real lives. You tried to stop women from making choices that have saved their lives. Always the potential child over the person.
Raptor- what a load of crap. Keep spouting lies.
Where oh where have the open threads gone. Oh where oh where can they be???????????
Two threads today isn’t going to cut it.
. . . and the right doesn’t spread their evil brand of patriotism? Like accusing anyone not going along with the war in Iraq as being, “Cheese eating, surrender monkeys?” I seriously doubt the right has any business questioning anyone’s patriotism, when theirs at times falls along nazi lines. The lock-step, war mongering right seems to think anyone not agreeing with them is some kind of second rate citizen.
Then there’s the ridiculous right with their full blown nonsense prattle claiming Obama isn’t a citizen of the United States, is a Muslim terrorist, is baby killer, ad infinitum. My suggestion is you take a good look in the mirror prior to blasting anyone’s patriotism, because yours is hardly the kind this country needs.
Real and false patriotism seems to be in one’s mind at times. Many whom waved the flag and had the magnetic sticker on the sides of the cars would say they did it out of support and patriotism for this nation.
Flags sells were low and carried in stock more out of a false sense of patriotism before 9-11 2001 afterwards the stores could not keep them in stock.
“Winning and Losing” the terms do not seem to have definitions that all can agree on. It is a fine hair to split to say that one is willing to have this country lose but then claim you are not questioning that person’s patriotism. To say you question their judgment in such matters as the invasion and the occupation of Iraq. Implied that somehow your judgment is based on something other then the facts of the case.
To argue that it is more important to continue to go after those in one country that did not attack us. Over going after those that did in another country makes no sense. I once compare the thought that we declared Iraq to be the central front in the war on terrorism. Is like a Police department saying that because they choose to only enforce the laws in a certain part of the city. That all crime must be committed there!
Oh but Bin Laden said that Iraq is the central front he even asked for voluntaries to go there! Stop and think about that for a minute! If you see someone as your enemy and wish to hurt and kill them. Would lying to your enemy seem to be out of bounds? And these people are willing and eagers to die for their cause, so what is a few to make us dance to their calling? We are to follow the bidding of President Bin Laden?
A smart man I knew used a trick to get you to do things how he wanted them done. He would explain how it should be done. Than at the end of it say, “That would be the smart way to do it!”. So of course if you did it any other way it would be the same as saying you are dumb.
I have gotten to wordy and even if you are still reading anything I write I lost you after the first paragraph.
But saying that if you want to stop doing something that was wrong in the first place in favor of doing the right thing. And calling it a matter of patriotism is calling into the question of the patriotism of anyone whom disagrees.
Raptor is a rascist Bush whore.
#
JMWalker
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:34 am | Permalink
. . . and the right doesn’t spread their evil brand of patriotism? Like accusing anyone not going along with the war in Iraq as being, “Cheese eating, surrender monkeys?” I seriously doubt the right has any business questioning anyone’s patriotism, when theirs at times falls along nazi lines. The lock-step, war mongering right seems to think anyone not agreeing with them is some kind of second rate citizen.
Then there’s the ridiculous right with their full blown nonsense prattle claiming Obama isn’t a citizen of the United States, is a Muslim terrorist, is baby killer, ad infinitum. My suggestion is you take a good look in the mirror prior to blasting anyone’s patriotism, because yours is hardly the kind this country needs.
——————-
How’s the banana and cheese supply in the Walker household? :D
Reguliar has ALWAYS been a Bush whore.
It’s okay KansasNative, we’ll find who you are as well and make you more personally responsible for your posts when your real name gets exposed.
Reguliar, threatening to kill (like you did) some one is against the law.
Posting opinions is not.
How’s the banana and cheese supply in the Walker household? :D
—————————————————–
How’s the supply of gas for your nazi ovens, reg?
#
KansasNative
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:43 am | Permalink
Reguliar, threatening to kill (like you did) some one is against the law.
Posting opinions is not.
——————
Start worrying runt, the clock is running.
#
JMWalker
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:44 am | Permalink
How’s the banana and cheese supply in the Walker household? :D
—————————————————–
How’s the supply of gas for your nazi ovens, reg?
==========================
Tiller has the monopoly on human incinerators in Wichita, not me.
Will you put me in your Nazi oven Reguliar or just how WILL you kill me?
#
Regular
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:46 am | Permalink
#
JMWalker
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:44 am | Permalink
How’s the banana and cheese supply in the Walker household? :D
—————————————————–
How’s the supply of gas for your nazi ovens, reg?
==========================
Tiller has the monopoly on human incinerators in Wichita, not me.
======================================================
Typical right wing maneuver, change the subject.
Reguliar, you threatened to kill me so when and how?
#
JMWalker
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:48 am | Permalink
#
Regular
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:46 am | Permalink
#
JMWalker
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:44 am | Permalink
How’s the banana and cheese supply in the Walker household? :D
—————————————————–
How’s the supply of gas for your nazi ovens, reg?
==========================
Tiller has the monopoly on human incinerators in Wichita, not me.
======================================================
Typical right wing maneuver, change the subject.
———————–
I didn’t change the subject, I addressed it directly.
Drink some more coffee Walker and have a cheese and banana sandwich. :D
#
KansasNative
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:48 am | Permalink
Reguliar, you threatened to kill me so when and how?
——————-
I don’t recall such a statement. Why don’t you go find it and re-post it, so we may examine the content.
Come on Reguliar you afraid to admit that you threatened to kill me?
Did I copy your post and turn it over to authorities?
Hmmmm.
#
KansasNative
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:51 am | Permalink
Come on Reguliar you afraid to admit that you threatened to kill me?
Did I copy your post and turn it over to authorities?
Hmmmm.
—————–
As I said, find it and post it and let’s examine the content Chas, I mean KansasNative. :)
Now everyone can see why Reguliar is called a liar.
Caught in a crime…deny, deny, deny…just like Bush, Reagan, etc.
#
KansasNative
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:54 am | Permalink
Now everyone can see why Reguliar is called a liar.
Caught in a crime…deny, deny, deny…just like Bush, Reagan, etc.
——————————–
As I said, find it and post it and let’s examine the content Chas, I mean KansasNative. :)
You’ll see it and remember it soon enough.
There will be a knock on your door.
#
KansasNative
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:51 am | Permalink
Come on Reguliar you afraid to admit that you threatened to kill me?
Did I copy your post and turn it over to authorities?
Hmmmm.
The statements and words in bold are classic Chas.
It appears that our fake minister is not only a pervert who constantly refers to my sister in disgusting sexual manner, it shows that he is one of the multi-nic posting Libs on this blog that have severe personality disorders.
So Chas, now is the time to quit your multi-nicking perversions, before you get your ass handed to you in a very public manner.
I didn’t change the subject, I addressed it directly.
Drink some more coffee Walker and have a cheese and banana sandwich. :D
=================================================
Going from your nazi oven to tiller is not changing the subject? You right wingers are even more stupid than I thought. Logic indeed plays no part in your thoughts, does it.
#
JMWalker
Posted August 30, 2008 at 8:02 am | Permalink
I didn’t change the subject, I addressed it directly.
Drink some more coffee Walker and have a cheese and banana sandwich. :D
=================================================
Going from your nazi oven to tiller is not changing the subject? You right wingers are even more stupid than I thought. Logic indeed plays no part in your thoughts, does it.
—————
No, it’s not changing the subject. You brought up ovens and I informed you of the frequent user of said ovens in the City of Wichita.
“Reading is fundamental.”
“Reading is fundamental.”
=============================================
So is logic. Take a class.
KansasNative
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:51 am | Permalink
Come on Reguliar you afraid to admit that you threatened to kill me?
Did I copy your post and turn it over to authorities?
Hmmmm.
The statements and words in bold are classic Chas.
It appears that our fake minister is not only a pervert who constantly refers to my sister in disgusting sexual manner, it shows that he is one of the multi-nic posting Libs on this blog that have severe personality disorders.
So Chas, now is the time to quit your multi-nicking perversions, before you get your ass handed to you in a very public manner.
—————-
KansasNative aka Chas, got vewy vewy quiet. :)
KansasNative
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:51 am | Permalink
Come on Reguliar you afraid to admit that you threatened to kill me?
Did I copy your post and turn it over to authorities?
Hmmmm.
The statements and words in bold are classic Chas.
Does it sting Chas?
I don’t think Kansas Native is Chas. Regular, hypocrite much?
i DON’T approve of any nic switching. Too immature.
Dog & JMW- good posts.
#
Political_mama
Posted August 30, 2008 at 8:21 am | Permalink
I don’t think Kansas Native is Chas. Regular, hypocrite much?
i DON’T approve of any nic switching. Too immature.
Dog & JMW- good posts.
====================
I say he is, just like you and the other Libs accused me of being every other poster on this blog, when I only posted under one nic.
Hypocrite
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
good one Reg!
Leave it to the libs to blame conservatives on something they never did. It is so obvious that Regular never threatened to kill JMWalker, but JMWalker keeps accusing him of it.
Also, JMWalker, you brought up the ovens and Regular just told the truth about the ovens that Tiller uses on the innocent.
About patriotism, I think that McCain’s VP pick is a true patriot. She knows how important our right to bear arms is. What you left don’t understand is that allowing or giving over our rights to the government only encourages the government to take away more of those rights.
The next rights they want to take away is our freedom of speech. That is what the fairness doctrine and the hate crimes are about. They will be used against anyone who doesn’t agree with them or says the same things they do. And you just wait, it will be brought against you some day too. All they will need is an accusation against you and your life will be ruined too. They don’t care if you are a liberal or a conservative, if you are brought up on charges you are fair game.
Since WHEN is GIVING UP our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS considered PATRIOTISM? Not only do you give up those rights to those you disagree with, you are giving up those same rights to those you agree with and finally in the end when you have no other choice, you will find out that you gave them up for yourself too.
Maybe you need to understand that patriotism is allowing others the same freedoms that you want for yourself too. If you don’t want them to have freedom and you want to take it away from them, you will be taking that very same freedom away from yourself. A true PATRIOT wants that same FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE.
The clock is running KansasNative. :)
but which country does he love? The former Democrat deputy attorney general of Pennsylvania, Philip Berg, has filed a lawsuit against Obama..claiming, among other things:
Oh, give me a break.
I really thought you were above this kind of sheer idiocy, Rap.
The lines in question were originally tested out not before a friendly audience at the Democratic convention, but before the VFW convention in Florida.
They were receptive.
#
Regular
Posted August 30, 2008 at 8:24 am | Permalink
#
Political_mama
Posted August 30, 2008 at 8:21 am | Permalink
I don’t think Kansas Native is Chas. Regular, hypocrite much?
i DON’T approve of any nic switching. Too immature.
Dog & JMW- good posts.
====================
I say he is, just like you and the other Libs accused me of being every other poster on this blog, when I only posted under one nic.
Hypocrite
======================================================
You posted as me, republican, JM, and a host of other nics, and you’re calling P M a hypocrite?
Reading is fundamental, as is logic. You would do well to learn both.
TheBorgHunter
Posted August 30, 2008 at 9:01 am | Permalink
Leave it to the libs to blame conservatives on something they never did. It is so obvious that Regular never threatened to kill JMWalker, but JMWalker keeps accusing him of it.
======================================================
Hey, assh**e, reg never threatened me, nor have I ever accused him of doing so. Get your facts straight, or STFU!
Craptor, Come on out in the sun for awhile I see the dark side has taken over your mind. Course if you do then your redneck might show, 2nd thought stay inside your hatred is of no purpose or solution there!!!!!!!!! Or here for that matter
#
JMWalker
Posted August 30, 2008 at 9:28 am | Permalink
======================================================
You posted as me, republican, JM, and a host of other nics, and you’re calling P M a hypocrite?
Reading is fundamental, as is logic. You would do well to learn both.
————————
I did it once as a joke, didn’t attempt to hide that I did it and then apologized several times for doing it.
Evidently, humor nor acceptance of apologies have no place in your heart.
Bitterness, on the other hand, appears to incorporate the most of your decision-making.
“About patriotism, I think that McCain’s VP pick is a true patriot. She knows how important our right to bear arms is. What you left don’t understand is that allowing or giving over our rights to the government only encourages the government to take away more of those rights.”
Nonsense. Is the the same “right” that wants to pass a constitutional amendment forcing all states and all localities to limit marriage to a man and a woman? Is this the same right that confuses giving states greater autonomy in church and state and other civil rights issues with greater freedom (yeah, allow the states to take away federal guarantees of constitutional rights, THAT makes sense)? Is this the same right, represented by the current administration, that has made an unprecedented power grab at the federal level so that a president actually thinks he has the authority to change the intent of congress passed laws with a signing statement? And are there any common sense limitations to the “right to bear arms” at all that people on the “right” would agree to? If I can make a nuclear missle, is that covered? How about an anti-tank gun? Should anyone be able to purchase or carry arms without any sort of checks at all (not even those most CC advocates seem to be in favor of)? When someone says it is the “Libs” who are responsible for all attempts to limit freedom, I see the rantings of a fanatic who has given up all ability to examine an issue or the implications of policies beyond their reflexive self identified position on the political spectrum.
The difference between the “left” and the “right” is not that one wants to take away “rights”, it’s which rights they want to take away (and no, while that may sound like a libertarian sentiment, I am most certainly not that).
Hey, assh**e, reg never threatened me, nor have I ever accused him of doing so. Get your facts straight, or STFU!
———————————————————
Hey, JMWalker, glad you agree with me that is just what i said, ”
It is so obvious that Regular never threatened to kill JMWalker, but JMWalker keeps accusing him of it.
———————————————————
Anyway, enough of that. What do you think of this bozo’s article on patriotism? I noticed that no one else is really talking about it either. I think he is so full of crap. It sounds to me as though he is making all kinds of excuses for Kerry and the likes who burn the flag then say they are patriots.
I think it is okay to say when our country is wrong but you don’t have to spit on it to be heard. There are so many foreigners in other countries that look upon that kind of act with contempt. In their countries they would be imprisoned or even put to death for that kind of act. Then here we are in America with such freedoms and we would have the audacity to spit on our own country that gave us that freedom.
.
I think patriotism is not only being proud of your country but honoring it.
The only time I have ever wanted to burn a flag was when we were considering passing a law against it.
I’m disgusted with my government- and the way bush said the constitution was nothing more than a ‘god damned piece of paper’. You claim your second amendment right to kill people is wonderful- yet, the freedoms written into our constitution are nothing more than training paper for republicans to crap upon.
Faux patriotism (protecting a piece of cloth, having children schooled to swear an oath of allegiance, etc) is the last refuge of scoundrels.
And on THIS forum? Scoundrels is an understatement. Some of the most self proclaimed “patriotic” wrap themselves in the flag to hide the fact that they are the slime of humanity.
P-Momma, you may have a right to your own opinion, but you don’t have a right to your own facts. The President never said that the Constitution was a G/D piece of paper. That is a vicious lie made up and passed around by the left. One of many where this President is concerned. And don’t give me a link to some bogus left wing web site that claims he really did say it. Patriotism is holding your President accountable when he’s wrong and NOT lying about him when he isn’t.
Borgbozo, you still can’t get it right. Is it the fact you can’t read, or is it your conversion by Wango boy to stupidism?
“The next rights they want to take away is our freedom of speech. That is what the fairness doctrine and the hate crimes are about.”
