Mike Luckovich

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 12:58 AM | Link to this

Since almost all of the alleged OBL rant came straight from Democrat(ic)s talking points, the DNC, the New York Times, and assorted moonbat websites, does this mean ml thinks they all like President Bush too?

By Jesus

January 21, 2006 01:47 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 01:48 AM | Link to this

Jesus,

You’re up awfully late, aren’t you?

By Dick (the original)

January 21, 2006 03:17 AM | Link to this

Ohh darnit. Can’t sleep. What to do? Hey! Let’s IMPRISON BUSH! This geek has spent his entire cheerleading life as a pansy. Let’s place him in an appropriate setting with people of similar morals & ethics. San Quentin! They’ll be calling him “Martha” before the sun sets on his first day! On that pleasant thought, I think I can sleep. Night all. P.S. Another good and true one, ML.

By Dick (the original)

January 21, 2006 03:23 AM | Link to this

Whoa!! Let’s hear it for JESUS!! Way ta go, JC! Like your style. Stick around awhile this time. Beware of Repubs. For you, of all people, know them for what they are. Git you some shuteye, JC.

By Sam

January 21, 2006 03:31 AM | Link to this

RW. I’ll bet JESUS is up late because he’s devoutly contemplating how to turn the lights out on people like you.

By Lynne

January 21, 2006 04:37 AM | Link to this

Mike, the year is young, but this one is a candidate for your 2006 favorites.

THIS is the reason why the US not been attacked since 9/11. Bush fell right into the trap. He even provided OBL with a fresh trainging ground in Iraq.

Way to go W. That’s homeland security in the uS. Impeach Bush.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 21, 2006 05:57 AM | Link to this

I love this cartoon.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 06:19 AM | Link to this

So if I was stomping cartoon boy’s guts out on the sidewalk and he asked me for a truce, but uttered under his sorry pinko breath that “praise allah, this has been a blessing for me,” now tell me, would I give the truce or would I wipe the little pervert all the way out?

Me and Bush think alike.

Maybe Bush wouldn’t be so mad if he didn’t have a bald headed crackpot goofball from the state department laughing the enemies empty threats up in the oval office. Bush is probably upset that this receding hairline freak isn’t doing his job and finding Bin Laden.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 06:26 AM | Link to this

Iran’s leader challenges Europe to take back Jews in Israel

I got a better idea. How about if we challenge allah to take back all the Iranians in “heaven?” Will do the packing and shipping for him.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 06:41 AM | Link to this

Don’t you forget, Osama: Bin Laden’s tape may yield clues- You’ll have to run and hide for a little while, just in case Bush and his neocon cabal do find a clue of your whereabouts. We wouldn’t want you to get caught, gosh no, that would put us behind in the polls! We got mid terms coming! We need a bunch of dead Americans so we can beat the Bush Administration over the head with them! More audio tapes! Go, Osama, go!

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 06:43 AM | Link to this

Good toon, ML. Too bad that OBL seems to have more credibility with the American public than the current occupants of the White House. Al Qaeda’s goal was to destroy the American way of life, not a couple of buildings. Look at today’s war dead, political polarization, economy stifling occupation costs, war bucks profiteering/corruption, loss of global standing, burgeoning inflation, record trade deficits, isolation of allies, stagnation of emergency preparedness due to war prioritization, reconstruction costs (AKA “when you lose, you win”), and the greatest loss of American civil liberties (Patriot Act) that has ever occurred in the history of our nation (I’m sure that OBL considers this his greatest achievement). No wonder Osama has more credibility; HE accomplishes what he starts out to do. Can we say the same of GWB?

By Andy

January 21, 2006 06:46 AM | Link to this

AntiR: Go, Osama, go!

By Andy

January 21, 2006 06:50 AM | Link to this

AntiR: Wouldn’t it be really cool if Al Qaeda killed a whole bunch of Americans, maybe even took out a whole city like Atlanta? You could stick to Bush in a major way then, couldn’t you? You could dance in the streets and call for impeachment and even protest the White House! You would win for sure in 06! Go, Osama, go!

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 06:56 AM | Link to this

That’s my Andy. Unfortunately, Osama IS like a football team to Muslim peoples. We have made him a rallying cry; a martyr if we can kill him. Before he was a fringe nut-job, now he’s a pious and humble religious man who is fighting the great hoards of the American imperialist occupying aggressors. Not exactly the image of OBL that we wanted to establish, I think.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 06:56 AM | Link to this

Listen to these freak pinkos, whose ancestors probably cheered on Hitler: I’m so glad Osama is on my side. He’s big and scary, just perfect to take on Bush and his evil oil cabal. And Bush can’t find him! Isn’t that so cool? I hope Osama cuts some hostage’s head off on Al Jazeera, that would really show Bush and the democrat poll numbers would go up. Nobody could beat us then!

Sick, pathetic, mentally stunted perverts.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 07:04 AM | Link to this

AntiR: The dude tried to surrender, pervert. What more do you need? Or is that what you are after? Would it get your jollies if we offered to surrender? That would really make your hero into a Rock Star, he could tour America with Michael Moore then, right? That would be so cool wouldn’t it?

Sick, pathetic, mentally stunted perverts.

By candide

January 21, 2006 07:19 AM | Link to this

Indeed our Iraq adventure has been to the advantage of the Muslim extremists. We would have got Bin Laden had we not gotten into Iraq’s quadmire. Bush should be sent to Teheran as an honored guest — at least get the s.o.b. out of here!

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 07:29 AM | Link to this

Andy: Not a question of my (or your) particular wants or desires. I’m not the one who made bin Laden a hero, you know. That is the result of the missteps that were taken to pursue him. The President made a lot of tough-talk regarding OBL early on in the war effort (not anymore, though). While good for campaign speechs, this now leaves us in the position of demonstrated ineffectiveness. This is not the image our enemies should have been given, is it?

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 21, 2006 07:44 AM | Link to this

Andy: “Listen to these freak pinkos, whose ancestors probably cheered on Hitler”
Or better still financed Hitler

By Andy

January 21, 2006 07:53 AM | Link to this

AntiR: I’m not the one who made bin Laden a hero, you know.

What is this, pervert?

Or this, you freak?: Before he was a fringe nut-job, now he’s a pious and humble religious man who is fighting the great hoards of the American imperialist occupying aggressors.

America is done for. We are swamped with a bunch of pathetic, sick, worthless deviates, the same kind of sicko that would read about the Holocaust and giggle, like AntiR and Liberal Texas Democrat and all you other little enemy cheering degenerates.

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 07:59 AM | Link to this

WOW, LTD, Great Link!

W’s G’daddy and Dick Cheney have a lot in common.

Don’t forget that in the late 90’s Dick’s company was helping Saddam strengthen his oil infrastructure. Listen to the rhetoric that old fart spews out now and you’d never know he was in bed with Saddam right up until 9/11.

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 08:03 AM | Link to this

If a couple of statements made on a blog indicates that “America is done for”, it must be much weaker than even bin Laden and Zarqawi imagined. America will only be done for when it loses the ability to have open dialogue about issues relevant to its’ future well-being. If the NonCons had their way this would be sooner rather than later.

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this

Pervert, Sicko, Degenerate, Pinko, Pathetic, Deviate - all in one post. My what a colorful vocabulary you possess.

Is this all that is left when reason and facts don’t support your position?

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 21, 2006 08:16 AM | Link to this

Andy: “America is done for. We are swamped with a bunch of pathetic, sick, worthless deviates, the same kind of sicko that would read about the Holocaust and giggle, like AntiR and Liberal Texas Democrat and all you other little enemy cheering degenerates.” Well then I guess you’ve nothing else to say … nothing to do now but gnash thy teeth and get out the sack cloth and ashes. Yup, I’m holding my breath

By Andy

January 21, 2006 08:26 AM | Link to this

The sickness continues:

America will only be done for when it loses the ability to have open dialogue about issues relevant to its’ future well-being.

Listen to the rhetoric that old fart spews out now and you’d never know he was in bed with Saddam right up until 9/11.

Before he was a fringe nut-job, now he’s a pious and humble religious man who is fighting the great hoards of the American imperialist occupying aggressors

Bush should be sent to Teheran as an honored guest

Relevant to our countries future or sick, pathetic anti American masturbation? You decide.

How old are you people?