Uhm OK. And what about the proposed flag burning amendment (which is consistently supported on the right)? For that matter, where was the right on the Janet Jackson boob exposure scandal, and how did they operate the FCC (clue: it wasn’t for free wheeling content)? Or Christian Right attempts to remove books from libraries (yes, there have been some attempts from self described social justice leftists, but the numbers are not even close to being the same)? Again, I don’t see the right favoring freedom of speech when they are offended by it.
The Fairness Doctrine regulated content on airwaves that were licensed by the government (because there were a limited number of frequencies being used), and the nature of the regulation actually required an expansion rather than a reduction in content (at least and especially at the time they were imposed). And the historical context of the FCC in doing that comes from a world during the frontier days of radio (although there was some lapse between those days and the FD’s implementation in 1949) when there were a very few powerful and pervasive radio stations that could be very single minded in their content (Do you know who John Brinkley was?). The world is a different place now, but there is still a concern about people getting access to information on multiple sides of an issue on airwaves that are licensed by a government that, depending upon who is in office, may be biased towards one view or the other. Personally, I am more concerned with seeing accurate information than “right” or “left” sides. I am unsure about the fairness doctrine, but I do think some aspects of deregulation (especially in the area of station ownership) have been a clear mistake. The “free market” does not, despite what people claim, favor the desires of customers, it favors cornering the market and being able to make maximum profits for minimal expenditure. The customers have to live with the choices of the owners more than the owners having to provide the customers with the choices that they want. The variety of what can be heard on AM and FM radio has, in my experience, declined greatly in the last twenty years. Satellite radio has somewhat helped with this, and digital radio might do the same thing on a more widespread basis (but not necessarily if the same people own the stations), but the fact of the matter is, all corporate radio station owners seem to care about is having a product that advertisers will advertise on. I personally see little difference in the ultimate result between state owned media that only dissiminates accepted opinions and media owned by autocratic businessmen who market only to one side of the political spectrum. Or does the First Amendment specify that freedom of speech only applies to those who can afford to be heard?
As for your babbling nonsense about Hate Crimes. The fact is that Hate Crimes are already recognized as crimes. One can easily find garbage from organizations such as Stormfront if s/he is inclined to look for it, so “Hate Crimes” have not limited their First Amendment rights. However, crime is not covered by the First Amendment. I see no real logical reason for invoking the First Amendment because someone vandalized property with the intent of intimidating “an undesirable” out of the neighborhood. Crimes committed to fulfill an intent due to hatred of groups of “others” can logically be considered as a seperate category from similar crimes committed for similar purposes, as long as the intent can be established beyond a reasonable doubt. The First Amendment does not say that crimes committed to communicate a political message can not be considered more odious than crimes committed for other reasons. And that is what the vast majority of hate crime legislation covers.
“They will be used against anyone who doesn’t agree with them or says the same things they do.”
[FE]And the above can not be used to describe people on the right.[/FE]
“And you just wait, it will be brought against you some day too. All they will need is an accusation against you and your life will be ruined too. They don’t care if you are a liberal or a conservative, if you are brought up on charges you are fair game.”
So who are “they” again?
“Anyway, enough of that. What do you think of this bozo’s article on patriotism? I noticed that no one else is really talking about it either. I think he is so full of crap. It sounds to me as though he is making all kinds of excuses for Kerry and the likes who burn the flag then say they are patriots.”
[FE]Boy, what an intelligent and thoughtful analysis of Randy’s opening post.[/FE] You do realize that your post and ranting about “Kerry and the likes who burn the flag then say they are patriots” helps to make his point for him, don’t you?
In this country, we have the right to criticize our government. It is the ultimate mark of irony impairment when someone gripes about people practicing that freedom because it is unpatriotic towards the country that gave them that freedom.
Sorry Walker dude, but you’re not even worthing responding to anymore.
It is so amazing how you leftist liberals swear up and down that the right wing conservatives have to rely on Rush or Hannity to get their talking points but you are the ones who rely on your leftist blogs to spout off at those who disagree with you. You don’t even argue or even acknowledge what we say. You say we said something that we didn’t.
Excuse me P_Mom but I said the right to bear arms and the freedom of speech, I did not say the right to kill people. I know it is very hard for you to understand and accept but the “right to bear arms” was created by our ForeFathers so that we could protect ourselves from the government.
If you look at history, you will see that when firearms were taken away from its civilians or they didn’t have them in the first place, it is where dictators have been able to easily rise to leadership such as Hitler, Castro, Hussein, etc.
A true patriot will defend the 2nd Ammendment to the death because without the 2nd Ammendment I guess you would be right then, the constitution would truly then be just a piece of G/D paper.
Oh yeah, btw Quit spouting off that lib lie from your blogs that President Bush said that the constitution was just a piece of G/D/ paper. I think it is you libs that really believe it is just a G/D piece of paper. And maybe that is why you want to take away the 2nd Ammendment after all, so that you can make it just a piece of G/D paper.
Political Mama: “I’m disgusted with my government- and the way bush said the constitution was nothing more than a ‘god damned piece of paper’.
Chris from Mac Town: “President never said that the Constitution was a G/D piece of paper. That is a vicious lie made up and passed around by the left.”
Actually, from what I can find, no one has either verified that Bush made the comment or verified that this claim is a “lie”. I don’t assign it much credibility because it has never been confirmed, but it would be misleading to say that this comment has been positively debunked. But the quote certainly should not be circulated as it is a demonstrated fact that Bush said it.
[FE]BorgHunter, you are really representing the right in a rational and respectful manner that will certainly win converts to your way of thinking.[/FE]
Agnatha, Sounds like you are really angry which I can understand after yesterday’s brilliant move by McCain. However, it will pass. Well, maybe not. If McCain and Palin win, you all might have to see your psychiatrists maybe twice a week instead of once a week.
btw, what about the books that the left tried to have pulled off the shelves by Mark Twain because the Tom Sawyer & Huckleberry Fin series were claimed to be offensive to the black Americans.
And what about laws passed by Louisiana and other states that mandated that no public buildings could be named after anyone who was a slaveholder. Do you remember all the schools named after Washington, Jefferson and other Founding Fathers that had to be renamed at the public expense?
Oh, and the ultimate in “LACK OF TOLERANCE”, is the move by the left to reinstate the UNfairness doctrine to silence those who disagree with them.
And let’s not forget the totally waste of time in trying to remove Indian mascots from sports teams.
It is the left that want the government to come in and tell us what we can and cannot do. Did you know that the right wing conservatives did not try to stop the left from having their own radio stations? They had them but they failed. Radio does not work for the left because they are so full of hate. It is hard to be brilliant, witty and humorous when you are full of hate.
Oh, did anyone see the nice ad that McCain did for Barack Obama the night of Obama’s speech. Now that is what I call the UNhate crime and FAIRNESS DOCTRINE and FIRST CLASS all the way. I don’t think the left could ever bring themselves to run an ad like this for McCain or anyone opposed to them. Here is the link to the nice ad:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Multimedia/Player.aspx?guid=392f30e7-e8c3-4e23-8384-37eabb4e96b8
“Agnatha, Sounds like you are really angry which I can understand after yesterday’s brilliant move by McCain.”
That is the most amusing act of projection I have ever seen. Yes, McCain was “brilliant”.
“btw, what about the books that the left tried to have pulled off the shelves by Mark Twain because the Tom Sawyer & Huckleberry Fin series were claimed to be offensive to the black Americans.”
Interesting. You seem to assume that any attempt to ban Huckleberry Finn would be due to leftists who want to strike it due to the racist terminology, which communicates interesting assumptions about what you consider to be the thoughts on race on the left versus the right). Are you saying that people on the right are likely to be unconcerned about racism as a motive for removing books from shelves, even though implied acceptance of homosexuality or immorality is fair game? More to the point, you apparently missed my pointing out that there have been some self described social justice leftists who have tried to remove content. And the fact remains, the Christian Right has tried to remove far more books than the “left”. Look at the entire list of books and the reasons given for trying to remove them.
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/challengedbanned/frequentlychallengedbooks.cfm#tmfcbo2007
“And what about laws passed by Louisiana and other states that mandated that no public buildings could be named after anyone who was a slaveholder. Do you remember all the schools named after Washington, Jefferson and other Founding Fathers that had to be renamed at the public expense?”
Uh huh. Renaming schools and public buildings is a different issue than freedom of speech. Nice red herring. Also interesting, are you arguing that all attempts to respect the feelings of black Americans (misguided or not) come from the left? Is that REALLY what you want to say? And of course, LA is just MA south, right? A hotbed of liberalism.
The rest of your post is a laughable mix of projection, ad hominem, and ipso post facto reasoning.
“It is the left that want the government to come in and tell us what we can and cannot do. Did you know that the right wing conservatives did not try to stop the left from having their own radio stations? They had them but they failed. Radio does not work for the left because they are so full of hate. It is hard to be brilliant, witty and humorous when you are full of hate.”
[FE]Yes, this post just drips with brilliance, wit, and humor.[/FE]
“Oh, and the ultimate in “LACK OF TOLERANCE”, is the move by the left to reinstate the UNfairness doctrine to silence those who disagree with them.”
TOTALLY untrue and you knew it when you made your post.
An uninformed post is an error.
An informed post that is not true is a lie.
The Fairness doctrine silences no voice.
It provides that their must be equal time for all voices.
Why is it that the right is afraid of that?
Could it be because they LIKE the monopoly they have on the airwaves and they FEAR that a public better informed might vote better to their own interests as opposed to the interests of the right?
Why does the right oppose free and equal speech?
Actually Borg, the SCOTUS just ruled that it was NOT to protect us from our own government. I always agreed that was originally what its intent was- but apparently we cannot own the kind of things that would actually let us protect ourselves from government.
The second amendment was written specifically- and been disregarded for its second part. Thanks to a neocon SCOTUS.
Personally I have mixed emotions on the second amendment. I think its all or nothing- we can either defend ourselves from government fully or what is the point?
The NRA gun nuts are just that- they’re nuts. They’re to the guns as the operation rescue is to the Roe standing
Hey Agnatha: #1 rule when one finds oneself in a hole. STOP DIGGING. You are getting your butt kicked something fierce. This is painful to watch. Do yourself a favor and go back to writing pithy letters to the editor. Borg Hunter, you are such a breath of fresh air. We need more like you on this site.
Your #1 fan
Want to know why I can’t stand republicans? Look at the last 16 years of republican policy. Look at Limbaugh, Bush, Rumsfeld, Reagan, Coulter, and the freaks on here.
Its the one place where I completely disagree with Obama. I do NOT want to play nice with them.
We already know that you two are married, so please, give us a break.
Borghunter?
I’m reasonably sure you have posted here before under another screen name.
This would tend to weigh against you when it comes to considering your honesty.
But, ever willing to help, I thought I might help you find a borg.
Get up, and approach your restroom slowly. I think it very likely you will find a borg just above your sink.
For the education of reader? The “borg” were an alien race in a science fiction show.
The borg crushed individuality into a hive mind that spoke with one voice. Dissent was not tolerated.
Because it was not known.
This is much like talk radio. It is a bland mix of right wing opinions that absolutely FEARS a dissenting voice.
The fairness doctrine does more to hunt “borg” than the dishonest poster who claims to hunt them.
BJ says: Could it be because they LIKE the monopoly they have on the airwaves and they FEAR that a public better informed might vote better to their own interests as opposed to the interests of the right?
– - – - – - – - – — – – - — – – - – - – - – - — – - – - – - — -
Could it be that the Left fears that their (potential) voters are too stupid to think for themselves and will fall victim to any silver tongued devil that comes along?
Thats what you lefties have never figured out about Rush and his listeners. When he first burst upon the scene twenty years ago, millions of listeners who heard him for the first time were amazed. Here was somebody who thinks like I do. I just never heard anybody say it on the radio before. We listen to Rush because he agrees with us, not the other way around.
You people on the other hand read books by total idiots like Thomas Frank and come away convinced that Rush and others on the right are some kinda hypnotists who have this power over their listeners to convince them to vote against their best interests. We know perfectly well what are best interests are and they have nothing to do with big government and the likes of the progressive left.
BlueJay, I have never posted under anything but BorgHunter. And I am not the Borg, I am a Borg Hunter. That means that I am hunting all of you libs that walk and talk alike. You sound just like the news media, tv sitcoms, rap songs, movies and yes even those scorned hypocritcal democrats in Washington who lost the public vote twice, in 2000 and 2004, to George W. Bush.
You have been found but I guess it was too late to do anything for you because you have already been assimilated.
Randy
What is a “neighborhood organizer”??
Marxist social engineers, trained by Saul Alinsky, recruited Obama.
Obama was recruited to agitate in Black churches for socialist and Marxist causes. The White radical liberals who recruited Obama could not get into those Churches.
Read Obama’s books, would you?
Read Saul Alinsky, “Rules for Radicals”
Read Malcom X
Listen to Pastor Wright.
Read any of the many books on “Black Liberation Theology”.
Obama went to Louis Farrakhan’s “Million Man March”
Nearly all of the books that Obama, himself, claims he read, and shaped his views, are radical and anti-American to the core!
If we found out that one of our candidates loved sections of “Mein Kampf” we would, rightly, be outraged.
You are extremely biased and extremely lazy.
Obama will say and do what he has to do, trying to get elected.
The fact remains, however, that Obama has surrounded himself with anti-American radicals his entire life.
“Rub raw the resentments of the group” Saul Alinsky, on the job of an “organizer”.
William Ayers stood on the flag to promote his book, “Fugitive Days” —
An interview of Ayers, promoted his book, appeared in the New York Times on 9-11-01.
Ayers, the admitted terrorist, and Obama were friends at that time. Ayers was once Obama’s boss.
Obama has had high praise for William Ayers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=talF7A-7MyM
HLP
Posted August 30, 2008 at 6:20 am | Permalink
“He’s not going to let McCain get away with questioning his patriotism.”
_________________________________________________
Of course, McCain has been very clear about his criticism of Obama. He questions his judgment and experience, not his patriotism.
The democratic playbook does not allow a candidate to address valid criticism, you misdirect and whine. Good to see that Randy isn’t deviating from the failed policies of the past.
____
If McCain questions Obama’s judgment and experience, then McCain will also see why Democrats are questioning Sarah Palin’s judgment and experience – right?
McCain HAS questioned Obama’s patriotism several times and mostly about that flag lapel pin. If McCain is not questioning Obama’s patriotism, then he needs to call off his attack dogs in spreading the rumor Obama was not even born in Hawaii and he is a Muslim.
If the Democratic Playbook has only misdirect and whine in it – then the Republican Playbook must have mislead (lies), fear and intimidation in theirs.
The Bush Administration, which McCain has stated he will continue, has had many failed policies. Unfortunately, the Bush failed policies affected the entire country, not just one political party.
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:39 pm | Permalink
William Ayers stood on the flag to promote his book, “Fugitive Days” —
An interview of Ayers, promoted his book, appeared in the New York Times on 9-11-01.
Ayers, the admitted terrorist, and Obama were friends at that time. Ayers was once Obama’s boss.
Obama has had high praise for William Ayers
___
What about George W. Bush’s grandfather and the Nazis. Is that true also?
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:36 pm | Permalink
Randy
What is a “neighborhood organizer”??
___
Paul – aren’t you heavy into politics and Operation Rescue? Don’t both use neighborhood organizers? Aren’t you a paid Republican shill for this blog ‘neighborhood’?
#
mom
Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:42 pm | Permalink
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:39 pm | Permalink
William Ayers stood on the flag to promote his book, “Fugitive Days” —
An interview of Ayers, promoted his book, appeared in the New York Times on 9-11-01.