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 21, 2006 08:31 AM | Link to this

LHU: “Don’t forget that in the late 90’s Dick’s company was helping Saddam strengthen his oil infrastructure.” Neither should we forget that it was GW’s Daddy, in the long line of war profiteers that sold Saddam all those WMD’s. Possibly the only reason GW believed Saddam had wmds was that he found the receipts in his Daddy’s desk. Given the record on body and vehicle armor that went with the troops into Iraq what kind of mad man invades a nation that possesses wmd’s, if indeed he really did believe they were there. with an army the size of, and equipped, as the one he used?

By Silly Pervert Pinko

January 21, 2006 08:36 AM | Link to this

Bush is so stupid. How come we have to have a leader like him instead of that GREAT, WONDERFUL, ROCK STAR OSAMA BIN LADEN? We’re always stuck with the oil hogs. Islam is such a better religion than Christianity. I really like when they make their women cover themselves completely up. We need to do that with these loudmouth woman’s rights chicks here that won’t let us score any p-ussy. We could enslave them like the Taliban does and have our way with them.

I’m tired of being a homo. It’s time to start burying all the other homos in the ground and stoning them with big rocks, like my hero Osama does.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 21, 2006 08:37 AM | Link to this

One is tempted to ask why it’s so easy to go to war based on artists renditions and so difficult to resolve said war except that someone, somewhere is making money … even if it’s only selling all those magnetic ribbons.

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 08:49 AM | Link to this

Some of us are old enough to remember that:

-in the early 60’s the US helped Saddam’s Baathist party rise to power in Iraq. (this was not good for democracy)

-in that same period the US helped establish the Shah in Iran. (this was not also not good for democracy)

-throughout the 80’s the US armed and trained future taliban and al qaeda members in Afghanistan.

-Also throughout the 80’s the US armed and trained Saddam Hussein’s army.

-we continue to either openly support or take no action against dictatorships around the world despite constant rhetoric about spreading democracy. Think China, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, libya, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Burma, etc.

There is a lot more, but your rantings indicate that you cannot be old enough or wise enough to understand.

Our Government has made some terrible mistakes (particularly in middle eastern foreign policy), needs to stop making stupid mistakes, and needs to get its actions in line with its rhetoric instead of coming across to the world as a shameless hypocrit.

By Silly Pervert Pinko

January 21, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this

This is how our hero gets control over his women and homos. Isn’t he soooo great! We should draw more cartoons of him shaming the American infidel president, maybe we can get him out of office! Then we can enslave and kill, like Osama does!

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this

Hey, SPP (I mean Andy),

Unfortunately the video you linked to is either the same one or very similar to a video I have seen that was recorded in Saudi Arabia (the Bushies best buddies). Are you really that ignorant or just desperate to defend the indefensible?

By getalife

January 21, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this

You are doing a heck of a job dubya.Only 1095 days to go

By Silly Pervert Pinko

January 21, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this

Michael Moore said that BUSH! dug an oil pipeline under Afghanistan! This gives us the right to cheer for the other side! So let’s draw cartoon’s shaming America! Let’s help our hero Osama, maybe he’ll let us stone some women for adultery! Won’t that be hilarious watching them beg right before we crush their heads. Remember, we are democrats too, we can tell every body we care about women and then draw cartoons showing how great people that stone women to death are. We’ve got it made!

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this

ML, I think you sent SPPAndy over the edge with this cartoon.

Maybe he’ll either keep hiding under various names or go away altogether now.

By Silly Pervert Pinko

January 21, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

This Osama guy is really cool, it’s a shame we let it get out that we just love him. Now we have to try to back out of what we said before, bummer. Maybe later, when Andy isn’t looking, we can push a brick wall over on a homosexual like Osama does. I can’t wait!

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 21, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this

LHU: “Maybe he’ll either keep hiding under various names or go away altogether now”.

I kinda like Andy’s new name. It’s so fitting, you know, “Methinks he doth protest too loudly,” - Shakespear “Men rage against the demon in others that most strongly disturds their own sleep at night” - me.

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 09:35 AM | Link to this

“Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz said ‘no tangible evidence’ had been found that al-Qaida operatives were among the 13 people killed in a US missle attack on the village of Damadola near the Afghanistan border last week. Meanwhile, thousands of chanting protesters took to the streets again on Friday,calling for Holy war as outrage persisted over the air strike.”

Why in the world would Muslim people support OBL when WE threat them sooooo gooood!!!!!!

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 09:35 AM | Link to this

LTD,

He will not understand the prose you post and it will only confuse and frustrate him further.

It could cause his personality to split again…who knows which name he will cowardly hide behind next.

By gttim

January 21, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Andy is a complete moron.

So if I was stomping cartoon boy’s guts out on the sidewalk and he asked me for a truce, but uttered under his sorry pinko breath that “praise allah, this has been a blessing for me,� now tell me, would I give the truce or would I wipe the little pervert all the way out?

We are not stomping anybody’s guts out. First off we are not even chasing OBL right now. All our guys are fighting in Iraq. Second, sure we have great soldiers doing a good job there, but you cannot occupy a country. Those people live there, they are not leaving, they have time on their side, and they will just keep blowing up $10 bombs until we leave. Our billions of dollars of military might will never change that. Most people learned this lesson in Vietnam. Our soldiers are dying so W can pretend he has a bigger dick than his daddy.

Remember OBL was who blew up the WTC. Now he sits in the mountains making videos while W has our soldiers in Iraq. That takes a genius! Lets not go after the guy who killed 3000 Americans. I have an idea, lets leave Iraq and go get OBL. I think most Americans, and polls bear this out, would approve.

Yeah, Andy we get it by your hundreds of moronic posts which you evediently have time to post since you either do not have a job or a life, or both. You love W! Anything he does is great, and anything Democrats do you hate. We understand you are a fanatic, like those guys bombing our soldiers, without reasoning skills to figure things out on your own, and that you must keep spitting out the GOP talking points and worship their politicians. Look at the polls, even on ML’s cartoons. The majority of Americans think we should not be in Iraq, and that W is not doing a good job.

Andy, get a job, get a life, get something. Your act is tired.

By Eric

January 21, 2006 09:41 AM | Link to this

Every time that ‘Andy’ opens his mouth I feel like I’m watching some cheap ripoff of All In The Family. Everything he says makes him look like some unlovable Archie Bunker character and a total idiot. The biggest differences are that Archie was entertaining and eventually even displayed some positive human qualities. I don’t really expect anything positive to spewing forth from that ‘Andy’. I think he’s just taking up space and wasting oxygen.

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

Eric & LHU: Andy-bashing does you no more honor than pinko-bashing does him. While Andy and I have some differences of opinion (mostly regarding the war), I still find some of his comments (when he’s not on a rant) insightful and worthy of consideration. He may even be right and the best way to navigate the current world menace may be through hair-trigger aggression. None of us really knows, afterall. We are all guessing based on our own experience, knowledge, prejudices and value sets. If the Andy’s and Midori’s of our country don’t have a voice today, you won’t have one tommorow!

By Andy

January 21, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this

Check this out: Osama is asking for a truce, you blooming idiots.

truce- n. A respite from a disagreeable state of affairs.

I’m fully aware that you silly pervert pinkos have no formal education other than “Bush Sucks,” which you probably have a PHD in by now, but we’re kicking this guys a-ss. You don’t ask to stop a war when you are winning, well, hold up, now I understand. It’s that pinko Murtha sickness that’s taken effect. You duma-sses think surrendering is victory. I forgot.

But that doesn’t mean Osama don’t rock!: An 84-year-old man survives a high-tech Taliban stoning (of the tank and wall variety) and denies any homosexual activity — he’s impotent.

You stupid moron pinkos cheer for your hero, I’ll cheer for mine, thank you.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this

After reading a translation of OBL’s recent threat, and seeing the similarities between the statements made by the liberal media, I see ml’s cartoon as self-gratification in the worst possible light. And he expects all Americans to help him pay the bill that he has incurred. Deplorable!!!

I agree with Andy. OBL is asking for a truce, that statement alone, speaks volumes for those who want to read the book.

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

Osama bin Laden has had a bounty of $27 million dollars on his head for what, 4 years? I think that the thing that chills Americans to their very core is that we have finally locked horns with a sub-culture that can’t be bought. This is so completely foreign to our sensibilities that we are now completely at a loss as to what to do.

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

OO: This is about the 50th truce offer from bin Laden. It’s just rhetoric meant to embarass us and give himself pseudo-authority. He, by no means, really wishes a truce and is well aware that he will not get one. Why would he want to step down from his bully-pulpit, afterall?

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this

AntiR: There is frustration, but your use of sub-culture, in some strange way, offers hope. Hoping their numbers are fewer than those who desire something better. I know you are too.

By Miguel de la familia Robinson

January 21, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this

“You don’t ask to stop a war when you are winning…”

I just woke up and that statement made me laugh so hard I almost peed in my pajamas.

“…but we’re kicking this guys a-ss.”

And then I read that and a little part of me died inside.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

This cartoon is no sub culture, this is mainstream

This is a deep seated politically motivated sickness, it’s taught in our schools, the supposed “adults” of the left call it patriotism and “dissent,” I’ve dealt with a whole group of perverts this morning that made all kinds of morbid putrid little excuses for it. Call it what you will, it is depravity, this Osama is a murderer, a champion of the anti woman and anti homosexual lobby like none other. This is who the left has hitched their wagon to. I’m proud for them. I wish they would take up arms for him.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

AntiR: I’m not aware of any other truce offerings, but then your use of pseudo-authority, again offers hope. Are you offering this hope intentionally? It doesn’t matter, hope guides my life, and no one can take that. Naive? Maybe, but happy in each moment.

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

OO- I’m with you there. I don’t think OBL would have an ounce of respect from the world’s Muslim community if we hadn’t repeatedly played into his hands and appointed him to martyr status. Hopefully the world can still come to understand that despite America’s knee-jerk response, bin Laden is just another radical religious kook.

By MajE

January 21, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

ABL gets most of his talking points from the Democratic Leadership and the American Press; they all hate what this country stands for. I’ve spent two years of my life in SWA and I can honestly tell you that the American Press is an enemy of democracy and the good deeds we try to accomplish. You may hate Bush, you may hate many things….(so many of you are just so bitter) but history (50 years from now) will show that this Endeavour was the first time that America proactively tried to make this world a better place for all people. Put your pseudo-intellectual arguments and hate aside and let’s try to give all people the freedoms we enjoy.

By getalife

January 21, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

We are teaching our cildren to lie, cheat, steal and kill

By AD

January 21, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this

RW..do you work for the AJC..get paid for being in this blog 24/7? Andy..how about you as well? Or do you guys work for Luckovich? You sure are keeping him in groceries.

By AntiRadical

January 21, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this

OO- World News had a break down of other bin Laden “truce” offers yesterday. Bottom line- it’s supposed to make it look like he is in control and has authority to negotiate. Psy-ops bull-stuff and the world swallows it hook, line, and sinker over, and over, and over again.

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

It is ‘deep seated politically motivated sickness’ that got us into a war of choice, created the terrorist training ground the war was supposed to prevent, and now uses that war to as a political instrument.

The war in Iraq was a mistake. All a truly objective observer would have to do is look at the long, ever shifting justifications given for this war, look at the facts we now know about those ‘justifications,’ and weigh that against the ridiculous rhetoric this administration still spews.

The irony of all this is that if the situation were reversed and Al Gore was in the White House making the exact same decisions, the people posting here would probably be taking entirely different positions. That is what is truly sad…

By Semper Fi

January 21, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this

Andy, RW, Ricky, Dusty, Buff and others, now MajE are just good Americans trying to point out some of the lies that liberals so freely state and believe, from their mind controlling mass media.
Ml is doing a fine job, for OBL that is.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

AntiR: I’m not going to be able to agree with you on OBL’s martyr status for the majority of the Muslim community. I don’t think that response to an unprovoked attack in the U.S. against innocent civilians can be categorized as a knee-jerk reaction.

This man hated us before 9/11, and for no other reason than “we exist.” I’m off to get groceries.

By M.S.

January 21, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

What a bunch of nonsense! Bin Laden cited American poles and news stories to back up his position the other day. I hope that fact is not lost on all of you Bush haters out there! there is a right way and a wrong way to dissent. It seems many people are in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with Osama!

By Andy

January 21, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

Here’s spmeting for you goofy know it all perverts, straight from the mouth of the “winners” in Iraq:

The present and future: There is no doubt that American losses were significant because they are spread thin amongst the people and because it is easy to get weapons. This is a fact that makes them easy targets, attractive for the believers. America, however, has no intention of leaving, no matter how many wounded nor how bloody it becomes. It is looking to a near future, when it will remain safe in its bases, while handing over control of Iraq to a bastard government with an army and police force that will bring back the time of (Saddam) Husayn and his cohorts. There is no doubt that our field of movement is shrinking and the grip around the throat of the Mujahidin has begun to tighten. With the spread of the army and police, our future is becoming frightening.

Even with the propaganda, this piece of excrement has to admit that they are done for.

But that doesn’t mean Osama don’t rock!: According to those stories, the Taliban’s Islamic jurists knew that homosexuality was reprehensible and the sentence should be execution, but they were genuinely puzzled by conflicting Islamic opinion on exactly how the execution should be carried out. “We have a dilemma on this,” one Taliban leader explained. “One group of scholars believes you should take these people to the top of the highest building in the city, and hurl them to their deaths. (The other) believes in a different approach. They recommend you dig a pit near a wall somewhere, put these people in it, then topple the wall so that they are buried alive.” That’s you’re hero Osama, he’s the bomb!

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

LHU: That is truly presumptuous of you to assume that different candidate, same cause, would change my attitude on this subject. You are as wrong about that as you are about other things.

I did not vote for Gore, don’t like the man, but have voted democrat in the past. But, if he chose to do so, militarily respond to a looming threat, I would support him because this threat is real and has been around a long time.

Do not presume to know me, you do not.

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

Here’s a simple thought that the most narrow-minded of posters here need to understand:

Opposition to the war in Iraq does not equal support for Al Qaeda, Hussein, and/or terrorism.

Read it, know it, love it.

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this

OO: A truly objective observer would not presume I was referring specifically to him.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this

LHU: When you clearly refer to “a truly objective observer” after exchange of posts between myself and AntiR, I saw this as obvious. My mistake……possibly????

By Andy

January 21, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Lord Help Us: One is entitled to believe that OBL, murderer of innocents, killer of homosexuals, woman discriminator extraordinare, is one that we should all hate. In fact it is quite easy to mistake the praise for this piece of excrement as a mental disorder or maybe a perversion. This is a free country, after all.

By finch

January 21, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this

Andy-pie obviously missed his rabies shots. I feel kinda sorry for him.

Kudos to LTD and Lord Help Us, who saved me the trouble of detailing all the ways that BushCo, CheneyInc, and their own personal military-industrial complex are all busy exchanging… no, not blood for oil. Blood for money.

A-pie’s alter ego Silly Pervert Pinko deserves a special gold star for noting how the Saudis tromp all over human (women, gays) rights in the name of Islam. Not Iraq. Saudi Arabia. You know, family home of OBL?

Hey A and SPP, let’s attack Saudi Arabia!! That’s where the Wahhabi extremism and the terror funding comes from!!

Nope, can’t be bothered. Too many business interests. Too much money to lose.

BushCo has created the best terror recruitment campaign OBL could ever hope for. The war in Iraq. He’s just taking advantage of it, as Mike so cleverly points out.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

So 8 hours and 49 minutes after my last post some freak says I am on here 24/7. Did you miss me “AD”?

LHU,

If Gore was in office conducting the same foreign policy the President is, I would support him. I’m a strong believer in politics stopping at the waters edge, but I also believe that it was going to take strong, serious action to ever effect lasting change in the Middle East.

I’m sure you are sincere when you claim you don’t support OBL, but he (or whoever that really was) is using your statements to bolster his claims. Some things are more important than your hatred.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this

BARELY TWO WEEKS before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the New York Post and Court TV both ran items about the Afghanistan Taliban regime’s<——————( not Saudi Arabia, you sick little pervert liar, champion of our nation’s enemy) punishment of two men convicted of homosexuality.

By Brian Curtis

January 21, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this

Good cartoon, Luckovich. And despite more desperate attempts at spin from the neocon and their tools, this is yet another reminder:

Bush is a failure. The ONE guy who actually attacked the U.S.—the one guy Bush swore to track down—still eludes him while we screw around in Iraq and wiretap American citizens without warrants. Great “strategy,” Dubya.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this

Look at finch making excuses, lying and twisting my words in support of a mass murderer, killer of homosexuals. It’s good to know where you people stand on these issues, why don’t you clear the air, tell us how you really feel about Hitler killing all those Jews? For it or against it? I know where finch, cartoon boy, gttim, eric and Lord Help Us stand, anybody else want to get behind Osama?