Ayers, the admitted terrorist, and Obama were friends at that time. Ayers was once Obama’s boss.
Obama has had high praise for William Ayers
___
What about George W. Bush’s grandfather and the Nazis. Is that true also?
———————
Of course it is not true. You know if it was true, Democratic politicians would be all over like stink on a skunk.
It has been explained many many many many many times to Libs about the facts of events.
But I guess, Libs just like lying so much they keep bringing it up.
Enjoy your status as a liar mom.
Mom
Am I running for President?
Note, I was never a “member” of Operation Rescue.
That is one of the several reasons that Judge Patrick Kelly never had any jurisdiction over me.
Obama is running for President.
Obama’s friends are almost all un-American to the core.
Why is that?
TheBorgHunter
Posted August 30, 2008 at 10:06 am | Permalink
Hey, assh**e, reg never threatened me, nor have I ever accused him of doing so. Get your facts straight, or STFU!
———————————————————
Hey, JMWalker, glad you agree with me that is just what i said, ”
It is so obvious that Regular never threatened to kill JMWalker, but JMWalker keeps accusing him of it.
=======================================================
As I said earlier, I have never accused reg of threatening me. You said I have. Post my threats, borgbrain. Your logic has gone the way of the dodobird.
You wouldn’t be related to reg, would you? You write like he does:-)
Patriotism is holding your President accountable when he’s wrong and NOT lying about him when he isn’t.
__
Chris- then let’s hold George W. Bush accountable and open all those sealed, secret records from the last 7 1/2 years? Are you game for that?
bjb
Posted August 30, 2008 at 6:16 am | Permalink
I also went to jail (civil contempt) in my stand against forced pledges of allegiance to unconstitutional federal orders. I was exonerated when Kelly’s order was struck down.
============================================
Hmmmmmmm —- Franklin and bjb buddies???
#
mom
Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:09 pm | Permalink
Patriotism is holding your President accountable when he’s wrong and NOT lying about him when he isn’t.
__
Chris- then let’s hold George W. Bush accountable and open all those sealed, secret records from the last 7 1/2 years? Are you game for that?
————————-
Sounds like a deal to me.
But how about if you agree to have the thousands of sealed records from the Clinton administration opened up as well? :)
George Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.
His business dealings, which continued until his company’s assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.
The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator’s action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
The debate over Prescott Bush’s behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the “Bush/Nazi” connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis’ plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler’s rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.
Remarkably, little of Bush’s dealings with Germany has received public scrutiny, partly because of the secret status of the documentation involving him. But now the multibillion dollar legal action for damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush’s business history an uncomfortable issue for his grandson, George W, as he seeks re-election.
While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade. The Guardian has seen evidence that shows Bush was the director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation (UBC) that represented Thyssen’s US interests and he continued to work for the bank after America entered the war.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar
“Franklin” snits –
“William Ayers stood on the flag to promote his book…”
Or it was photoshopped.
What’s the penalty for virtual treason?
Virtual hanging?
“Franklin,” you really ought to take a deep breath. And your blood-level meds. And a break.
You’re turning into a self-parody.
franklin – Paul – what makes you a ‘member’ of Operation Rescue? Were you or were you not a part of the protests in front of Tillers?
As for you not running for president – thank God! But you inferred that Obama’s friends are all unAmerican and I was simply bringing up the fact the the Bush family fortune, which helped George W. Bush to the White House, was enhanced by his grandfather’s connections to Nazis. Just Google Prescott Bush and see what comes up. The fact that his assets were seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act was mentioned.
As for REgular – liar is a strong word, don’t you think? Perhaps you are judging me by what you see in your own mirror?
But how about if you agree to have the thousands of sealed records from the Clinton administration opened up as well
Fine with me…then we will get to see the memo that told the Bush Administration about the threat of Bin Laden before 9/11. That would be interesting for the Bush Administration to explain why they didn’t act on it.
JMWalker
Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:13 pm
While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause…
———————-
That’s all that is necessary and you just admitted there is nothing there.
Of course, the reason why Democratic Politicians don’t bring it up, because they know they would be brought to course for slander and libel and lose big time.
So, feel safe on the WE Blog, sort of..from lawsuits involving libel and slander.
Which, btw, the blog doesn’t really save you, it just delays the action.
“Sam Graham-Felsen, one of the official bloggers for Barrack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign, was a self-proclaimed sudent of Karl Marx when he was an undergraduate at Harvard and proudly displayed a Russian Communist flag in his dorm room.
After leaving Harvard, Graham-Felsen published an article in an avowadly socialist magazine, expressing sympathy for the 2006 Paris street riots, which he observed in person, and working as a free-lance writer, he has posted dozens of comments and articles on the blog of the leftist publication The Nation.
Behind the bar in their Quincy House suite at Harvard, Graham-Felsen, a graduate of the class of 2003, hung a Communist Party flag that he and his roommate brought back from Russia, according to an article published in the Harvard Crimson while he was a senior.. The Crimson article also noted that Graham-Felsen’s bookcase in the Quincy House dorm included titles by Karl Marx and Howard Zinn, the socialist political science professor at Boston University known for his anti-American history texts and his extreme anti-war protest activity.”
Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D, The Obama Nation, Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality.
Graham-Felson speaks highly of author Noam Chomsky.
#
mom
Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:15 pm | Permalink
As for REgular – liar is a strong word, don’t you think? Perhaps you are judging me by what you see in your own mirror?
—————————–
Shoe.
Fits.
Wear.
It.
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:06 pm | Permalink
Note, I was never a “member” of Operation Rescue.
That is one of the several reasons that Judge Patrick Kelly never had any jurisdiction over me.
===========================================
bjb AND Franklin both had dealings with Judge kelly?? Hmmmmmmmm……
This has been fun boys, Franklin and Regular, but I need to leave now because I have a life outside of a blog in Wichita Kansas. Just remember, every time you say something about the Democrats, there are just as many examples of the very same type of behavior on the Republican side.
mom
I told the organizers of “Operation Rescue” that I was not sure that getting arrested would help to change the laws, but I did believe in public protest.
I have absolutely NO arrest record, whatsoever.
Judge Patrick Kelly’s illegal order specifically stated that you had to be a “member” of “Operation Rescue” and ingage in illegal activity, such as “tresspassing” to be covered by Kelly’s order.
“An injunction can not issue forth and bind the whole world. Those subject to injunction must be named.” United States Supreme Court.
JM
Ted Kennedy’s father was very friendly towards Hitler, as well, prior to WW2.
So what?
#
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 12:39 pm | Permalink
William Ayers stood on the flag to promote his book, “Fugitive Days” —
An interview of Ayers, promoted his book, appeared in the New York Times on 9-11-01.
Ayers, the admitted terrorist, and Obama were friends at that time. Ayers was once Obama’s boss.
Obama has had high praise for William Ayers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=talF7A-7MyM
===================================================
Brought to you by the american issues project, a group of right wing extremists, who will use any and all tactics to keep a democrat out of office. They will be spreading their putrid brand of hatred from now until the election. They are scumbags like limbaugh, colter and the like rolled into one hate group. Truth is anathema to their way of thinking.
All which makes Wango boy the perfect candidate for admission to the group.
That’s all that is necessary and you just admitted there is nothing there.
Of course, the reason why Democratic Politicians don’t bring it up, because they know they would be brought to course for slander and libel and lose big time.
So, feel safe on the WE Blog, sort of..from lawsuits involving libel and slander.
Which, btw, the blog doesn’t really save you, it just delays the action.
__
I just had to make one more post.
Regular – read the entire article – not just one sentence. And all this talk about lawsuits? I thought Republicans didn’t like all those frivilous lawsuits tying up the courts? There have been books printed about this subject – were those authors successfully sued?
Your entire posting was fear and intimidation – regular tactics of the Republicans. Those things worked in the past but maybe not in this election. Too many people are hurting and struggling to just keep their heads above water. This time around, the common people are mad and they are blaming Bush and the Republicans.
#
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:24 pm | Permalink
JM
Ted Kennedy’s father was very friendly towards Hitler, as well, prior to WW2.
So what?
=========================================================
Exactly, Wango boy. My point exactly. It’s a none issue.
“You people on the other hand read books ”
And that is a negative thing? As opposed to tuning in every day for a dose of unenlightened, unbalanced, self affirmation?
Fairness doctrine “borg” Maybe some truth will set you free. It’s coming soon to a radio near you!
Ted Kennedy’s dad:
“During May of 1938, Kennedy engaged in extensive discussions with the new German Ambassador to the Court of St. James’s, Herbert von Dirksen. In the midst of these conversations (held without approval from the U.S. State Department), Kennedy advised von Dirksen that President Roosevelt was the victim of “Jewish influence” and was poorly informed as to the philosophy, ambitions and ideals of Hitler’s regime. (The Nazi ambassador subsequently told his bosses that Kennedy was “Germany’s best friend” in London.)
Columnists back in the states condemned Kennedy’s fraternizing. Kennedy later claimed that 75% of the attacks made on him during his Ambassadorship emanated from “a number of Jewish publishers and writers. … Some of them in their zeal did not hesitate to resort to slander and falsehood to achieve their aims.” He told his eldest son, Joe Jr., that he disliked having to put up with “Jewish columnists” who criticized him with no good reason.”
http://hnn.us/articles/697.html
mom
I told the organizers of “Operation Rescue” that I was not sure that getting arrested would help to change the laws, but I did believe in public protest.
I have absolutely NO arrest record, whatsoever.
Judge Patrick Kelly’s illegal order specifically stated that you had to be a “member” of “Operation Rescue” and ingage in illegal activity, such as “tresspassing” to be covered by Kelly’s order
____
So you got off on a technicality?
Monkey Hawk
There is NO NEED to “photoshop” William Ayers!
Good grief, Ayers goes out of his way to make people mad. Ayers has spent his entire life doing and saying outrageous things.
Obama advisor and BOSS, William Ayers, standing on the American Flag, to promote his book:
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/August-2001/No-Regrets/
Call Chicago Magazine, and ask if this picture is ligit, would you?
So, like, what happens when a non-issue is posted on WEblog? It suddenly becomes an issue. Lambs to slaughter, and all that:=)))))
“Good grief, Ayers goes out of his way to make people mad. Ayers has spent his entire life doing and saying outrageous things.”
Didn’t you just tell us all the other day Franklinpaulie that THAT is sort of your job on this forum?
Agit prop is your schtick here.
For our readers, agit prop is agitation propaganda.
#
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:33 pm | Permalink
Monkey Hawk
There is NO NEED to “photoshop” William Ayers!
Good grief, Ayers goes out of his way to make people mad. Ayers has spent his entire life doing and saying outrageous things.
Obama advisor and BOSS, William Ayers, standing on the American Flag, to promote his book:
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/August-2001/No-Regrets/
Call Chicago Magazine, and ask if this picture is ligit, would you?
==================================================
Wango boy, it’s only you, and a bunch of right wing morons, pushing this crap. Your fear keeps you from seeking the truth, and keeps you perpetuating mindless prattle thought up by you and groups like american issues project (notice I refuse to cap American, when used in conjunction with the issues project: they do not stand for anything American.).
Put your lead and titanium hat back on, Wango boy, the judge is coming fer ya.
JM
You have no ability to engage in linear logic.
Barrack Hussein Obama, HIMSELF, has extremely radical, and criminal, friends and associations.
That is a proven fact.
In response to those facts, you respond that George W. Bush had a GRANDFATHER who might have been sympathetic to Hitler?
In response to that, I show that Joe Kennedy, TED Kennedy’s Father, was VERY friendly towards Hitler, and actually helped Hitler, diplomatically.
Now? Now you insult me for my take on this stupid issue?
Obama, TODAY, hangs out with radical and violent anti-American lunitics.
That is a fact.
Deal with it.
#
mom
Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:27 pm | Permalink
That’s all that is necessary and you just admitted there is nothing there.
Of course, the reason why Democratic Politicians don’t bring it up, because they know they would be brought to course for slander and libel and lose big time.
So, feel safe on the WE Blog, sort of..from lawsuits involving libel and slander.
Which, btw, the blog doesn’t really save you, it just delays the action.
__
I just had to make one more post.
Regular – read the entire article – not just one sentence. And all this talk about lawsuits? I thought Republicans didn’t like all those frivilous lawsuits tying up the courts? There have been books printed about this subject – were those authors successfully sued?
Your entire posting was fear and intimidation – regular tactics of the Republicans. Those things worked in the past but maybe not in this election. Too many people are hurting and struggling to just keep their heads above water. This time around, the common people are mad and they are blaming Bush and the Republicans.
———————
No, just the Democrats are mad and whining.
Those of who plan, save and prepare for down economic times are doing just fine.
Those of us who are not “upside down” in their car payments, not up to their necks in credit card debt and did not make piss poor decisions on buying a home, are doing just fine.
Those of us who understand the situation in Iraq has turned out to be a success, understand that the whining Democrats no longer have anything in Iraq to whine about, so they choose other subjects to whine about.
Whining about their own self-inflicting wounds are what Democrats good at.
Perpetual whiners.
Enough already. The dirty little secret is that prominent Americans of both Parties were doing business with the Nazis. Kinda like the mafia, it was just business, nothing personnel. The other little secret is these people were/are one worlders who profess no allegiance to the U.S. These are the same people who have made fortunes funding and doing business with both sides in just about every war since 1812.
JMWalker says: Brought to you by the american issues project, a group of right wing extremists, who will use any and all tactics to keep a democrat out of office.
- – - – - — – - – - – - — – - – - – — – — – - – - — – – - – – - – -
Now that sounds like the true definition of patriotism to me. Where do I sign up?
BJ
I do not blow up buildings.
William Ayers brags about blowing up buildings, including the Pentagon.
William Ayers appeared in the New York Times, promoting his book, “Fugitive Days” on 9-11-01.
William Ayers is Obama’s friend and former boss.
Obama launched his political career in William Ayers house.
Borg and Mactown are married husband and wife.
It is as scary as can be that someone thinks like rush does- and find themselves proud of such dispicable beliefs.
So do you understand that liberals don’t have anyone think for them? We have our own mouthpieces but as a group we are quite diverse. They echo our beliefs, not the other way around.
FACT: We are as a nation more bruised, more divided, more targetted, more unsafe than any other time in recent history, more unrespected, more unable to wield power, more poor. Brought to you by the values of the republican party.
BS p-momma: we are a bruised divided nation because of the children of the Democrat party. The borg collective if you will. Many mouths but only one brain. I say children because like children, you have never accepted the fact that you lost in 2000 and 2004. Nothing was stolen from you, you just lost and you don’t like it. Face it, your candidates lost because they were sucky candidates. Kinda like our sucky candidate in 1996. Sucky candidates lose elections on both sides.
Your party has no concept of what it means to be the loyal opposition. You have become traitors to your own Country in order to to defame and destroy a President. The Democrats, not the Republicans have split this Country.
France just elected a PRO AMERICAN President.
How did that happen?
Our GDP is now LARGER than at any time in history.
GDP Growth, last quarter, was STRONG.
More people were covered by health insurance, last year, than at any other time in our history, the number of uninsured actually declined, dramatically.
Democrats always say that things are getting worse.
Democrats only do well when something goes wrong.
Democrats want defeat in Iraq.
Democrats want the economy to tank.
We can not have the Communism, Democrats really want, without running down American capitalism, first!
#
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 1:41 pm | Permalink
JM
You have no ability to engage in linear logic.
Barrack Hussein Obama, HIMSELF, has extremely radical, and criminal, friends and associations.
That is a proven fact.
In response to those facts, you respond that George W. Bush had a GRANDFATHER who might have been sympathetic to Hitler?
In response to that, I show that Joe Kennedy, TED Kennedy’s Father, was VERY friendly towards Hitler, and actually helped Hitler, diplomatically.
Now? Now you insult me for my take on this stupid issue?
Obama, TODAY, hangs out with radical and violent anti-American lunitics.
That is a fact.
Deal with it.
#
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 2:23 pm | Permalink
France just elected a PRO AMERICAN President.
How did that happen?
Our GDP is now LARGER than at any time in history.
GDP Growth, last quarter, was STRONG.
More people were covered by health insurance, last year, than at any other time in our history, the number of uninsured actually declined, dramatically.
Democrats always say that things are getting worse.
Democrats only do well when something goes wrong.
Democrats want defeat in Iraq.
Democrats want the economy to tank.
We can not have the Communism, Democrats really want, without running down American capitalism, first!
====================================================
Me? Linear logic? Read your own words. They’re the words of a radical nutjob: Wango boy must destroy country so good Wangos can take over and build capitalist utopia. All workers work twenty hours a day, have many child to work for state, and bow to great leader, Wango poppa.
Wango boy type logic: McCain spent FIVE years in the company of COMMUNISTS. He was rehabilitated to embrace the communist manifesto, and is a PUPPET, controlled by Putin himself, and will SELL OUT this country if elected to the White House.
Is that the linear logic your talking about? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
More people were covered by health insurance, last year, than at any other time in our history, the number of uninsured actually declined, dramatically.
======================================================
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — The number of Americans without health insurance decreased last year as more people signed up for government coverage, while the nation’s median income rose slightly to $50,233, new government figures show.
In addition, the poverty rate remained about the same at 12.5%, with 37.3 million people living in poverty – compared with 36.5 million in 2006.
But the number of children living in poverty increased to 13.3 million, or 18%, up from 12.8 million, or 17.4%. The poverty rates for children and adults are higher than their lows of the late 1990s. And looking over the longer-term, the poverty rate experienced its largest jump during an economic recovery, increasing from 11.3% in 2001, economists said.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/26/news/economy/census_income/index.htm
=====================================================
I try to give all facts, not just cherry pick, Wango boy. Poverty increased under Bush from 11.3% to 18%. Nice legacy to leave the nation. Most of the newly insured are covered by the government. Bet that torques your mandible.
It must be pointed out that Franklinpaulie is a washed up, Republican party flack.
He has admitted that he posts here at the behest if not on the payroll for the party and it’s interests. Unlike any other poster known here, his posts are not opinion. They are agitation propaganda.
As to who divided this country, I recommend turning off the radio and reading the book “The Wrecking Crew” by Thomas Frank.
The cons have made it their mission these last 25 years to utterly destroy the Democratic party and buy the government into buisiness hands. As such, they HAVE no loyalty to country. Their only loyalty is to the continued accumulation of their own money and power.
Actually Chris,
You are spot on. Gore tries to steal the election in 2004 and gets slapped down. Dems will cry about it for another 8 years.
In 2004 they try and run a traitor and wonder why they lose. Ooh. . .it was because a group of highly decorated veterans lied about him. It was the truth and he had no answer.
Failing to learn from 2004, they now attempt to run a terrorist’s empty suit butt-boy. The messiah of change that in an act of desperation has picked the embodiment of old-school-go-along-to-get-along democrat politics as a VP.
What will be their excuse for losing this time?
When grandmas start using the ‘F’ word with the same mouth they kiss their babies, you know we’re winning.
HEHEHE
Say NAGIN, you Dumb MF, check out the weather forecast for New Orleans.
Sunday and Monday and Tuesday looks like a real Bitch. Why you waiting to declare a mandatory E V A C U A T I O N?
http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?CityName=New+Orleans&state=LA&site=LIX&textField1=30.0658&textField2=-89.9314&e=0
Late Afternoon: A 10 percent chance of showers. Mostly cloudy, with a high near 87. East wind around 5 mph.
Tonight: A 10 percent chance of showers and thunderstorms before 1am. Partly cloudy, with a low around 77. East wind between 5 and 10 mph.
Sunday: A 30 percent chance of showers and thunderstorms, mainly after 1pm. Mostly cloudy, with a high near 89. Breezy, with a east wind between 10 and 20 mph.
Sunday Night: Tropical storm conditions possible. A 50 percent chance of showers and thunderstorms. Mostly cloudy, with a low around 79. East wind 20 to 25 mph, with gusts as high as 30 mph.
Labor Day: Hurricane conditions possible. Showers and possibly a thunderstorm. Some of the storms could produce heavy rain. High near 83. Chance of precipitation is 80%.
Monday Night: Hurricane conditions possible. Showers and possibly a thunderstorm. Some of the storms could produce gusty winds and heavy rain. Low around 78. Chance of precipitation is 80%.
Tuesday: Showers and possibly a thunderstorm. Some of the storms could produce gusty winds and heavy rain. High near 83. Chance of precipitation is 80%.
Was it PATRIOTIC for Mayor Nagin to NOT EVACUATE New Orleans before Katrina hit?
Was it better for Mayor Nagin to just blame BUSH afterwards?
Is it PATRIOTIC for Mayor Nagin TODAY, to NOT DECLARE a Mandatory Evacuation YET?
Dumb, Helpless, and Unpatriotic SOB – NAGIN.
Is it PATRIOTIC to take No Responsibility for YOURSELF?
THAT, be the Dems.
Wango boy posts:
n response to those facts, you respond that George W. Bush had a GRANDFATHER who might have been sympathetic to Hitler?
In response to that, I show that Joe Kennedy, TED Kennedy’s Father, was VERY friendly towards Hitler, and actually helped Hitler, diplomatically.
Now? Now you insult me for my take on this stupid issue?
========================================================
I think you answered yourself with your last sentence. Stupid issue. You insult yourself by posting, Wango boy.
Hey, Wango boy, how do you respond to the fact McCain was turned to communism as a prisoner of North Viet Nam? I mean, in the company of, and all that. What’s good for Obama has got to be good for McCain as well, don’t you think? Linear logic, boy.
Sorry Max,
But Nagin’s first response to hurricane warnings is to make reservations in Vegas.
“you lost in 2000 ”
Can you count to 500,000?
That’s how many more votes Al Gore got than george bush.
Oh and no. We will never forget that. The next generation won’t forget that.
Hank posted August 30, 2008 at 3:39 pm
“Sorry Max,
But Nagin’s first response to hurricane warnings is to make reservations in Vegas.”
————-
As of this time, no “hurricane warning” has been issued for that area.
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/lix/
Thomas Frank is a left wing looney hack. Spawned from that infernal cesspool know as Johnson County, he is Michael Moore sans two hundred pounds. He can be counted on to write some piece of crap book before each major election. Actually they are all the same book with different titles and a few words switched around. He reoccurring theme is that Kansas should be the most blue state west of MA and would be except we are so stupid that we don’t know what’s good for us.
Hell yes we want to destroy Government. At least a large portion of it that has grown up around the New Deal and LBJ’s war on poverty. Where in the Constitution does it say anything about the Government having any role in education? Or energy? Or healthcare? Why do we have a dept. of labor? Government has clearly defined duties and boundaries under the Constitution. We just wish to get back to that. We don’t hate Government, but we fear it just like our founding fathers did.
“William Ayers is Obama’s friend and former boss.
Obama launched his political career in William Ayers house.” [FRANKLIN]
PROVE IT!!!
“Hey Agnatha: #1 rule when one finds oneself in a hole. STOP DIGGING. You are getting your butt kicked something fierce.”
Riiiight.
“This is painful to watch. Do yourself a favor and go back to writing pithy letters to the editor. Borg Hunter, you are such a breath of fresh air. We need more like you on this site.
“Your #1 fan”
Translation: Thanks for agreeing with my right wing nutjob views honey!
“I just never heard anybody say it on the radio before. We listen to Rush because he agrees with us, not the other way around.”
And I doubt you will understand when I say…
1) This statement is nothing to be proud of.
2) The reason I say it is nothing to be proud of is not because I disagree with Rush because he is a conservative.
3) You just supplied the (partially) correct answer as to why conservative radio hosts do better than liberal radio hosts (one group of people who listens to radio or watches “news” to have their viewpoints validated, rather than to get accurate information, is larger than the “other” group).
Chas
William Ayers and Obama served on one “charitable” board together.
Terrorist Ayers later appointed Obama to RUN another “charitable” board.
Terrorists William Ayers, and his wife, Dohrn, held the first fundraiser for Obama’s political career, in their own home, in Chicago.
Alice Palmer, who wrote favorably about the Soviet Union, set up that meeting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxoiZdBSi-g&eurl=http://backyardconservative.blogspot.com/search?q=wright
I’m sorry BlueJay,
But Gore did not receive more votes than Bush in 2000.
the results were:
Bush received the Electoral College votes from 30 states (271 votes)
Gore received the Electoral College votes from 21 states (266 votes)
If the goracle would have carried his home state, he would have won!
Pro gun, pro life to become a senator, then to be president. . .
well BJ, you know the rest.
HEHEHEHE
And that proves what, exactly, Franklin??
#
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 5:11 pm | Permalink
Chas
William Ayers and Obama served on one “charitable” board together.
Terrorist Ayers later appointed Obama to RUN another “charitable” board.
Terrorists William Ayers, and his wife, Dohrn, held the first fundraiser for Obama’s political career, in their own home, in Chicago.
Alice Palmer, who wrote favorably about the Soviet Union, set up that meeting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxoiZdBSi-g&eurl=http://backyardconservative.blogspot.com/search?q=wright
=====================================================
Another POS hit piece, brought to you by democrats hate us. Now there’s a bipartisan group if I ever heard of one. Bi being the key word, wink.
And so, on it goes: Wango boy pulls one POS web site after another, in the futile attempt to use “linear logic” to further his one track mindless meanderings.
Speaking of linear logic, what ya say ’bout gud ole McCain bein a communist? He consorted with them commies fer five years. Why he gotta be a commie pinko, dad burn it.
You have to remember that Chris works for big oil. He’s got his, and he benefits when the rest of us are hurting.
I agree JMWalker
#
Political_mama
Posted August 30, 2008 at 6:15 pm | Permalink
You have to remember that Chris works for big oil. He’s got his, and he benefits when the rest of us are hurting.
————–
Playing the victim card again eh?
I see Franklin is fertilizing the blog again.
William Ayers indeed has a controversial past. His activities as an education professor are not so controversial. Obama’s connection with Ayers has everything to do with the activities as an education professor and an education activist, and nothing to do with his former activities as a member of the Weather Underground.
The simplistic device of using Terrorist as a title or adjective for Ayers is simply another demonstration of Franklin’s use of anything he can find against the “liberal” candidate.
He is a shill and a bullsh*tter. Period.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ayersapr18,0,359588.story
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-radical-ayers_thinkmay18,0,5953909.story
Note that neither article contains a flattering portrait of Ayers.
Here is Ayers in his own words. No, I hardly agree with everything the man says, but of course, nuanced thinking appears to beyond the capacity of, and certainly beyond the interest of, a bullsh*tting shill like Franklin, particularly when he uses Ayers to try to portray Barack Obama as someone who allies himself with terrorists.
Oooops! Here is the third link:
http://billayers.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/episodic-notoriety-fact-and-fantasy/
You libs fail to remember:
Ayers said he “did not regret” bombing the Pentagon.
Ayers bragged about bombing 30 different buildings.
Ayers stood on an American Flag, and BRAGGED about going to war, against America, while he was a close campaign advisor, and financial contributor, and BOSS, to Barrack Hussein Obama!
Political_mama
Posted August 30, 2008 at 6:15 pm | Permalink
You have to remember that Chris works for big oil. He’s got his, and he benefits when the rest of us are hurting.
- – - – - – — – - – - – - – — – - – - — – - – — – - – — -
Yeah right momma, I’m really raking it in right now. Where were you back in the eighties and early nineties when we were closing ten refineries in Kansas?! Oh yeah, you were enjoying cheap gas. I was working at a couple of them during that time when we got word to shut her down. Both times it was due to unnecessary environmental regulations foisted upon us by big government. I am blessed to have a good job but I still have to pay the same price at the pump and the grocery store as you do. Maybe you ought to look at the environmental whackos who run your pitiful excuse for a party if you want to see who’s really to blame.
Chris, that was the oil companies shutting them down. Demand was going up and up and up. So why shut them down? They were putting a kink in the line.
Thanks for making my point for me.
And yeah, I know you are certainly raking it in. I’d kill for a job out there- if I could sleep at night.
The Republicans are demonstrating their patriotism by busting down the doors of the citizens of Minneapolis at pointing assault rifles at unarmed kids. Republicans just can’t contain their fascism and look for any excuse to bash some skulls in a pathetic attempt to quell the 50,000 protesters planning on welcoming the GOP.
#
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 6:31 pm | Permalink
You libs fail to remember:
Ayers said he “did not regret” bombing the Pentagon.
Ayers bragged about bombing 30 different buildings.
Ayers stood on an American Flag, and BRAGGED about going to war, against America, while he was a close campaign advisor, and financial contributor, and BOSS, to Barrack Hussein Obama!
=====================================================
Wango boy. Climb out of the washer for a minute and answer the question.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223
Oh dear!
So she lies about her 16 year old daughter and treats her like we live in the 50’s. How apropros.
Yeah right momma, I’m really raking it in right now. Where were you back in the eighties and early nineties when we were closing ten refineries in Kansas?! Oh yeah, you were enjoying cheap gas. I was working at a couple of them during that time when we got word to shut her down. Both times it was due to unnecessary environmental regulations foisted upon us by big government. I am blessed to have a good job but I still have to pay the same price at the pump and the grocery store as you do. Maybe you ought to look at the environmental whackos who run your pitiful excuse for a party if you want to see who’s really to blame.
==================================================
You mean dumb environmental regulations, foisted on big business by government? The same government that serves us all? That government? Or just the part you don’t like, such as, environmental regulations that protect humans, animals, lakes, rivers, drinking water et al, from big business, who, in the past, polluted everything they put their hands on, with no regard for what they were doing?
Those same regulations that stopped the possibility of polluting another river so much it caught fire? Those same regulations that are attempting to clean Kansas’s rivers, not one of which is considered pollution free by the EPA? Those regulations?
Those same regulations that put catalytic converters and other smog controls on automobiles that make it possible for kids to breath in big cities?
Or just the ones you don’t like.
Here’s a suggestion: Move to China; they have no environmental regulations.
Maggotpuke you are so stupid you make me sick. Honest, legitimate, protest by citizens is one thing and republicans have no problem with that. But when groups aligned with the other side send in thousands of “rent a mob’ protesters to purposely disrupt and raise havoc at our convention, then that is not constitutionally protected speech. I hope some skulls get cracked. Maybe then the hired protesters will decide the money they are being paid is not worth it.
I wonder why its only the Democrats that use these tactics? I guess when you have no class or honor, anything goes.r
apparently you haven’t seen Operation Rescue and Fred Phelps.
Political_mama
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:35 pm | Permalink
apparently you haven’t seen Operation Rescue and Fred Phelps.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = == = = = = = = =
Thanks for making my point, since Phelps is a Democrat
“Here’s a suggestion: Move to China; they have no environmental regulations.” — JM Walker.