By Dusty

January 21, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

Well, it hardly seemed appropriate to post today. All the traitors were saying every ugly thing they could imagine. No, it wasn’t dissent when you call Americans “imperialistic, occupying aggressors” and saying that Osama has more “credibility than President Bush”. It is plain old subversion. And if Luckovich is your flag boy with his “humorous” dejection of Bush and American policy, then he goes in the pile with you other “objectors”. I cannot be as “kindly” as Ojective Observer, MajE, Semper fi and even Andy with his brash words. RW is the diplomat but that role gets harder and harder. For the losers here, you are not supporting your country and there is no way to disguise it. Whatever your agenda is, I do not condone anti-Americanism.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this

Bush is a failure. Says one American enemy.

There is no doubt that our field of movement is shrinking and the grip around the throat of the Mujahidin has begun to tighten. With the spread of the army and police, our future is becoming frightening. Says another American enemy.

Can you tell the difference? #1 is a pampered little pinko, college campus “activist,” who’s ahd mommie and daddy to pay his sorry way through life. It’s cool and the “in” thing to bash America, so of course, little pervert Brian, who has no control over his life anyway, sides up with the mass murderer, killer of homosexuals.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

Screw them on at 8:16, 9:16, 9:28, 9:35, 9:37 and 9:41 for:

Driving without insurance and leaving the scene of their accident.

Congratulations! All gone.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this

Why is there no space between mine and Andy’s post?

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

OO: Can’t help but notice all the posts you refer to are on the ‘left’ side…

Even though your post makes no sense, it looks like there is not much ‘objective’ about the observer.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

Andy,

A message for moonbats

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

It’s not like you to give multiple awards to the same people, I think you should reconsider. Mainly because I have not been able to wrangle one of those coveted wingnuts away from you.

By finch

January 21, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

Well, I don’t condone anti-Americanism either. That’s why I don’t condone BushCo’s invasion of Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11! A waste of American time, money and bood. And for what?

A-pie is right about Afghanistan and gays, though. And the Taliban hated women too! But those weren’t the only reasons to invade Afghanistan. It harbored OSL! I’m thrilled that the US actually had the smarts to hit a logical target!

Meanwhile, were gays and women being stoned in Saddam’s Iraq? Nope. Not like in Saudia Arabia. Or Afghanistan. Or Pakistan.

So lets get to the core reason for the post 9/11 war on terror. Who financed OSL? What nation produced the Wahhabi sect that inspired OSL? The sect that not only hates women and gays, but S-h-i-ttes, Sufis, Druids, and secular Sunni Muslims, to say nothing of Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and athiests?

SAUDIA ARABIA!!!

Why didn’t BushCo invade Saudi Arabia after 9/11? Easy. Too many business interests and too much money. Iraq, where extremists were too busy killing eachother to bother with the US, was chosen instead. Why? BushCo and CheneyInc had hairs up their butts for YEARS about Iraq, ever since Daddy had the NERVE to agree to a truce in the Gulf War. This was the chance to act out their looney-tune Crusader American fantasy. It had nothing to do with 9/11.

And let’s not forget Pakistan, even if BushCo and CheneyInc have! Musharraf, superficially pro-western, is dangling by a thread while he pitches for more US fighter jets and earthquake aid! And his government still won’t confirm that ANY Al Qaeda were killed in the 1/13 US air strike.

Meanwhile, anti-US militants with a serious Taliban-Osama bent are now “stronger than ever” in northern Pakistan!

How convenient!

But back to Iraq, which is now (thanks to the US), a symbol of so-called “anti-Islam Yankee imperialism” in THAT region. It’s become a beacon for every ill-educated Muslim with a martyr complex in Mesopotamia.

Nice work. Brilliant. (/sarcasm) The US has turned a serious problem into a monster.

I wouldn’t let BushCo and CheneyInc organize a picnic. The ants would win.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

OK, I’ll bite. Who is OSL?

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

LHU: Look closer! There is a commonality among those awarded. You’re name is “Lord Help Us”, does that indicate that only “we” are deserving of God’s help, or do you extend that plea for others living under oppression and for those fighting against it. Probably, but then I’m not as certain as you are, on those things which I am not privvy to.

You’re right, I am not objective when it comes to this war, I am on other issues.

AntiR: Yours was a 9:35, but it went to the second 9:35.

By getalife

January 21, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this

Since the coc does not support wounded veterans injured fighting for our country, I just saw this on CNN

By finch

January 21, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this

Don’t forget this *very important true fact.

Pakistan, which tops the “with friends like these” list remains a paper ally in the REAL war on terror.

*”No evidence has yet turned up of al Qaeda figures among the dead when a U.S. missile killed at least 18 people in a remote part of Pakistan, the South Asian nation’s prime minister said on Friday.” (Reuters)

Some friend.

Hey, Andy-pie! Enough links for you?

By Bee Ess Detector.

January 21, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

“Objective” Observer, are you so blind that you don’t see the fact that you are no where near “objective”?

If you are “objective” then so is “Objective Andy” and “Objective RW” or “Objective Midori”.

You are a partisan hack just like everyone else on this blog, pull your head out.

By Lord Help Us

January 21, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this

A thousand pardons, I WAS WRONG. Instead of questioning the ‘objective’ portion of your nom de plume, I should have also noted that your last post casts doubt upon the ‘observer’ component as well.

God’s compassion is greater than any political party, greater than any country and is extended to all of the inhabitants of the earth that He created.

War is a last resort, not a political tool. We in this country have started down a slippery slope by engaging in a pre-emptive war of choice.

By Midori

January 21, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this

If you are “objective� then so is “Objective Andy� and “Objective RW� or “Objective Midori�.

ok — what did I do now???

By Talon News

January 21, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this

BeeEss dictator, I find your assessment totally flawed, you must be the product of the libby lib media. I consider myself completely objective and non-partisan along with others that frequent this blog more often. People like RW, Andy, Scooter, Ojective Observer, Dusty and Big Daddy are very non-partisan and are not blinded by the hypocricy of the Libby Libs. Go crawl back under your rock!

Jeff O~O

By getalife

January 21, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this

Saw this at the HP

By getalife

January 21, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this

Did some pimping here, AJC editorial on Iran is mentioned

By Dusty

January 21, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this

So many people here have to present “facts” to prove why they are really true Americans while presenting ANTI-Ameriacan statements. I don’t have to find support as to why I love this country. I have lived here all my life and don’t have to be convinced how fortunate I am. Every thing is not perfect. But I don’t have to declare the greatness of our enemies to improve any part of our government. We elected our government. We can communicate with our government. We are voting citizens. This dissolute squawking about oil, imperialism, war-mongers doesn’t cut it except with our enemies. They love it. Some of you posters need to decide exactly where your loyalties lie. I think Luckovich needs to decide too.

By Midori

January 21, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this

We can communicate with our government

Can we?

How can one “communicate” with a government who will only appear before partisan, hand-picked audiences?

How can one “communicate” with a govenment that spies on those that do not agree with it?

By getalife

January 21, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this

Well, you can to Kerry

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this

Getalife: I cannot believe you are still posting that after what I showed you last night! And you were mean to me. Does this mean we’re through?

Remember now, I, too, am all for lobby reform and term limits.

By sct

January 21, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this

We can communicate with our government

Dusty, you must be a lobbyist.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this

Well let’s see…cards, letters, e-mails, faxes, phone calls, letters to the editors, blog entries, public speaking, the ballot box….no I guess there is no possible way to communicate.

By getalife

January 21, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this

OO,

You know opinions are like …….., everybody has one.

I would never be mean to you, I have not been grumpy since the last time.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this

R.W.: Did you see MY DENNIS last night. He is so funny! Smart & funny, an unbeatable combination. But your reprimand is well received, I will leave him to his wife and children. Drat!

By getalife

January 21, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this

RW,

You check your counter lately? I have been getting hits from all over the world. My shameless plugs have been paying off.

By Know_A_Jerk_When_I_Read_One

January 21, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this

Andy:

this was TOO easy.. “Me and Bush think alike.”-Andy 6:19…

Ergo..neither of you think..or do you have your thoughts inserted into YOUR head by Daddy’s buddies too?