You’d be surprised how much China is clamping down on pollution and what gains they are making.
“Hell yes we want to destroy Government.”
I am not sure but this may qualify as a subversive statement.
Government is of by and for the people.
All you cons care about is your own bottom line.
Which is fine with me. Go get yourselves an island.
But don’t call waving a flag patriotism when your concern for your countrymen extends no further than your little tribe of knuckle draggers.
Incidentally Chris? If you work for a living, aren’t rich, and vote Republican?
Here’s your sign. It says “be nice to me, I’m a moron!”
Ya know what the REAL Republicans so behind your back Chris?
Your bosses, your employer, and other people who you vote THEIR best interest and not your own?
They laugh at you. You are their cannon fodder.
“Maggotpuke you are so stupid you make me sick. Honest, legitimate, protest by citizens is one thing and republicans have no problem with that. But when groups aligned with the other side send in thousands of “rent a mob’ protesters to purposely disrupt and raise havoc at our convention, then that is not constitutionally protected speech.”
Save us from the ironically impaired.
“Rent-a-mob”, see Florida, 2000.
IOKIYAR indeed.
Moral philospherHarry Frank’s definition of “Bullsh*t”: See Franklin as a living example.
Political_mama
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:19 pm | Permalink
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223
Oh dear!
So she lies about her 16 year old daughter and treats her like we live in the 50’s. How apropros.
__________________________________________________
Again just WOW. If a Republican would perpetuate such trash you’d be calling for their head.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ph7p7DT53Y
#
beber
Posted August 30, 2008 at 7:46 pm | Permalink
“Here’s a suggestion: Move to China; they have no environmental regulations.” — JM Walker.
You’d be surprised how much China is clamping down on pollution and what gains they are making.
====================================================
So move there, and take cfmt with ya:-)
Come on now Kia, you really sure you’re willing to stick your neck out on this?
sounds like Kos did their homework.
I’m sorry that your VP candidate is an abysmal failure- than goodness that this woman is going to go down- she is not what women need.
I certainly want some more proof than a left-wing internet rag and some pictures of a shielded or winter clothed Sara and chubby daughter.
For the sake of your party, I hope it’s true. If it it just made up slander it is the cruelest most tasteless story around. No wonder teenage girls develop eating disorders.
“Thomas Frank is a left wing looney hack.”
Yeah?
Well he was recently hired to write a weekly column for the Wall Street Journal. I guess they didn’t run that one by you though huh?
dailykos = completely unreliable
kos is very reliable.
#
KSGolfnut
Posted August 30, 2008 at 8:37 pm | Permalink
dailykos = completely unreliable
============================================
Rush Limbaugh = completely unreliable
Chrisfrommactown, what protesters are those? The convention hasn’t even started yet. As usual the conservative has let his anti-Americanism show through. Why don’t you leave America if you hate it so much?
Golfnut denies:
“dailykos = completely unreliable”
Proof is in the pics. Bristol is showing the preggers while granny to be keeps her figure. Just another case of the conservatives living in denial, kinda like Sara Palin.
Thank you Paul I am aware now of their insidious plot! Obama and Ayres are together to take over America with charitable organizations!
“William Ayers and Obama served on one “charitable” board together.
Terrorist Ayers later appointed Obama to RUN another “charitable” board“.
Why they will be running around all over helping people and giving money to those whom have suffered through the hardships in life. Those bastards!
writerdog
Those “charitable” organizations that Obama and terrorist Ayers worked on?
They gave money to other radical organizations, and other organizations that promoted leftist, radical and terrorist goals.
Hey, here is another great speaker who got large crowds to listen:
http://www.the-earchives.com/earframe.asp?p=2310&ref=15
What part of my earlier post is crap? Philip Berg DID file a federal lawsuit. That is what I stated, complete with references. Any one care to deny the FACT that a lawsuit HAS BEEN FILED by a Democrat from Pennsylvania, the former assistant AJ of PA??
What part of that is a lie?? Not one word. I did not offer statements about the vailidity of the lawsuit. I stated an absolute fact…and you libs want to deny the fact that a lawsuit was filed. Go live in your little world of denial all you want.
“Hey, here is another great speaker who got large crowds to listen:
http://www.the-earchives.com/earframe.asp?p=2310&ref=15
Oh gee, watch out for the serpent men!
Shill.
Any fanatic can file a lawsuit, Raptor. We should care about this because why?
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/has_obamas_birth_certificate_been_disclosed.html
As for Berg, he does like to file his lawsuits.
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/01/philip-j-berg-nutbar-supreme.html
#
Franklin
Posted August 30, 2008 at 9:56 pm | Permalink
Hey, here is another great speaker who got large crowds to listen:
http://www.the-earchives.com/earframe.asp?p=2310&ref=15
========================================================
Hey, here is another great speaker who got large crowds to listen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWn3P-xkcXI
#
Raptor
Posted August 30, 2008 at 9:56 pm | Permalink
What part of my earlier post is crap? Philip Berg DID file a federal lawsuit. That is what I stated, complete with references. Any one care to deny the FACT that a lawsuit HAS BEEN FILED by a Democrat from Pennsylvania, the former assistant AJ of PA??
What part of that is a lie?? Not one word. I did not offer statements about the vailidity of the lawsuit. I stated an absolute fact…and you libs want to deny the fact that a lawsuit was filed. Go live in your little world of denial all you want.
========================================================
Wango logic at its best. Wango boy’s been working overtime.
Bullsh*t free analysis of Obama’s acceptance speech.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_obama.html
More bullsh*t free analysis from Factcheck.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/context_included_obama_on_iran.html
Heres your sign blue jay. It says “I vote democrat, its easier than thinking”.
Fact check IS bullshit.
I Spent Years as a POW with John McCain, and His Finger Should Not Be Near the Red Button
http://www.alternet.org/election08/95825
A fellow Vietnam POW of McCain’s warns of the candidate’s “quick and explosive temper” and suggests McCain is exaggerating his imprisonment.
Obama’s House — THE FACTS >>>>
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/rezko_reality.html
wango logic?? please show me where he did NOT file a lawsuit? Please demonstrate exactly what I said that was incorrect? Did I judget on the validity of the lawsuit? No. Did I try to offer an opinion on its merit? No. Did I simply point out that a Democrat has filed a lawsuit in Federal court? Yes.
What is incorrect about that? Whether he has filed other lawsuits or is a nut case does not deny the FACTS that I posted. Deal with the facts insted of your stupid little juvenile insults for once.
“Fact check IS bullshit.”
Talk about bullsh*t.
1) Factcheck is non-partisan, Franklin. I know such a concept seems to be beyond your pathetic comprehension. Obviously you don’t to read the links I post. Fully half of the ones I posted recently puncture the bullsh*t coming from the Obama campaign.
2) The reason why you don’t like it when I use Factcheck to debunk the nonsense that your put out is because you ARE a bullsh*tter, which is a step below a liar. At least a liar tries to avoid the truth, you don’t care. A classic example is how you took an error in Obama’s Dreams of My Father book, plus an indication that some things were changed in the book (which, by the way, is typical in autobiographies) to “prove” that Obama is dishonest. Then, that evolves over time until you make totally unsupported claims that the book is entirely untruthful. You also state patented nonsense such as the claim that Corsi (whose book was much more massively debunked than Obama’s autobiography) is “much more reliable than CNN”. Your problem, Franklin, is that in your shilling you display no internal censor. You simply will take something and then produce the most extreme and exaggerated interpretaion. You mix truths with half truths and outrageous falsehoods (such as the pathetic “Fact Check is bullsh*t” or “Corsi is more reliable than CNN) with no hesitation, no apparent regard. Your threatening to sue people over your activities as a prolife activist is so pathetic. You are so outraged when people take associations and exaggerate or misrepresent them with regards to you. However, you show no hesitation to do it to others like Barack Obama or any figure who opposes your political views. And you do it on a massive scale with ridiculous sets of one line statements, placed one after another with no differentiation.
What’s really pathetic is, I have been pointing out your bullsh*t for awhile now and you still don’t even seem to understand what I mean by it. You say I accuse you of being a liar.
Being a liar would be an improvement, shill.
Agnatha
The law is on my side.
I truly believe that what I post is true, when I post such.
On a very, very few number of posts, I have made a mistake and corrected my mistake.
However, I have never, even once, deliberately posted a lie.
On the other hand? Many of the liberals on this board HAVE deliberately posted false things about me.
They did so knowing those posts were false.
The law is on my side.
The facts are on my side.
I admit to having friends in Operation Rescue.
However, I was never, ever even charged with violating the law, in any abortion protest, ever.
Those who say otherwise might soon find themselves subsidizing my political activities.
IF this goes to court, I will win.
What stops me, for now, is that I am not sure that many of my enemies have enough money to make it worth my time.
Franklin paulies sponsors here should know that he outed himself to the forum in a bit of drunken bluster.
We all know who and what he is. At a recent face to face meetup, several bloggers laughed that if Franklin, aka econ 101, aka Paul F Rosell did not post here, we would have to invent him for comic relief. He is the ultimate parody of everything he is told to believe in.
Wango boy posts:
Agnatha
The law is on my side.
I truly believe that what I post is true, when I post such.
======================================================
There is a difference between truth and facts not in evidence. You post the latter. You post so-called “facts”, put up by extremist right-wing web site, with no searching for follow up verification. In effect, you post rumors and gossip as truth; that is way below a liar. Should you decide to file a lawsuit against somebody, your own posts will sink you like a rock. The good thing is rocks last billions of years; the bad thing is rocks last billions of years.
Fact Check IS a liberal organization.
Every politician, and every political party, and every news organization, WILL make some mistakes.
FactCheck.org tends to be VERY selective about who they decide to “correct” —
“And what of all those media outlets giving aid and comfort to the leftists who attacked Rush? Now that we know there are several dozen cases of “phony soldier” scandals, just as Rush suggested, how many stories have they devoted to them, thus vindicating Rush? Check for a Jesse Macbeth story in a Nexis database search on CBS, NBC, and NPR. Search Time, Newsweek and USA Today. Look up the Washington Post, the New York Times and USA Today.
You won’t find a one.”
http://www.mrc.org/BozellColumns/newscolumn/2007/col20071009.asp
I would add, if you go to the factcheck.org website, and type in phony soldier, you will not get any hits, either.
The “phony soldier” issue was REAL. We had imposters comming out of the woodwork, getting national media attention, making up stories about Iraq.
Limbaugh helped to expose this problem, and was attacked for telling the truth.
The Majority Leader of the United States Senate, Democrat Harry Reid, even jumped into the middle of it.
Limbaugh made millions of dollars, for a charity that supports the families of our troops, killed in the line of duty. He raised that money by auctioning off a letter by Harry Reid, demanding that networks punish Limbaugh for telling the TRUTH on this issue.
Fact Check is a LIBERAL oraganization.
If FactCheck.org were truly “bipartisan” they would have been on Rush Limbaugh’s side, on this one.
JM
You are not very smart, on the law.
IF I have committed libel and slander, against anyone else?
That individual can take me to court.
That case would have NO bearing on any case that I might have.
And I do have a case.
I also have a life and would rather let the matter drop.
We shall see.
Think of it this way: a man is waiting inside Dillons or Walmart, for the police to process him on a shoplifting charge.
While being processed, on that charge, someone breaks into his car, in the parking lot, to steal his GPS system out of his car.
Does that accused shoplifter have a case against the person who stole his GPS system?
Does the shoplifting case have ANY bearing at all on the GPS theft case?
Of course not.
So, even if you can prove that I am guilty of libel or slander, and you CAN’T! — That does not protect any of you, for doing the same.
You lost this one.
#
Franklin
Posted August 31, 2008 at 11:00 am | Permalink
JM
You are not very smart, on the law.
IF I have committed libel and slander, against anyone else?
That individual can take me to court.
That case would have NO bearing on any case that I might have.
And I do have a case.
I also have a life and would rather let the matter drop.
We shall see.
Think of it this way: a man is waiting inside Dillons or Walmart, for the police to process him on a shoplifting charge.
While being processed, on that charge, someone breaks into his car, in the parking lot, to steal his GPS system out of his car.
Does that accused shoplifter have a case against the person who stole his GPS system?
Does the shoplifting case have ANY bearing at all on the GPS theft case?
Of course not.
So, even if you can prove that I am guilty of libel or slander, and you CAN’T! — That does not protect any of you, for doing the same.
You lost this one.
===================================================
If ever there was a clear cut case of Wango linear logic, the above is it. Take your meds, dude.
Franklin brings up Bozo Bozell as a reply to Factcheck. You truly are a tool Franklin.
1) I read your link to Bozo’s crap. Are there “phony soldiers” who come out of the woodwork? Sure. However, Limbaugh’s implication was that those who came out as Iraq War Veterans against the war were more than likely phonies (I remember the scandal well). Bozo skims right by that, brings up the fraud Limbaugh brought up to justify his remarks, and then quotes a prosecuting attorney who claims that there are more (which there probably are, but that by itself hardly validates Limbaugh’s implication).
2) Fact Check deals primarily with the claims of candidates and their surrogates, not media figures about issues (unless they make an investigatable claim about candidates). Bozo’s whines about Factcheck are a red herring, because he claims that Fact Check’s silence on “phony soldiers” represents evidence of a liberal bias, when in fact it represents a self imposed limitation to limit themselves primarily to candidates for office and their surrogates (and particularly the presidency).
3) Bozell is a right wing extremist whose self announced mission is to “prove” left wing bias in the media. Making this claim is useful to tools like Bozo because reality is much more complicated than political biases and claims. Therefore, when reality turns out to not to reflect the views of coalition conservative tools like yourself and Bozo, you can whine that the reporting of reality reflects a “left wing” bias rather than the inconsistency of your views with reality. The idea that you can go to a howlingly and self identified partisan source to self servingly “prove” that Fact Check is partisan is just brainless, and once again simply provides further evidence that reality and the truth are completely unimportant to you.
5) Here are some reports from “liberal” Fact Check.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_obama.html
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/reed_reality.html
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/distorting_mccains_remarks.html
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/saddleback_bloopers.html
Franklin, I say this with all sincerity:
You are too easy, loser. And you continue to display exactly what Harry Frankfurt means with his definition of a bullsh*tter:
“This is the crux of the distinction between him (the bullsh*tter) and the liar. Both he and the liar represent themselves falsely as endeavoring to communicate the truth. The success of each depends upon deceiving us about that. But the fact about himself that the liar hides is that he is attempting to lead us away from a correct apprehension of reality; we are not to know that he wants us to believe something he supposes to be false. The fact about himself that the bullsh*tter hides, on the other hand, is that the truth-values of his statements are of no central interest to him; what we are not to understand is that his intention is neither to report the truth nor co conceal it.“
In other words:
“If FactCheck.org were truly ‘bipartisan’ they would have been on Rush Limbaugh’s side, on this one.”
Bullsh*t.
Give it up Franklin. Your fighting a lost cause with jm because “you just can’t fix stupid”.
“IF I have committed libel and slander, against anyone else?
That individual can take me to court.”
Riiiight. Like Barack Obama is going to waste time taking everyone who libels him with outrageous bullsh*t to court. He wouldn’t be able to do anything else. As a public and political figure, this crap comes with the territory.
And by the way, this is also true for some of the nonsense here claimed about John McCain.
“Give it up Franklin. Your fighting a lost cause with jm because ‘you just can’t fix stupid’.”
Considering that the source here is a right wing tool who has yet to muster anything other than lame ad hominem arguments against “libs”, I would say that you inadvertantly provide evidence for your own claim.