The ONLY reason we haven’t been attacked again is because THEY are not ready. Don’t for one second delude yourself into thinking that we’re safe- NOTHING HAS CHANGED. These are people who are willing to strap bombs to themselves in order to hurt us. Don’t ever,ever underestimate the will of the fanatical…

but wait..i just described YOU………!

By Dusty

January 21, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this

No, sct, not a lobbyist, just a party girl getting ready to go to my birthday dinner. (My children will love that party girl title.) You don’t have to be a lobbyist to love this country. What is your designation?

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this

getalife,

The way you keep quoting OBL all over the blogosphere I’m not surprised the CIA, NSA, and al Jazeera all keep checking your blog.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Unless I misread that,

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

By getalife

January 21, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this

RW,

The NSA will be busy because a lot of people are talking about his last statement. I read that the guy who wrote “The Rogue State” is doing very well off OBL’s plug.

Happy Birthday Dusty!

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

No I missed that and my “reprimand” was the very first line from your link.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this

I know R.W., I read it before you did, but you reiterated, so I was deflated twice in one evening. Too much for me to bare.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

Happy Birthday, Dusty! Oh, and by the way, I had no idea on the party girl issue.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this

Set to music:

Happy Birthday to you

Happy Birthday to you

Happy Birthday dear Dusty

Happy Birthday to you!

By Barbara

January 21, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this

Getalife and R.W. How do we find your web site/blog or whatever they are?

By getalife

January 21, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this

Hello Barbara,

Just click here and RW’s link is on the right

By Andy

January 21, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this

Good news for all of you homosexuals in Atlanta, apparently the pinkos and their favorite army, Al Qaeda, have reached the decision to serve God’s justice by burying you in a hole instead of pushing a brick wall over on you. While this is still not the best thing that you could have been told, it will be a much swifter death than being pinned under rubble for several days. So let’s give a cheer for Osama, his tender mercy has shown through once again!

And remember, keep voting for democrats, they’ve done sooooo much for you and the blacks, especially all those nice slums they hooked you up with. With luck we’ll get that evil Bush and his oil cronies out of the White House and we’ll bring the Taliban to your neighborhood. Go, Osama, go!

By Jay not jay

January 21, 2006 06:45 PM | Link to this

It’s not surprising, but it is sad that Osama is begining to sound like a democrat ventriloquist doll and they would use this for the Bush bashing party. Do you really believe anything that his sick mind would come up with anyway? I found this letter Zawahiri to Zarqawi -thanks for that link Scooter. They don’t seem to be in the best of positions lately.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this

Oops! I did give multiple awards to two individuals. Sorry, overly eager to take care of unfinished business. 13 Down 2 To Go.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 07:02 PM | Link to this

Jay not jay,

The [Kos Kidz}(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/21/152619/642) can’t seem to decide whether OBL is one of them or if Karl Rove is pulling a fast one.

Entertaining comments.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 07:04 PM | Link to this

Let’s try that again, I was laughing too hard the first time.

The Kos Kidz can’t seem to decide whether OBL is one of them or if Karl Rove is pulling a fast one.

By getalife

January 21, 2006 07:10 PM | Link to this

Man, that last Andy comment must have scare them away. What a character, did I mention that I spammed Kerry with a shameless plug?

By Geezus

January 21, 2006 07:13 PM | Link to this

Must be cAndy’s Time of the month….nice toon ml.

By Jay not jay

January 21, 2006 07:19 PM | Link to this

Yes RW, it’s a very confusing world for those kids. Maybe they should try using their own ventriloquist doll so someone may understand.

By Jay not jay

January 21, 2006 07:21 PM | Link to this

OO, who were the recent recipients of the coveted award?

By Andy

January 21, 2006 07:26 PM | Link to this

The question is - why does Bin Laden’s statement sound this way to their ears? Is it because Democrats are traitors and off-base and misleading a majority of Americans, or for some other reason? Could the fact that Tweety and others on MSNBC are confused be that Bin Laden might have some valid points?- musings of the Daily Kosers.

Why, oh, why does Osama sound just like us? Why, oh, why would he mimic the things that we say? Why, oh, why shouldn’t we feel honored that he is unable to come up with any thoughts of his own and has to use our democratic party talking points? Or should we? Why, oh, why is he cheering us on? What, oh what does he mean the struggle is in our hands? Why, oh, why does he say he will do anything to help us?

By Jay not jay

January 21, 2006 07:26 PM | Link to this

getalife, RW, I checked out your blogs, good stuff. Haven’t had a chance to post anything yet though.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 07:33 PM | Link to this

Jay not jay,

Thanks. I wonder if Dusty knows who she shares a birthday with?

By getalife

January 21, 2006 07:36 PM | Link to this

Thanks Jay not jay,

It will be there and it is not censored, so post whatever you want.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 07:39 PM | Link to this

Here you go JayNot: By Objective Observer January 21, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this*

Screw them on at 8:16, 9:16, 9:28, 9:35, 9:37 and 9:41 for:

Driving without insurance and leaving the scene of their accident.

Congratulations!

In all fairness, one of them did return to the scene, but what’s done is done. I am gonna have to watch R.W. though, for some strange reason, he wants one, but they aren’t free. 13 Down & 2 To Go.

By getalife

January 21, 2006 07:41 PM | Link to this

They get a little carried away with the smiley faces over there.

By Jay not jay

January 21, 2006 07:42 PM | Link to this

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

OH NO, Don’t say that, my birthday is tomorrow, but I’m getting ready to head out to celebrate tonight. So, I will cast this Politically Neutral statement: Go Aquarius’! Hell, they may name a professional sport team that next, huh?

By Andy

January 21, 2006 07:43 PM | Link to this

Look at Sunday’s editorial page in the AJC for the perfect snapshot of pinkoville, we’ve got the right to kill an unborn child, the right to kill an unborn child, the right to kill yourself and Osama Bin Laden’s right to kill homosexuals. How delightful and uplifting. It’s no wonder that pinkos are always such cheerful people.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 07:45 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

I just linked to Kos and DU, what does it take to win one of these highly coveted nuts with teeth?

By Hypocrit Alert!!

January 21, 2006 07:48 PM | Link to this

“You can support the troops but not the President.”

“Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly. We must stop giving the appearance that our foreign policy is formulated by the Unabomber.�

“It is clear that any deployment to Kosovo will similarly drag on and go enormously over budget.�

“I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today.�

Tom Delay quotes, i guess republicans don’t support the troops and aid the enemy. At least we clearly won there. this incompetent administration will slander anyone to take the focus off their failed policies. Nice try.

By Midori

January 21, 2006 07:52 PM | Link to this

The meme of the month: OBL sounds like Democrats!!!

or is it Democrats sound like OBL?

I post on both Conservative Underground and FreeRepublic.

I saw that meme taking shape there.

Sure didn’t take long to filter over here.

I’ve never seen so many human parrots

It all flows downhill.

By Brian Curtis

January 21, 2006 07:53 PM | Link to this

I love America. That’s why I’m fighting its enemies—Bush and his neocon cronies—as hard as I can.

Oh, and unlike Bush, I haven’t forgotten Osama —but I’ll bet he’d like to!

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 07:55 PM | Link to this

Well obviously someone left one of the doors open on one of my links.

By Jay not jay

January 21, 2006 07:56 PM | Link to this

Brian Curtis, your fighting the Bushista and neocons have caused you to loose your focus. Osama has never been forgotten, he sounds like a desparate houswife to me.

By lol

January 21, 2006 07:58 PM | Link to this

Another Bush lie:

“Wanted dead or alive: Osama Bin Laden”

By Andy

January 21, 2006 08:04 PM | Link to this

Molly Ivins really, really does not want America to win in Iraq.

And she ain’t afraid to lie about it either..

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 08:10 PM | Link to this

R.W.: You are always visiting strange links, like me. It is what happens when you hang around with Big Daddy. Not good enough. You are going to have to work really hard. You know what it will take, do you have that in you?

I did give one to myself and 2 to Getalife though, so maybe I will make a generous exception.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 08:12 PM | Link to this

More importantly, we have seen the rise of a great cause. Three Republican Presidents and Republican Congressional majorities have achieved a tremendous amount in two-and-a-half decades. The Cold War was won - and today we are winning the war against Islamic fascism. Millions of people who lived in tyranny have been liberated - and freedom is spreading across the globe. Republicans rebuilt our national defenses; cut taxes and spurred economic growth; ended “stagflation;” limited government’s growth; reformed welfare and insisted on accountability and high standards in education; took important steps to protect and strengthen marriage and the family; and stood up against judicial activism and for constitutionalism.

The United States faces a ruthless enemy - and we need a commander-in-chief and a Congress who understand the nature of the threat and the gravity of this moment.

Political Genius, Karl Rove, still no indictments against him, apparently the pinkos were lying about that too…

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 08:20 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

Now if “do what it takes” you won’t believe it was an honest effort.

Maybe these guys could play at the awards ceremony.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 08:30 PM | Link to this

These guys don’t have “nuts with teeth’, but they do use nuts for teeth.

By Andy

January 21, 2006 08:31 PM | Link to this

My goodness, the Chicago Tribune:

For all his bluster about more attacks, though, it’s likely bin Laden spends much of his time with an uneasy truth. Somehow, the Central Intelligence Agency learned that several Al Qaeda heavies would be in that Pakistani hamlet. How, bin Laden must wonder, did the CIA get that information? From a spy? From an infiltrator? From an eavesdropped conversation? From an e-mail intercept?

Whatever the answer, its implications must be as unnerving for bin Laden as his threats of annihilation are for many Americans. Ask not, Osama, for whom the missile-armed drone next searches. It searches for thee.

By Ricky

January 21, 2006 08:31 PM | Link to this

Hey Jimmy Carter is supportive of Hamas. Former President Jimmy Carter expressed optimism Friday over Hamas’s participation in next week’s Palestinian parliamentary elections, saying that while the group may be terrorists, at least they’re not corrupt.

Interviewed Friday, Carter said that although Hamas were “so-called terrorists,” so far “there have been no complaints of corruption against [their] elected officials.”

By Marion of Texas

January 21, 2006 08:32 PM | Link to this

Excellent cartoon, Mike Luckovich. Thank you for continuing to hammer this pitiful president and his sycophants for all their foibles. They are the most corrupt and incompetent bunch of politicians I have ever seen. If Bush, who is so fond of self-righteously proclaiming “stay the course,” had himself stayed the course in Afghanistan, we would not be in the mess we’re in now in Iraq. And we would also not have lost over 2200 American lives in that country. Nor would we have the crippling debt which will hang over our children for decades to come. Bush is an idiot and should be impeached for all his lies.

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 08:33 PM | Link to this

R.W.: Don’t understand your first sentence. But….Set to music:

When R.W.(The Original) gets there,

everybody’s gonna jump for joy.

I love that song!

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 08:37 PM | Link to this

On second thought, things with teeth may not be something to hope for.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 08:40 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

How about this:

Thank you for continuing to hammer this pitiful president and his sycophants for all their foibles. They are the most corrupt and incompetent bunch of politicians I have ever seen. If Bush, who is so fond of self-righteously proclaiming “stay the course,� had himself stayed the course in Afghanistan, we would not be in the mess we’re in now in Iraq. And we would also not have lost over 2200 American lives in that country. Nor would we have the crippling debt which will hang over our children for decades to come. Bush is an idiot and should be impeached for all his lies.

Do you count off for plagiarism?

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 08:44 PM | Link to this

No, R.W., because everybody does that here. Keep at it though, I believe you really do want one. You will accept it with grace and humility, won’t you?

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 08:48 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

You’re a tough one. I even took out the portion where you may have trapped me with the art is subjective excuse. I would scream, throw a fit, and refuse to accept, you can get grace and humility anywhere. (OK maybe not so much here)

By Objective Observer

January 21, 2006 08:49 PM | Link to this

R.W.: I will even offer myself as a target. Go ahead, blow off some steam, I can take it.

By finch

January 21, 2006 08:51 PM | Link to this

Wow! Birthday Central!! Happy happys to Jay not Jay and Dusty!!

getalife, you are such a shill, directing Barbara to RW’s blog… through yours! Were you a door to door salesperson in another life?

And RW, you are clearly a political speechwriter from another dimension. and I think I found your pic on the web!

Is this you??

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 08:56 PM | Link to this

finch,

That guy just celebrated his 81st birthday on Christmas day.

There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man’s fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the Twilight Zone.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 09:00 PM | Link to this

A few more January 21st Birthdays

President Geena is 50 today!

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 09:06 PM | Link to this

And for “Jay not jay” January 22nd is shared with Jay by a little girl that got famous throwing up pea soup.

By finch

January 21, 2006 09:13 PM | Link to this

RW,

You mean he would have celebrated his 81st birthday on Christmas, right?

I know! Details, details… and you’re still a gentleman.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 09:18 PM | Link to this

finch,

I guess so the page I looked at didn’t mention the inconvenient fact that he had died. Provided you aren’t making that part up.

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 09:21 PM | Link to this

Died June 28, 1975. That was two days before I turned 20, no wonder I don’t remember it.

By finch

January 21, 2006 09:26 PM | Link to this

RW,

Rod had a summer home near my family’s old vacation place on Cayuga Lake in upstate NY. Trivia: The TV company he owned was “Cayuga Productions”.

That’s right. He also used to be my neighbor.

Now, stop laughing!

By RW-(the original)

January 21, 2006 09:45 PM | Link to this

Finch,

So is that the “Seneca” inspiration, I had thought it was the one near Clemson.

By finch

January 21, 2006 10:00 PM | Link to this

RW,

Shows you how ignorant I can be. I didn’t even know there was a Seneca near Clemson. Where’s my road atlas?

Yup, that’s the Seneca inspiration!

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 12:05 AM | Link to this

Jay not jay,

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

By greg

January 22, 2006 01:07 AM | Link to this

What do you suppose the many things are that Bush so hates about himself that typically made him into a common drunk??

By Andy

January 22, 2006 06:17 AM | Link to this

By greg

January 22, 2006 01:07 AM | Link to this

What do you suppose the many things are that Bush so hates about himself that typically made him into a common drunk??

Anybody care to wager whether greg had been drinking when he authored this comment? I’m just thinking liberal hypocrisy and I’m willing to lay a few bucks…

By Greg

January 22, 2006 06:40 AM | Link to this

Naw. Greg doesn’t drink. Not ever. Greg has big, big buck to offer up.Probably more than any collection of 200 twits on this blog. Always ready to make a move - but never can find a sissy with the scrotal mass to take a shot/chance. I’m real easy to locate. Very “high visability job” you might say. Always eager to take people on face-to-face. Even offer travel/medical expenses. No takers of late. News does spread, I guess. Doesn’t speak well for the heroes of the country, now does it? But thats highly predictable with Repubs all the time. Can’t trust em. But I occasionally try. Hoping to lure a big one outta his cage.

By Andy

January 22, 2006 06:51 AM | Link to this

Oh, so greg’s a crack head, I get it.

By Objective Observer

January 22, 2006 07:48 AM | Link to this

JayNot: Set to music:

Happy Birthday to you,

Happy Birthday to you,

Happy Birthday dear JayNot,

Happy Birthday to you!

By getalife

January 22, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this

I wrote that he gave campaign money to both parties and their members of Congress. He didn’t. I should have said he directed his client Indian tribes to make campaign contributions to members of Congress from both parties.

By Andy

January 22, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this

My mistake set off a firestorm. I heard that I was lying, that Democrats never got a penny of Abramoff-tainted money, that I was trying to say it was a bipartisan scandal, as some Republicans claim. I didn’t say that. It’s not a bipartisan scandal; it’s a Republican scandal, and that’s why the Republicans are scurrying around trying to enact lobbying reforms.

Democrats Unveil Their Own Plan for Rules on Lobbying

Look, lady, we don’t want to hear the truth! Lie to us, I say, LIE!

By Andy Is An Idiot

January 22, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this

Andy’s rhetoric rivals only Osama bin Laden’s — full of hate speech and adding nothing to intelligent discourse on any issues.

By Andy

January 22, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

Yeah, ^^^^, but I haven’t killed near as many homosexuals as Luckovich’s favorite mass murderer Osama has, shees.

By Andy's Mom

January 22, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

You people need to take it easy on my Andy. He is very scared right now, Osama Bin Laden has scared poor Andy silly with his latest comments. He is so afraid that he wears a helmut and types to this blog from under his bed. Thats why he is on this blog 24/7, he shivers with fear.

Again please be easy on him, if you don’t he will never get a job and move out of the house. I’m an old lady and could die soon, at 55 Andy needs to get out on his own. Please, please please QUIT scaring and sarring my poor Andy.