Look in the mirror, pal, and get out your toolkit. If you are correct, it won’t do any good.
“Agnatha
“The law is on my side.
“I truly believe that what I post is true, when I post such.”
You may well be honest when you say this. However, you don’t seem to understand how badly this reflects on you. You show little concern with reality, and certainly no self skepticism. If your beliefs are indistinguishable to you from truth, then the only way to defend the truth is to engage in bullsh*t. It is apparent that you only look for those things that support your beliefs.
I am going to vote for Barack Obama. In fact, I will actively support Barack Obama because I think he is an excellent candidate.
That being said, the man as a politician is not above freely slinging his own bullsh*t. I posted links to several examples. Why? Because unlike you, I realize that reality does not always reflect my biases.
“There is a difference between truth and facts not in evidence. You post the latter. You post so-called “facts”, put up by extremist right-wing web site, with no searching for follow up verification. In effect, you post rumors and gossip as truth; that is way below a liar.”
Exactly. At least a liar at least tries to avoid the truth. When a person is unable to distinguish his beliefs from truth, the actual truth no longer matters. Only the belief. Hence:
“…the truth-values of his statements are of no central interest to him…”
The jawless fish tapping his white cane of ethics writes,
Exactly. At least a liar at least tries to avoid the truth. When a person is unable to distinguish his beliefs from truth, the actual truth no longer matters. Only the belief. Hence:
“…the truth-values of his statements are of no central interest to him…”
agnatha says: Considering that the source here is a right wing tool who has yet to muster anything other than lame ad hominem arguments against “libs”, I would say that you inadvertantly provide evidence for your own claim.
- – - – - – - – - – — – – - – - — – - – - – - — – - – - – - — – - – - – -
Oh my. Lame ad hominem arguments.
Maybe if you’d listen to Rush more, you would pick up on some of the finer points of what he does. Like using absurdity to point out the absurd. Oh I know you think you are so intellectual and you like to post links to other sites that you think will bolster your argument with logic and reason. What a waste of time. For every web site you link to that seems to support your argument, I can link to an equally valid site that will say just the opposite. What have we gained? At the end of the day, nothing.
To paraphrase a famous line from Dean Wormer in Animal House. Angry and stupid is no way to go through life.
I wonder?
How DOES it feel to stand on one’s own throat as the working class folk who vote Republican do?
Chris you are a complete tool.
Democrats are patriotic? When did that happen? What could be seen as evidence of this? I thought Democrats generally supported the enemy. This has changed? When?
“Fact Check is a LIBERAL oraganization.”
Not surprising.
As is Google and 99% the news media.
Fox however is only approximately 60 – 65% liberal.
As is Google and 99% the news media.
????
Google is a search engine. You think they’re using a “liberal” algorithm or something (not that I expect you to know what an “algorithm” is)??
Sergey and Larry may or may not be “liberal,” but I will be quite entertained to hear your supposed explanation of Google’s left wing bias.
Please do go on!
What part of my earlier post is crap?
The claims in the lawsuit are patently absurd. It’s beyond frivolous, and I expect the judge will not be pleased.
In posting it the way you did (”but which country does he love?”), it implied that it was worthy of something other than complete ridicule. It suggested that the long-discredited allegations in the lawsuit might actually have merit.
Which is idiotic.
P.S. Your initial statement (”which country does he love”–questioning his patriotism) would be not a remotely rational question even if every allegation was true!
Or do really think that foreign born citizens can’t love this country?
HLP
Posted August 30, 2008 at 5:39 pm | Permalink
I’m sorry BlueJay,
But Gore did not receive more votes than Bush in 2000.
Hank – Gore got about a half-million more “people” votes than Bush did in 2000.
Hank – Gore got about a half-million more “people” votes than Bush did in 2000.
. . .and also more electoral votes, if you count the stolen state of Florida.
Hey Ben,
Rules is rules. Bush carried Tennessee. Got their electoral votes. He won.
Technically, truthfully we’re still a republic. there is no such thing as a ‘popular’ vote for the president of the United States.
In each state the people vote for delegates to represent them at the electoral college.
Gore did not get any votes for president. Bush won in the electoral college.
Looking at the popular vote for president is no more valid that determining the winner of a football game by the total yards gained or first downs made. It’s the score at the end that counts.
Gore did not receive any votes for president in
2000!
Ah, but bush got the votes that counted — those of the Supremes.
Hey rage,
Gore can’t count Florida. Gore tried to steal their electoral votes via the court system, but failed.
Bush slopped him down and the citizens of Florida got the delegates to the Electoral College they voted for.
The count always favored Bush, sorry, get over it.
The count always favored Bush, sorry, get over it.
I’m not sure what the adverb “always” has to do with it, as if the vote count was a variable quantity, subject to some postmodern interpretative dance. Whatever.
The only count that matter under the law–”the clear intent of the voter”–the way people actually voted on the ballots–was an unambiguous Gore victory. That’s been posted here time and again.
Yes, Bush did indeed legally win the election, though, by a vote of 5-4. C’est la vie.
I can “get over” the fact that the election was stolen–there’s no way to undo it, and our long national nightmare is almost over anyway–but don’t expect me to pretend that history is something other than it is.
”the clear intent of the voter”
The count always favored Bush.
Legal? nitwits! How much more legal can you get than SCOTUS?
Gore’s little minions were brilliant! Demand a recount in only a few heavily democrat favored counties. (Illegal under Florida law.) An automatic machine recount was done due to the small marginal win by Bush. Bush still won. When that recount failed to get him the required votes he demanded a manual recount in all the counties.
But, by Florida law it was too late. The November 14th deadline for a manual recount had passed. The Supreme Court of Florida extended the deadline. That’s when the Bush team asked for a decision by SCOTUS. SCOTUS overturned the extremely liberal Supreme Court of Florida’s decision b a 7/2 margin. They found no legal reason for the illegal extension.
It is a very complex legal question and it was decided by the Supreme court, not even close 7/2.
By all indications since then if Gore would have won in the Supreme Court he still would have lost after the manual recount. Again, the count always favored Bush.
With absolutely no understanding of the complex political and illegal maneuvering of Gore’s minions the dumbest among us still hold on to the mantra “Bush stole the election”. If you still believe that you are stupid. Or, a lier.
Sorry, Bush won. Gore lost. Get over yourselves.
Keep twirling, Hank.
Your multiple rationalizations won’t change the facts.
Re: Regular
DNFTT
#
Rage
Posted August 31, 2008 at 3:50 pm | Permalink
Keep twirling, Hank.
Your multiple rationalizations won’t change the facts.
________________________________________________
Rage, son!
What facts are you talking about? I just gave you the damn facts! And you want to talk about the significance of ‘always’! Maybe you can understand ‘never’. Gore ‘NEVER’ led in the popular vote for president statewide in Florida
Tell me you’re smart enough to carry on an intelligent conversation! Start by trying to understand the SCOTUS decision and work back!
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html
Nobody stole the damn election! Gore tried but it didn’t work!
“Oh my. Lame ad hominem arguments.
“Maybe if you’d listen to Rush more, you would pick up on some of the finer points of what he does. Like using absurdity to point out the absurd.”
1) The source I was referring to, Chris, in that post, was yourself.
2) I HAVE listened to Rush Limbaugh, on occasion. He serves his purpose, and his purpose, along with Hannity, Savage, and the rest of their ilk, is to validate the pre-determined viewpoints of his listeners. The fact is, there is a greater market for validation of coalition conservative viewpoints than others, and that is simply because there are more obsessive compulsive righties whose self definition relies on them being “conservative” than there are similar people who define themselves as “liberal” (and there are those in the latter category, but they are rarer). For that matter, you may as well know that I have also listened to Air America, and with the exception of Stephanie Miller I find them every bit as unlistenable as the paid right wing nutcases. I also find G. Gordon Liddy to be listenable. Unlike Rush, he seems to have a truly self depreciating sense of humor and is also respectful of other viewpoints. Rush, even with his “absurdity”, is just another huckster throwing out red meat to the true believers.
“Oh I know you think you are so intellectual and you like to post links to other sites that you think will bolster your argument with logic and reason. What a waste of time. For every web site you link to that seems to support your argument, I can link to an equally valid site that will say just the opposite. What have we gained? At the end of the day, nothing.”
Translation, I’ve really got nothing in response except other than “well, we each have sites that agree with us”. That’s invoking the equivalence fallacy. Just because a source provides information that is inconsistent with what you as a conservative want to believe doesn’t make it liberal. Some of the sources I have linked to in this thread have been critical of claims made by “my” candidate. I haven’t seen any sort of hint of such a willingness to do so on your part (and posting links indicating that McCain is not conservative enough would not count). Nothing is gained because you lack the self awareness to critically examine your own beliefs.
“To paraphrase a famous line from Dean Wormer in Animal House. Angry and stupid is no way to go through life.”
Remember what I said about lame ad hominems? Here is a perfect example. Grow up.
Rage you gutless little child. Carrying around this hatred for eight years has totally warped your mind. I think the American Psychiatry Association has a clinical name for the condition you and so many others have. Its called “Florida 2000 Derangement Syndrome”. It is marked by a total inability to cope with the fact that President Bush and the Republicans won Florida fair and square. In fact they prevented the Democrats from “stealing” the election like they have so many others. The real story that year was the three for sure and possibly four Republican Senators who lost their seats through out right voter fraud. Even the MSM admitted that every recount had Bush winning. In fact Bush was gaining votes with each recount.
I’m sure it was a bitter pill to swallow to lose such a close election. The Republicans were faced with a similar dilemma in 1960 when JFK eked out a narrow win over Nixon, probably with the help of Mayor Daley and his Chicago political machine. The Republicans had solid grounds to contest the election results, but chose to put the good of the Country over partisan politics. It was a good thing too, as a divided America would have hampered the Presidents efforts to confront the Soviets in Berlin and Cuba. We see the results now as President Bush has had to lead our Nation during a difficult time amidst all the lingering hatred and resentment from 2000.
So here are the key points of Florida 2000. #1-Bush won Florida by a narrow margin. #2-Bush won every recount that was done. #3-The Supreme Court did not elect/select the President. It merely ordered a halt to the endless recounts that the Democrats had planned and allowed the Florida Sec. of State to certify the election results. As has been pointed out earlier, the key lesson here is. If you want to be elected President of the United States, CARRY YOUR OWN HOME STATE.
“‘the clear intent of the voter’
“The count always favored Bush.”
Bullsh*t. There is plenty of evidence that Florida was stolen, and that the votes that were not counted were not likely to have gone Bush’s way.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/06/20/ING2976LG61.DTL
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040517/palast
And just for you, National Review’s take:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/kirsanow200407120824.asp
Notice, however, how author Peter Kirsanow skirts the actual allegations. Here is the Wikipedia article. Yes, Wikipedia allows people to edit their content, but on popular, often visited topics, bullsh*t from one source or another does tend to get edited out, and the quality of the information ends up being good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000
“Counting only ‘undervotes (when the vote is not detected by machine), and not considering ‘overvotes’ (when a ballot ends up with more than one indication of a vote, for example both a punch-out and hand-written name, even if both indicating the same candidate)[36] Bush would have won in all legally requested recount scenarios. If overvotes where the intent of the voter was clear were counted, using any consistent standard for ‘clear intent of the voter’, Gore would have won. This was not requested by either side at the time; the independent recount therefore led to a greater awareness of the issue of ‘overvotes’.
“Under the recount rules initially requested by Gore, Bush would have won, and under the rules requested by Bush, Gore would have won.[37]”
And of course, this does not refer to the outrageous “felon purges”, which Kirsinow ignores but were in fact documented occurances.
And by the way Hank, you are still way too free with your throwing around of the “nitwit” ad hominem.
Here’s another analysis of the overvote issue.
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0227-04.htm
Of course, this is hardly an unbiased source.
Here is a summary of the Miami Herald report. Notice the different results for overvotes versus undervotes.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/04/04/florida.recount.01/index.html
The fact is, Hank’s absolute claim that the count always favors Bush is clearly incorrect.
Agnatha
Posted August 31, 2008 at 4:45 pm | Permalink
Bullsh*t. There is plenty of evidence that Florida was stolen, and that the votes that were not counted were not likely to have gone Bush’s way
—————————
Eight years of eating the same sour grapes and the jawless fish still has a taste for “if’s and buts.”
“Eight years of eating the same sour grapes and the jawless fish still has a taste for ‘if’s and buts’.”
Re: Regular
DNFTT
Sigh. Let’s try this again.
Under the standard of Florida law, the only thing that matters is the “clear intent of the voter.” The Florida Supreme Court explicitly affirmed this standard in ordering a statewide recount. That was what was before the Supreme Court–everything else you’ve stated is irrelevant.
While the tabloid corporate media has done a good job of spinning it in a “who cares” fashion, they nonetheless had to acknowledge that “If all the ballots had been reviewed under any of seven single standards, and combined with the results of an examination of overvotes, Mr. Gore would have won, by a very narrow margin.” (emphasis added)
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEEDB1338F931A25752C1A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
The Florida Supreme Court did not say “ignore the overvotes.” It said follow the standard–look at the ballot, and see if you can determine a clear intent.
If you can’t–throw it out.
When the media consortium finally looked at the overvotes–well after it was too late to do anything about it–they, predictably, fell into the “competing scenarios” thinking, as the Republican noise machine would gone apeshit if they had they simply considered–or even dared to emphasize the only standard that was valid under Florida law.
I could waste more of my time, presenting the hard facts and figures, tracking down the old PDF files of the data, the Florida Supreme Court decsion, etc., but. . . why? It’s very old news.
. .. which makes me curious as to why you guys still get so hysterical about it. Hmmm. . .
P.S. We could talk about the other crap–the felon databases etc., but I have no interest in rehashing any of it.
Hank – technically you are correct – none of us ever vote for President; we vote for electors.
Now to Gore and his supporters I would add: You lost because you did not manage hold your ‘flank’ – Ralph Nader. Forget hanging chads – if Gore had gotten the Nader votes he would have carried both FL and NH. EITHER of those would have made the difference. And, of course, as Hank correctly points out – TN. Or Arkansas for that matter.
2000 was Gore’s to lose. And, IMO, he did.
Forget hanging chads – if Gore had gotten the Nader votes he would have carried both FL and NH.
Right: Forget democracy. Blame it on a third-party candidate.
Sigh. . .
Rage
Posted August 31, 2008 at 5:08 pm | Permalink
Sigh. Let’s try this again.
Under the standard of Florida law, the only thing that matters is the “clear intent of the voter.”
=================================
At the time, the state of Florida had about three zillion attorneys available to them and still lost.
Either you believe in the court system or you don’t.
Which is it?
BTW, I think there is also clear evidence that there was considerable fraud in the 1960 election in favor of John F. Kennedy (although whether it would have decided the election is debatable).
http://www.slate.com/id/91350/
At the time, the state of Florida had about three zillion attorneys available to them and still lost.
To begin with, dummy, the Florida Supreme Court is not “the state of Florida.” They were the state’s highest court (nor, incidentally, did the state of Florida lose–aren’t you forgetting that Jeb and Katherine Harris were on Bush’s side?).
I accept that a majority of the Supreme Court interfered with the Democratic process in a logically and ethically untenable way. I do not, however, question their right to decide such cases and controversies.
I simply assert that, on that day, they made a decision that was not grounded in the law and the facts, and did not live up to the high standards of their profession.
#
Rage
Posted August 31, 2008 at 5:20 pm | Permalink
I simply assert that, on that day, they made a decision that was not grounded in the law and the facts, and did not live up to the high standards of their profession.
====================================
In a per curiam decision, by a 7-2 vote, the Court in Bush v. Gore held that the Florida Supreme Court’s method for recounting ballots was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
So, you’re claiming to be wiser and smarter than seven of the most senior jurists in the country?
rage – I also hate the Electoral College and its violation of the principle of ‘one man one vote’ but recognize that it exists and that without a constitutional amendment it will not change. As for chads etc I doubt that we would ever have been able to know for sure. The sad fact is that we really cannot count that precisely. Ask any election commissioner. Their nightmare is the tie or near-tie election. And that is what we had in FL.
That said, Gore should have carried FL about 52-48 and then the counting problems woud have been made moot. And, when I hear certain Clinton supporters talk about sitting this out or whatever I am reminded of the Nederites who helped Bush so much.
“Hank – technically you are correct – none of us ever vote for President; we vote for electors.”
But, of course, it’s not the name of the electors on the ballot, so this is most certainly splitting hairs. In 2000, more people voted for the name of Al Gore than for the name of George W. Bush. But that, in the US, does not guarantee the winner. The electoral college does that.
“Now to Gore and his supporters I would add: You lost because you did not manage hold your ‘flank’ – Ralph Nader. Forget hanging chads – if Gore had gotten the Nader votes he would have carried both FL and NH. EITHER of those would have made the difference. And, of course, as Hank correctly points out – TN. Or Arkansas for that matter.
“2000 was Gore’s to lose. And, IMO, he did.”
I’m not sure how much the Gore campaign can be blamed for Nader, but I think the Gore campaign did make some mistakes that drove some voters to Nader. Remember the bad taste of scandal the Clinton Adminstration had left in the mouths of many voters-I include myself here-in spite of its policy successes-the Chinese funding scandal probably drove more people to Nader than Nader himself did. Nader was a non factor in 2004 and he most certainly will be a joke in 2008, but 2000 was a different time.
However, I agree, the election was Gore’s to lose, and if the recount had gone forward as Gore himself had requested it, the results would not have changed. If all the ballots in Florida where the intent of the voter was clear had been counted, Gore would have won. This doesn’t relieve the Gore campaign of any mistakes they made that allowed Bush to stay close enough to pull off the victory. And in the end, nothing will come of this except for more fodder for blog and discussion board conversation ad nauseum.
And therefore, since it is spilled milk, I’m wiping up my part of the stain and am outta here. I got a lawn to mow.
Under the standard of Florida law, the only thing that matters is the “clear intent of the voter.”
________________________________________________
Well, if you pick and choose among the Florida statutes you can maybe rationalize a case. There were more laws, like deadlines, etc., you carefully ignore.
________________________________________________
The Florida Supreme Court explicitly affirmed this standard in ordering a statewide recount. That was what was before the Supreme Court–everything else you’ve stated is irrelevant.
______________________________________________
Well, evidently it wasn’t irrelevant! I carefully explained the facts that stood up in court!
_____________________________________________
I gave you the link to the SCOTUS decision, you’ve no excuse for misrepresenting the facts anymore.
_____________________________________________
. .. which makes me curious as to why you guys still get so hysterical about it. Hmmm. . .
_____________________________________________
Hysterical! LOL! I’m not the one still whining about it eight years later! I’m merely presenting the facts. (in a calm, rational, patient, respectful manner I might add) Gore tried to steal the election in the court system and failed.
hmmmm. . . (note the additional ‘m’, a sign of a more thoughtful approach)
hehehehe
In a per curiam decision, by a 7-2 vote, the Court in Bush v. Gore held that the Florida Supreme Court’s method for recounting ballots was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
“So, you’re claiming to be wiser and smarter than seven of the most senior jurists in the country?”
Now see, this isn’t trolling. Snarkish, but not trolling. And it advances a good argument.
In my personal, completely lay opinion I tend to agree with Rage that the clear intent of the voter standard is a reasonable standard. The argument of the US Supreme Court, was as I recall, however, that the standard was applied differently in different counties. Also, that the standard included votes that otherwise would never have been counted. However, I personally do disagree with the majority’s apparent objection that those votes should not have been counted in the recount because they would not have been counted otherwise. The recount was manual, and if the intent of the voter was clear via that means, they should have been counted (IMVSO, as long as the standard was consistent). However, the different standards being applied by different counties alone was arguably a violation of the 14th Amendment,and would and should have been sufficient to halt the recount as it was being done.
It should be noted that the 7-2 decision that identified the recount as it was designed was unconstitutional. The 5-4 decision which halted any further recounts was arguably decided by the Court along partisan lines.
“Hysterical! LOL! I’m not the one still whining about it eight years later! I’m merely presenting the facts. (in a calm, rational, patient, respectful manner I might add) Gore tried to steal the election in the court system and failed.”
Uhm, the comments outside the parentheses belie the comments within them.
Now I really am outta here!
Hey Ben,
There was more going on in Florida than hanging chads. The DNC planned ahead of the election to challenge the results in Florida.
They put two attorneys (most from out of state) in every county to protest and disqualify as many absentee ballots as they could. They concentrated on serviceman’s ballots from overseas. They knew these were heavily republican.
The main sream media called the election in Florida 70 minutes before the polls closed in panhandle which is heavily republican. It is estimated that this lost Bush several thousand votes. The turmoil over this blatant favoritism by the MSM changed the way they report results. They no longer will call an election until all the polls close.
Then there was the ‘push polling’ that went on during election day and the following day conducted by a Dallas firm. They were asking people in the counties later challenged by Gore if they were confused by the ‘butterfly ballots’ and if they were sure they voted for Gore instead of Buchanan. My father-in-law lives in Palm Beach County and he was insulted by their questions. This poll was purpose was to effect public perception and set up Gore’s later court challenge.
Gore and the DNC planned the attack on the voting process and they failed.
“They concentrated on serviceman’s ballots from overseas. They knew these were heavily republican.”
Totally false.
Lieberman insisted that servicepeople’s ballots be counted even if they were received late.
The only thing you have to remember about Florida is that voting is a 10th Amendment right. The Florida Supreme Court said recount every vote, just as the state law required in a close election.
The US Supreme Court, packed with CONs, ordered the recount stopped. Had the recount gone forward, Gore would have won.
The rest is history.
As far as Hank’s idiotic–”this was all planned in advance”–it is belied by the simple fact that no Democratic Senator came forward to protest the vote as the Black Caucus in the House did.
Without a Senate sponsor, the motion died.
Wow. Some pre-game strategy, eh?
BTW, facts have come forward over the years that had the RepubliCONs lost the electoral vote but won the popular vote (like Gore did), they were prepared to shut the government down rather than concede victory to Gore.
The “hanging chads” meme was typical CON tactics, CONfuse the real issue with the hair-splitting until the American people get fed up with everything.
The real issue was not a few hundred chads. It was a several thousand votes that had Al Gore’s name punched and Al Gore’s name written in under “write in candidate.”
These were spat out by machines as “over-votes” but clearly signaled the intent of the voter to vote for Gore.
He won these over-votes by many thousands. Chads and absentee ballots were a total distraction, but they had the effect that the CONs wanted–slow down the process long enough for the US Supreme Court to illegally rule on a state’s rights issue and shut down the recount.
Justice Souter:
1. The statute does not define a “legal vote,” the rejection of which may affect the election. The State Supreme Court was therefore required to define it, and in doing that the court looked to another election statute, §101.5614(5), dealing with damaged or defective ballots, which contains a provision that no vote shall be disregarded “if there is a clear indication of the intent of the voter as determined by a canvassing board.” The court read that objective of looking to the voter’s intent as indicating that the legislature probably meant “legal vote” to mean a vote recorded on a ballot indicating what the voter intended. Gore v. Harris, __ So. 2d __ (slip op., at 23—25) (Dec. 8, 2000). It is perfectly true that the majority might have chosen a different reading. See, e.g., Brief for Respondent Harris et al. 10 (defining “legal votes” as “votes properly executed in accordance with the instructions provided to all registered voters in advance of the election and in the polling places”). But even so, there is no constitutional violation in following the majority view; Article II is unconcerned with mere disagreements about interpretive merits.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZD1.html
Justice Breyer:
The Florida Supreme Court did not accept her definition. But it had a reason. Its reason was that a different provision of Florida election laws (a provision that addresses damaged or defective ballots) says that no vote shall be disregarded “if there is a clear indication of the intent of the voter as determined by the canvassing board” (adding that ballots should not be counted “if it is impossible to determine the elector’s choice”). Fla. Stat. §101.5614(5) (2000). Given this statutory language, certain roughly analogous judicial precedent, e.g., Darby v. State ex rel. McCollough, 75 So. 411 (Fla. 1917) (per curiam), and somewhat similar determinations by courts throughout the Nation, see cases cited infra, at 9, the Florida Supreme Court concluded that the term “legal vote” means a vote recorded on a ballot that clearly reflects what the voter intended. Gore v. Harris, ___ So. 2d ___, ___ (2000) (slip op., at 19). That conclusion differs from the conclusion of the Secretary. But nothing in Florida law requires the Florida Supreme Court to accept as determinative the Secretary’s view on such a matter. Nor can one say that the Court’s ultimate determination is so unreasonable as to amount to a constitutionally “impermissible distort[ion]” of Florida law.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZD1.html
The equal protection issue, relating to county-by-county standards, was not a rejection of the Florida Supreme Court’s interpretation of Florida law. They, in fact, produced the fairest standard they could after being informed by the Supreme Court, previously, that they could not alter said standards. As Justice Breyer aptly noted:
In light of our previous remand, the Florida Supreme Court may have been reluctant to adopt a more specific standard than that provided for by the legislature for fear of exceeding its authority under Article II.
The main reasons Gore lost(sic) in 2000,
* The vicious, inaccurate, character assassination campaign run against him by the RNC.
* Our dysfunctional, corporate owned media aided and abetted the RNC’s smear campaign.
* Lazy, gullible, irresponsible voters who were conned by the two above factors.
That said, Gore should have carried FL about 52-48 and then the counting problems woud have been made moot.
Ben, I do believe we are in perfect agreement.
John Kerry met with Ralph Nader, and took him and his constituency’s issues seriously.
While I don’t doubt that Nader would have gotten less votes anyway (it was a different election), taking those simple steps did a lot to defuse such discontentments.
This election, of course, is another one entirely, and the dynamics are still being determined.
blah blah blah
prattle prattle prattle
excuse1, excuse2, ad infinitum…
Dems lost in 2000
Dems lost in 2004
Dems(chortles) the facts.
Place fish in a shallow baking dish. In a bowl, stir together the tequila, orange liqueur, lime juice, 1 teaspoon salt, garlic, and olive oil. Pour mixture over fillets, and rub into fish. Cover, and refrigerate for 1/2 hour, turning the fillets once.
Preheat the grill for high heat.
In a medium bowl, toss together the tomatoes, onion, jalapeno, cilantro, and sugar. Season to taste with salt. Set salsa aside.
Remove fillets from marinade, and pat dry. Brush the fillets with oil, and sprinkle with ground black pepper. In a small saucepan, boil remaining marinade for several minutes. Remove from heat, and strain out garlic cloves. Set aside to cool.
Grill fish for 4 minutes per side, or until fish is easily flaked with a fork. Transfer fillets to a serving dish. Transfer the fish to a serving plate. Spoon salsa over the fish, and drizzle with the cooked marinade to serve.
cosmos_originally
Posted August 31, 2008 at 6:46 pm | Permalink
The main reasons Gore lost(sic) in 2000,
* The vicious, inaccurate, character assassination campaign run against him by the RNC.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - — – - – - — – - – - – – —
And what about the DNC releasing the Bush DUI from 1976 the weekend before the election? That pretty much fits the bill of a “vicious, inaccurate, character assassination campaign” to me, o one who lives in glass house.
You lowered the bar Chris. I’m fine with spreading any vicious lies and rumors against the neocons. Even attacking John McCain’s service record. Nothing is too low anymore thanks to you and yours.
“The times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same partisan playbook. So let us agree that patriotism has no party. I love this country, and so do you, and so does John McCain. The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America — they have served the United States of America.”
————————————————–
I do agree with this 100%.
It’s the solutions to the problems that need to be at issue.
And you’re not voting for him Kia. I would agree with it, but I’m tired of the cons winning.
“Sorry, Bush won. Gore lost. Get over yourselves.”
A whole generation is being taught otherwise.
You know? They are being told the truth that an American election was stolen by the scum of the Earth Republicans.
I hope it has been worth it to you to earn the undying hatred of millions of Americans better than you.
That’s true Pmom. But I do find him sincere which is more than I can say for my opinion of many of the other Democrats holding office.
And I’m sure you could find something nice to say about a Republican somewhere too :)
BJ says: I hope it has been worth it to you to earn the undying hatred of millions of Americans better than you.
- – - – - – – - – - — – - – – — – - – - – - – - — – — – — – — – - –
Oh BJ, you are so deluded. Don’t you realize that it is just the lunatic fringe who harbor those thoughts. And you are their poster child. This blog site and the others you may frequent are not reality. They largely represent the views of those on the far left and far right of the political spectrum. And yes I include myself in this equation. If it was otherwise, then this site would have ceased to exist a long time ago. Most Americans have long ago gotten over the 2000 election, despite your attempts to keep the fires of hatred burning.
Have fun with this site, let off steam, state your views, but don’t ever believe that we are leading some parade of angry people with torches and pitchforks to storm the castle and slay the evil monster.
And I’m sure you could find something nice to say about a Republican somewhere too :)
Sure thing, KIA. With the usual caveats, I like this guy
Bush’s 1976 DUI?
How about the RNC’s (and media) numerous, long-lived, FALSE attacks on Gore?
‘Love Story’
Farm chores
“Invented”(sic) the Internet
“Discovered”(sic) Love Canal
Boasted of starting the Superfund, when he had credited it to a letter from a high-school student.
And after (falsely) establishing that he was a delusional liar with the above attacks, attacking him with every nit-picking error and mis-speak they could find.
The RNC loaded all the facts about Gore, speeches he had made, etc, that they could find into a database, and compared it to what he said during during the debates. They quickly gave any error found to the media.
The many errors made by Bush during the debates were mostly ignored.
Oh a lot of people on your side get that this is not just ideological difference Chris.
And I give you, your side has a quarter century head start in the fight and a good toe hold on ruining government and this country.
The nomination of Barack Obama demonstrates the naivety and noble wishing for coexistence that still exist on the more noble side of politics.
But make no mistake. A backlash is coming. You’ll get a sample of it in November.
Then? People may begin to wake up and see that a government that they are part of CAN serve them well.
cosmos says: How about the RNC’s (and media) numerous, long-lived, FALSE attacks on Gore?
– - — – - – - – - — – - – — – - – - — – - – - — – - – - – — – - -
What can I say cos. When your opponent hands you a gun and a full clip of ammo, what are you suppose to do? What Alger failed to realize was that the game had changed. No longer did the democrats have a monopoly over the media. No longer could they get away with the outrageous lies and self aggrandizement. There was a new sheriff in town and his name was Rush. And Rush brought friends with him. Media outlets and internet sites that weren’t in bed with the Dems. What you so euphemistically refer to as “slander and character assassination” was actually republicans finally standing up and setting the record straight. Americans saw Alger for what he really was. A clown and a buffoon who was in no way capable of leading this great nation. The fact that he came so close still sends chills down my spine.