By Andy

January 22, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

So how you been blogger/ pinko/ Andy’s mom/ I Wish I Was Andy:

By Andy’s Mom

January 22, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

You’re getting to easy too spot, blogger, or what ever name you’ll go to using after reading this. No other silly pinko sees my leg and then immediately attaches to it quite the way your obsessed deviate little depraved a-ss does. It’s become like a trademark. Welcome to the bigtime. No more incognito.

By Dusty

January 22, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this

Well, folks, I just read all the happy birthday wishes and songs—what FUN! Thanks a lot. Made me feel warm even though it is 66 dgrees in here. The gas company sent me a birthday bill that inspired “shock & awe”. I think I will build a nice roaring fire in the fireplace. Come on over. We’ll all sing Kum ba yah and never have a mean thought again! Well, maybe…..

By Jay not jay

January 22, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

Thanks for the warm wishes OO and RW. Happy Birthday Dusty, keep that fire stoked.

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this

Well, it’s good to see the celebrants out and about. What did you guys do with everyone else?

By getalife

January 22, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this

The Steelers are stomping a mud hole in Denver.

Contributions that came directly from Abramoff, his wife and one of the American Indian tribes he represented — a total of $6,000 — were donated to the American Heart Association by the campaign just days after Abramoff entered his guilty pleas.

Why does dubya lie, just tell the truth for God’s sake.

Thanks for the donation dubya, why don’t you give the money back to the Indians.

By Andy

January 22, 2006 07:32 PM | Link to this

And that’s the heart of the problem with our party and its angry activist base. It’s not so much that we’re living in a parallel universe, but that we have dueling conceptions of what’s mainstream, especially on abortion and other values-based issues, and our side is losing. We think that if we simply call someone conservative, anti-choice and anti-civil rights, that’s enough to scare people to our side. But that tired dogma won’t hunt in today’s electorate, which is far more independent-thinking and complex in its views on values than our side presumes.

To which Cynthia Tucker answers by saying:

’ conservative extremists will rev up their own campaign to eliminate access to contraceptives. They won’t be content to toss out abortion rights. They will merely interpret that success as license to roll back the clock 50 years to a time when women had little control over conception.

Don’t misunderstand the rationale behind the anti-abortion politics of the hard-core extremists. Unlike moderately conservative Catholics and others who believe abortion takes a life, the politics of mossbacks such as “family values” scold James Dobson are more pernicious: Believing a woman’s place is in the home, they have declared war on women’s rights.

‘Ultraconservatives have already succeeded in blocking over-the-counter sales of the emergency contraceptive known as the “morning-after” pill.

Those same right-wing activists have started a quiet campaign to persuade state legislatures to allow pharmacists to decide whether they will fill a woman’s prescription for birth control pills.

Just when I thought Tucker might be coming around, she goes absolutely insane.

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 07:38 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Even a NYT column by a guy from Slate makes more sense than Cynthia. In fact, this guy will probably be blacklisted from now on for this piece.

By Andy

January 22, 2006 08:11 PM | Link to this

RW: Saletan almost made it completely through his column before he let this little item slip- The No. 1 threat to the unborn isn’t the unchurched. It’s the unprotected. Still, all and all, it was a lot less foamy than Tucker’s paranoid screed.

There are some ulterior motives behind both of these columns. You can tell there was an abortion focus group held no too long ago and they’ve hatched a new strategy. They are playing like they will lose Roe V Wade and want to “compromise” for it’s loss. In reality, Roe and/ or abortion isn’t going anywhere and they know it. They just want to grab some concessions on contraception and education, without “giving up” anything.

Some people will say “what is wrong with that?” Well, the education they want has been a vehicle to teach gender “acceptance” to grade schoolers and the contraception they want is the so called morning after pill. These are things the majority has consistently rejected.

These libs are sneaky little devils.

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 08:19 PM | Link to this

Andy,

I know what you mean, I read Saletans article thinking “wow this guy is making sense”, but when I got to that part I thought “why is that popping up (no pun intended) in every article?”

By Andy

January 22, 2006 08:25 PM | Link to this

RW: It’s kind of funny that Tucker was able to go a couple of weeks seeming almost normal before she had to have an outburst to relieve the swelling. She went off like someone who had just smashed their thumb.

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 08:30 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Somebody probably told her that you were singing her praises over here and she had to do something.

By kimberly

January 22, 2006 08:30 PM | Link to this

Andy & RW, Um… dudes…. REAL men are watching football right now. If you pay close attention, you’ll see how the players pat each other on the butts with warm affection. Kind of like the two of you. TRY it! You might like it. I know I do. {;-> Ciao.

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 08:32 PM | Link to this

kimberly,

It’s pretty easy to type, watch football, read, pop a few cold ones, and butt pat all at the same time. Why limit yourself?

By Andy

January 22, 2006 08:41 PM | Link to this

Seattle 20, Panthers 7. Happy?

WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 - As the Bush administration and its European allies pursue a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear standoff, some top lawmakers from both parties pressed for a more vigorous approach today, including the option of military action.

“There’s only one thing worse than the United States exercising the military option,” Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, said, “and that is Iran having nuclear weapons.”

After all these years, McCain finally has something worthwhile to say.

By Andy

January 22, 2006 08:44 PM | Link to this

I jumped the gun on old McCain, now he’s sounding downright presidential:

Mr. McCain, speaking on the Fox News Channel, added that concerns about Iran, along with what he termed the “wackos” in Venezuela - where President Hugo Chavez is one of the Bush administration’s most ardent critics — underscored the need for greater American energy independence.

He’s still got a long, long road to travel to get my vote..

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 08:50 PM | Link to this

Andy,

I watched him on Fox today, he is definitely reaching back out to the right.

and kimberly, it’s 27-7 now and Seattle has the ball again.

By Jay not jay

January 22, 2006 09:14 PM | Link to this

Stick a fork in that cat. My remote was robbed and now the Desperate House Ho’s have taken over. Help me!!

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 09:18 PM | Link to this

Jay Not jay,

The Desperate Housewives are much more entertaining than that game.

By Jay not jay

January 22, 2006 09:23 PM | Link to this

I think you’re right RW, I wish every lane was like Wisteria Lane.

By RW-(the original)

January 22, 2006 09:35 PM | Link to this

JayNj,

I want the house across the street from Gabrielle. and kimberly, it’s 34-7, now can we give that one up?

By Jay not jay

January 22, 2006 09:41 PM | Link to this

Wisteria Lane poem

By Jay not jay

January 22, 2006 09:44 PM | Link to this

pardon, that is a song as well. Corny but funny.

By Wow

January 22, 2006 10:10 PM | Link to this

This place is turning into a gay chat room.

By Jay not jay

January 22, 2006 10:17 PM | Link to this

Wow, not that there is anything wrong with that, but we do have a sense of humor in here, pardon.

By finch

January 22, 2006 11:29 PM | Link to this

I don’t get it! Folks here talk about “Desperate Housewives”, the NFL, with occasional forays into more serious subjects, and this is a gay chat room?

Wow, go to your room!

Go Steelers.

By Jay not jay

January 22, 2006 11:49 PM | Link to this

finch, in case you’re being vicious, I made you a darn fast Diablo sandwich and be sure to unhook that toilet paper trail following you out the door! j/k!

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:34 AM | Link to this

Jay not jay,

Don’t let the “finch” trick you into thinking he was Sheriff Buford T. Justice. “finch” is the Sheriff that sounds taller on the radio, so that Diablo sandwich is not germane to the situation.

By Jay not jay

January 23, 2006 12:44 AM | Link to this

Yes, I see it now

Buford T. Justice: “Hey boy, where is Sheriff Branford at? Sheriff Branford: “I AM Sheriff Branford.” Buford T. Justice: “Oh, pardon me. For some reason you sounded a little taller on radio.”

That does sound familiar…

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:48 AM | Link to this

Jay not jay,

Let’s see what “Wow” thinks of the level of discourse now.

Wow,

Don’t make us bring The Big Lebowski back out.

By Jay not jay

January 23, 2006 12:51 AM | Link to this

I think Wow will hide in his little crevasse and fantasize about Andy’s leg later today.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:58 AM | Link to this

Jay not jay,

Andy usually gets started about 5 or 6 so “Wow/blogger/pinko/IWIWA/et all” don’t have long to wait.

If you want to add to or at least read something nutty look at the comments on Parade’s worst dictators list.