“The fact that he came so close still sends chills down my spine.”
You have one? Huh. I thought all you cons just had some sort of exoskeleton.
Get ready for more chills. You got lucky with Barack.
I’m hoping we get a Congress that will give you night sweats!
Jay, if we dont build that Congressional majority, we are going to be in deep trouble… JMHO
Too many folks seem just itching for a return to McCarthyism…. And dictating to the whole nation what it means to be a patriot… ummmm…. namely, if you go against the guvmint, you aint no patriot!!
THAT scares the crap out of this old Liberal!!
“Chas” –
Not to worry.
As soon as we return a Democrat to the White House and have Democratic majorities in Congress, no Republic Party CON is gonna say “…go against the guvmint, you aint no patriot!!”
They’ll come face-to-face with the cold hard reality that a solid majority of Americans have experienced CONservative government inaction and know they’re the worse for it.
Remember this???
Göring: Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.
Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.
Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
In an interview with Gilbert in Göring’s jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)
============================================
Sound even vaguely familiar?? Hmmmm???
I agree Monkey… but there is still much work to be done… And we dont need a “Gustav” to help make the CONservatives look better than they are!!
No, MH the party CON’s wont say it… They will leave that to their paid shills on the airwavesm, and on the Blogs….
I wish somebody would actually post a link to what the “Fairness Doctrine” actually said, before it was made illegal… Those crying about it are LYING as to what it actually SAID….
“There are many misconceptions about the Fairness Doctrine. For instance, it did not require that each program be internally balanced, nor did it mandate equal time for opposing points of view. And it didn’t require that the balance of a station’s program lineup be anything like 50/50.
Nor, as Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly claimed, was the Fairness Doctrine all that stood between conservative talkshow hosts and the dominance they would attain after the doctrine’s repeal. In fact, not one Fairness Doctrine decision issued by the FCC had ever concerned itself with talkshows. Indeed, the talkshow format was born and flourished while the doctrine was in operation. Before the doctrine was repealed, right-wing hosts frequently dominated talkshow schedules, even in liberal cities, but none was ever muzzled (The Way Things Aren’t, Rendall et al., 1995). The Fairness Doctrine simply prohibited stations from broadcasting from a single perspective, day after day, without presenting opposing views.”
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0212-03.htm
Chrisfrommactown,
Thank you for proving that you are so TOTALLY disconnected from reality that you don’t even understand the difference between Rush Limbaugh, and corporate owned media.
Like the NY TImes, CNN, Judy Woodruff, Lou Dobbs, the AP, USA Today, Chris Matthews, the Los Angeles Times, Newsday, et al.
Some examples at,
‘INVENTING INVENTED THE INTERNET! No one said Boo about Gore’s remark. Then, the RNC spin-points arrived:’
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh120302.shtml
Chrisfrommactown probably always says “invented”, instead of “created”. According to Republicans, those two words are identical, and 100% interchangeable synonyms .
As are the two words “discovered” and “found”.
I’m kinda surprised that the Daily Howler missed the origins of the “invented” line, mainly, an extrremely sloppy headline from Declan McCullagh’s Politech email list, forwarding from some Republican party drivel.
http://web.archive.org/web/20010531124315/http://www.politechbot.com/p-00285.html
Since I was on the list at the time, I sure as hell didn’t miss it!
P.S. I’ve since forgotten how involved in this nonsense Declan really was.
Just as Republicans were beginning to eye the 2000 presidential race in earnest, the vice president offered up a whopper of a tall tale in which he claimed to have invented the Internet.
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1999/03/18655
What a dork.
“Chas” –
I was a broadcaster back during the Fairness Doctrine days. All it amounted to was that stations were required (as licensees of a limited collective resource, i.e. the broadcast spectrum) to allow anyone with an alternative opinion the opportunity to express an opinion.
That’s why there used to be television “editorials” that aired a firm, principled opinion on “Welcoming Spring.” And when someone actually objected to something, it turned into that old Johnny Carson bit with the guy in the Elmer Fudd hat.
There were highly-opinionated broadcast commentators during the Fairness Doctrine. Joe Pine was one. All the Fairness Doctrine did to him was compel him to let dissenters get on the air. Most of the time, Pine cut ‘em down to size. (Frank Zappa’s appearance on the Joe Pine show was a notable exception.)
The right-wing talk radio phenomenon thrives without a Fairness Doctrine. Limbaugh’s crew strictly weeds out legitimate dissent. Were he called upon his distorted rants and diffusion of facts, Rush would run to the corner with his tail between his legs and whimper.
Just for the record:
Joe Pine lost his lower leg in the Korean War.
And there was all that hippy-hatred among the CONs during the 60s.
Pine attacked Frank Zappa with:
“You have long hair. Are you a woman?”
Zappa answered:
“You have a wooden leg. Are you a table?”
Au contraire, Monkeyboy.
I don’t think you do much listening to Rush or Sean Hannity. Dissenting calls go to the front of the line. They are given full opportunity (within reasonable time constraints) to express their opinions. They are then interviewed by the host. Naturally, those calls usually end in failure for the caller – not because they aren’t given the opportunity, but because they don’t have a well thought-out position.
“KSGolfnut” –
You forget that I’ve actually done talk radio.
Screeners tell us a lot about callers before we’d put ‘em on the air.
It’s a pretty simple process to let the straw men on the air. It’s really a common and cheap talk radio ploy.
Larry King’s old overnight show took all callers without a screener. I think the current overnight guy whose show skews toward UFOs and conspiracies (Bell? Norey? Someone.) might take all callers.
But my producers were pretty good about getting an incompetent caller’s opinion in the queue just before a commercial break.
Old radio played the hits.
Talk radio plays the audience.
Again, Monkey – you don’t listen. What you’re describing isn’t what happens.
“Fairness Doctrine” would be great if Newspapers and TV were part of it since they about 95% liberal.
MonkeyH writes–The right-wing talk radio phenomenon thrives without a Fairness Doctrine. Limbaugh’s crew strictly weeds out legitimate dissent. Were he called upon his distorted rants and diffusion of facts, Rush would run to the corner with his tail between his legs and whimper.
*****
Dude, that is so true. I saw an old clip from Rush’s first foray into TV. He was in New York of all places. His hostile audience was standing up and yelling questions and comments. Audience members were tearing his arguments to shreds with a good measure of cat-calling and ridicule thrown in to boot.
They had to clear the studio! An ashen-faced Rush was visibly shaken when they came back from the commercial break.
After that, it was all dittoheads all the time.
Fairness is expressed in ratings and commercial support.
If liberals hate the conservative hosts so much, stop listening to them.
#
CapnAmerica
Posted September 1, 2008 at 9:49 am | Permalink
MonkeyH writes–The right-wing talk radio phenomenon thrives without a Fairness Doctrine. Limbaugh’s crew strictly weeds out legitimate dissent. Were he called upon his distorted rants and diffusion of facts, Rush would run to the corner with his tail between his legs and whimper.
*****
Dude, that is so true. I saw an old clip from Rush’s first foray into TV. He was in New York of all places. His hostile audience was standing up and yelling questions and comments. Audience members were tearing his arguments to shreds with a good measure of cat-calling and ridicule thrown in to boot.
They had to clear the studio! An ashen-faced Rush was visibly shaken when they came back from the commercial break.
After that, it was all dittoheads all the time.
============================
Radio is a free market enterprise.
There is absolutely nothing preventing Liberals from starting, owning and broadcasting their own messages nation-wide.
Of course, they have tried and failed.
The reason why they fail is they appeal those who enjoy mean-spirited attacks and lies.
Most of America wants to hear the truth, not a radio broadcast of whining and lying.
Goofnut?
I DO listen.
It lets me know what the knuckledraggers here will say before they say it.
Limbaugh? Ya don’t get through. Though I DO occasionally have fun asking Snerdley if I can talk to some one in the big house!
Hannity is a little more open. A caller often can blow him up. In which case he blusters “You’re like a broken record!” and hangs up.
Fairness doctrine baby! Gonna be a lot of right wing social misfits outta work next year.
“Again, Monkey – you don’t listen. What you’re describing isn’t what happens.”
Nonsense, you have no way of knowing that. The screening process does not take place on the air.
Pretty much it is a waste of time to call in and argue with a talk radio host anyway. They control the mic, they control the pacing and the time of the conversation (and no, I haven’t tried to do it).
And BTW, liberal talk radio is doing OK now, but they do best on national levels (such as satellite radio), but I agree that it will not ever be nearly as big as conservative talk radio, there are just far fewer obsessive compulsive gotta have my views validated on the radio conservatives than there are similar liberals, in spite of the growth of the latter population due to irritation at self described conservatives. But let’s not forget, the media king of talk radio is Rupert Murdoch. For example, here in Clear Channel land, we now have right wing nut radio creeping over from KNSS to what used to be the entertainment talk radio station.
However, I’m curious, what is it with Chris’ over the top fanboyism for Rush Limbaugh. You’d think the fat man was personally responsible for a social revolution in this country (he’s not, he’s a symptom of it).
I totally screwed up this statement:
“there are just far fewer obsessive compulsive gotta have my views validated on the radio conservatives than there are similar liberals, in spite of the growth of the latter population due to irritation at self described conservatives.”
Should be:
there are just FAR MORE obsessive compulsive gotta have my views validated on the radio conservatives than there are similar liberals, in spite of the growth of the latter population due to irritation at self described conservatives.”
The kind of “libs” that conservatives like to rail against as red meat for their audiences just do not exist in the widespread numbers that conservatives like to imply they do. There are across the board liberals out there, but they are not all that common. Even self described “liberal activists” tend to have their one or two issues. The fact of the matter is the third rail for the conservative coalition, built by the likes of Vinguarie and Phillips, is that most people in this country are liberal on some issue or other, and the sheer monomania nastiness of conservative activists when they get a political advantage damages them in the long term. That’s why several Republican strategists were very worried after the 2004 elections. And their concerns were validated in 2006, and are still evident in 2008.
The foul weather voter is ready to turn on the right. The mistake some on the “left” want to make is thinking that the foul weather voter is therefore on their side. He/she is not. They’re just more likely, at this point in time, to be irritated at the right.
Which makes the upcoming Republican Convention a very interesting balancing act.
Those of you who are drooling at the mouth just waiting for the fairness doctrine to come back should know something. It is being reported that the legislation to reinstate it is already written. For a long time i have been saying that the first act of a Dem Congress and President would be a hate crimes law. Now I believe that will be second after the fairness doctrine. It is being reported that the fairness doctrine legislation as written goes far beyond talk radio and even has a internet component to it. Leave it to the little Hitlers in the Democrat party to legislate away any dissent.
You know they planned to get around to the fairness doctrine back in Clinton’s first term. But they had more important things to do like the”motor voter fraud’ bill and NAFTA, WTO and trying to outlaw gun ownership. They had to push the fairness doctrine off till after the 94 elections and we all know how that went. They won’t make that mistake again.
Yep, thats the Democrat definition of Patriotism. Trash the Constitution and stifle all dissent.
Pmom
The Daily Kos story, about Palin’s 16 year old daughter, is pure BS:
http://townhall.com/blog/g/9b3375c7-6a27-4b5e-9204-b267282a1ce1
“Regular” espouses –
“Radio is a free market enterprise.”
Nope.
It’s a commodity limited by the spectrum.
According to the Federal Communications Act of 1938, the airwaves are the common property of the people. Broadcast stations purchase licenses to control a certain bandwidth.
Free enterprise system — An economic system characterized by private ownership of property and productive resources, the profit motive to stimulate production, competition to ensure efficiency, and the forces of supply and demand to direct the production and distribution of goods and services.
Your side promotes the antithesis of free enterprise in the radio broadcasting world; you Libs want the government to force ‘equal time’ on privately owned radio stations, which are independent of the government.
The only thing that is licensed is the bandwidth and the privilege to broadcast on that bandwith.
Libs
Get your talking points straight, would you please?
Some of you claim that the “Fairness Doctrine” did not, in any way, stop or discourage modern talk radio.
Some of you, on the lunatic left, now beg for the return of the “Fairness Doctrine” — so that talk radio will be shut down?
Moonbats!
“Your side promotes the antithesis of free enterprise in the radio broadcasting world; you Libs want the government to force ‘equal time’ on privately owned radio stations, which are independent of the government.”
Point of reality. The Fairness Doctrine did not require “equal time”, but it did require that more than one side should have their viewpoint represented. Equal opportunity was not the same as “equal time”.
That being said, what were considered the compelling reasons for the Fairness Doctrine, the limited number of broadcasting frequencies, and the fact that this limited number of frequences was essentially considered public property to be leased to private broadcasters, has largely become moot with the advent of cable, HD frequencies, and satellite radio. That being said, the deregulation of radio on public airwaves I believe has created problems, more along the lines of monopolies, ownership, and comsumer interests/needs being way down the list of broadcasters.
That being said, the deregulation of radio on public airwaves I believe has created problems, more along the lines of monopolies, ownership, and comsumer interests/needs being way down the list of broadcasters.
I would add a couple more things. If one takes a look at the battles over bandwidth these days, believe it or not, we’re still facing issues of spectrum scarcity. They’re not the same issues: huge chunks of the electromagnetic spectrum are in play, but the explosion of communications technologies has created multiple conflicts nonetheless.
The issue at this point is indeed one more of control and ownership than ever. The freewheeling nature of the Internet has served as a mild corrective to the huge media concentration of our time. Unfortunately, the broadband duopolies (i.e. cable monopoly vs. DSL monopoly) we see developing in most communities potentially threaten even that: it’s a chilling non-coincidence that AT&T was involved in censorship of political criticism in live concerts and participated in Bush’s illegal spying proram and was a chief sponsor of this year’s Democratic National Convention.
And we were one vote–Republican chairman Kevin Martin–from allowing Comcast to screw the connections of customers using peer-to-peer protocols, in violation of their own terms of service, something they did in secret and initially denied, until the technical proofs of it could no longer be gainsaid.
The Fairness Doctrine was pretty much as innocuous as it’s been presented by several person heres but the real issue for the 21st century is Net Neutrality, the endangered founding principle of the Internet.
http://savetheinternet.com/
Hey! I wonder how my daddy would precept this
#
Agnatha
Posted September 1, 2008 at 1:51 pm | Permalink
“Your side promotes the antithesis of free enterprise in the radio broadcasting world; you Libs want the government to force ‘equal time’ on privately owned radio stations, which are independent of the government.”
Point of reality. The Fairness Doctrine did not require “equal time”, but it did require that more than one side should have their viewpoint represented. Equal opportunity was not the same as “equal time”.
That being said, what were considered the compelling reasons for the Fairness Doctrine, the limited number of broadcasting frequencies, and the fact that this limited number of frequences was essentially considered public property to be leased to private broadcasters, has largely become moot with the advent of cable, HD frequencies, and satellite radio. That being said, the deregulation of radio on public airwaves I believe has created problems, more along the lines of monopolies, ownership, and comsumer interests/needs being way down the list of broadcasters.
————————
Satellite broadcasting has changed the playing field.
If the liberals have the cash and want to exploit their unrestricted voice over air channels, they can do so now.
Satellite radio is a subscriber service.
Are the Liberals afraid they would fail financially in such a market unless they market ’soft porn’ like Howard Stern?
I think there is much fear in the Liberal radio crowd they cannot compete without compromising all of their common decency like is done on the Howard Stern satellite radio service.
The majority of Americans do not want to tune into the ‘porn channel’.