I put a link up on my blog, but haven’t seen any flack from them yet.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 01:05 AM | Link to this

Wow,

We can mention Basketball, too. On this one your screen name applies.

By Jay not jay

January 23, 2006 01:24 AM | Link to this

Andy may need an extra can of mase handy for all those crazy hyenas.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 01:32 AM | Link to this

It’s just one or two hyenas with many names, time stamps and habits can be devilish things.

By Jay not jay

January 23, 2006 01:45 AM | Link to this

Yes it is funny, but tomorrow (today) is another day and it’s time to recoup. Until next time, salute!

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 07:27 AM | Link to this

Well, last week the Bush admin refused to disclose the names of Whitehouse aides who met with Abramhoff, what the nature of their bussiness was, or if they accepted “gifts”. We were, also, told that the President did not know Abramhoff and had never met him. Today we get 5 color glossies of Bush and Abramhoff schmoozing it up. So, either this was a totally innocent event and Bush just “accidently” managed to get in the camera frame with Abramhoff FIVE times, the President is so mentally deficient that he can’t remember WHO he met and got money from, the Presient gets so much money from so many people that not even a genius could keep up with it, or (most likely) this administration is corrupt from head to toe.

Q- Why do Republicans and Democrats rarely marry and have children? A- They’re afraid their children might end up too lazy to steal!

By Nevermind

January 23, 2006 07:45 AM | Link to this

Great toon once again Mike!! Obviously, judging by the outrageous comments, you have hit a nerve. The truth is often a bitter pill to take.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this

From Time magazine:

While TIME’s source refused to provide the pictures for publication, they are likely to see the light of day eventually because celebrity tabloids are on the prowl for them. And that has been a fear of the Bush team’s for the past several months: that a picture of the President with the admitted felon could become the iconic image of direct presidential involvement in a burgeoning corruption scandal like the shots of President Bill Clinton at White House coffees for campaign contributors in the mid-1990s.

From the White House:

The White House has acknowledged that Abramoff attended some events at the Executive Mansion, and spokeswoman Dana Perino said Sunday it’s not surprising that the two would have met. “The president has taken tens upon thousands of pictures at such events,” Perino said.

So if posing for pictures with a criminal is in itself a crime, when will Billy get his day in court?

By Andy

January 23, 2006 08:12 AM | Link to this

We don’t have to look for our pictures:

Marc Rich’s former wife, Denise Rich, shown here with Bill and Hillary Clinton at an event earlier this year, has reportedly contributed close to $1 million to the Democratic Party

By Andy

January 23, 2006 08:15 AM | Link to this

They’re all over the place!

Indonesian businessman James Riady, a campaign contributor to President Clinton, has agreed to plead guilty to a single felony charge of conspiracy for federal election law violations, the U.S. Justice Department said. (Enny Nuraheni/Reuters)

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 08:31 AM | Link to this

As usual, President Bush = President Clinton. Surprise, surprise, surprise!

By Andy

January 23, 2006 08:41 AM | Link to this

So who else would you like us to compare Bush to? Past Postmaster Generals?

Besides which, why are you making such a big deal out of things you spent an entire decade ignoring? Gee, I wonder why?

By getalife

January 23, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

Well of course, the head of the coc knows Jack!

http://getalifes.blogspot.com/

Dubya is the king of the coc!

By getalife

January 23, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this

OOPS, lets try gain,

Well of course, the head of the coc knows Jack!

Dubya is the king of the coc!

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this

Andy: I compare Bush to what I accept as common standards of civilized decency (not any other person). I did the same with Clinton when he was wrong (I still think there was something going on with Whitewater, even if it wasn’t absolutely proven). MonicaGate, I thought did as much to make Reps look vile and vindictive as it did to expose Clinton as a lowlife (it also made any Rep protests of partisan “gotcha politics” completely and totally facetious, now). Reps had their investigatory fun while the Dems said “doesn’t really matter” or “Nixon did it, too”. Now the Dems have their fun while the Reps say “Clinton did it, too”. What was Clinton then is Bush now, and Bush now is Clinton then. The more it changes, the more it stays the same.

A really interesting exercise would be to compare Bush/Clinton (bad Presidents) to Ronald Reagan (good President). That might be enlightening and worthy of effort.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this

Or we could compare current democrat officeholder misdeeds versus current Republican office holder misdeeds, I believe that would be our first step towards meaningful reform, but you pinkos don’t seem to want to recognize that you also have problems on your side, because that’s no fun. It’s much easier to blame the Republicans for everything even though Harry Reid has taken over a million dollars from the casinos which is almost as much as Abramoff gave to everyone else combined in contributions on behalf of casinos.

See it any way you want to see it.

By getalife

January 23, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

McCain does

If the coc wants to win any elections, they should jump on board with McCain’s reform.

By blogger

January 23, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

Andy, shut your uneducated mouth:

By Andy

December 26, 2005 04:27 PM | Link to this

blogger: What branch of government does the Attorney General belong to?

By blogger

December 26, 2005 04:32 PM | Link to this

Andy, why don’t you do some research for once if you don’t know?

By Andy

December 26, 2005 04:37 PM | Link to this

The Judiciary. Bush had the Attorney General review his actions. Bill Clinton had Jamie Gorelick, his deputy Attorney General review his wiretapping surveillance. Why do you say that it hasn’t been reviewed for legality by the Judicial Branch if it has been? Are you just going with the impeach Bush line, like some silly sap?

By blogger

December 26, 2005 04:49 PM | Link to this

Andy, gee, I always thought that the Attorney General is a member of the President’s cabinet who serves at the pleasure of the President, and is a member of the Executive Branch of government? Did you just say that the Attorney General is a member of the Judicial Branch of government???????

By Andy

December 26, 2005 05:00 PM | Link to this

It figures, I’m dealing with a lightweight, a hysterical one at that.

The Attorney General compromises the Justice Department, specifically- the Attorney General was to be “learned in the law� with the duty “to prosecute and conduct all suits in the Supreme Court in which the United States shall be concerned, and to give his advice and opinion upon questions of law when required by the President of the United States in other words a member of the Judiciary.

It should have been easy for you when I tipped Bill Clinton’s use of Jamie Gorelick to review the legality of his surveillance activities. You must not be capable of complex reasoning. Do you get all your ideas from Michael Moore? Why am I discussing this with you and not him? Wouldn’t it save time?

By blogger

December 26, 2005 05:10 PM | Link to this

Andy, I can’t believe how completely stupid you are. Take a few minutes to familiarize yourself with the organizational chart of our federal government. You’ll see that under “Executive Branch� is the “Department of Justice,� which the Attorney General heads. Also, if you would happen to read a little further into your own link you would see that the Department of Justice is “an executive department of the government of the United States� with the Attorney General as its head, or in other words, the Executive Branch. You’re a moron, Andy. You are utterly stupid, and a complete waste of time.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

Let’s see if we can find out why I was so bored that day and lost my concentration:

By blogger

December 26, 2005 02:09 PM | Link to this

Andy, your true ignorance has been revealed if you think the tax code encourages people to become gay. Nothing you can say has any credibility. I guess that’s a Christian/Taliban Fundamentalist thing.

By blogger

December 26, 2005 02:16 PM | Link to this

the ability to do so would give him massive, unchecked power with no oversight from the judiciary. Or in other words, dictator-like powers, even if he did not choose to exercise them malevolently

By blogger

December 26, 2005 03:08 PM | Link to this

You may want to at least put your disgusting child porn collection in a closet or under a blanket. Otherwise, you may be going to prison for a long, long, time if that criminal suspect flees into your house.

By blogger

December 26, 2005 03:46 PM | Link to this

Andy, I’ve never posted my opinion on Iraq or Sadaam Hussein, nor do I advocate that we live under a system of government and civil rights as they existed in Iraq. Good job changing the subject, you ignorant, child-porn-lover.

By blogger

December 26, 2005 04:05 PM | Link to this

Andy, nice try, but you’re still making no sense. I never called him anything, I just responded to your ignorant question of what he may have to gain. Unchecked, dictator-like powers is what he has to gain. Are you forgetting your own asinine statements posted above? I guess you’re an ignorant, child-porn-loving, senile, idiot.

Is this guy a freakin weirdo or what? Why do you pinkos always descend into stalking?

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

Andy: Comparing current partisan misdeeds sounds more germaine. So far, it is looking like the Reps are on the losing end of that comparison, but even if that continues to hold true it could (and probably does) mean that the Dems just didn’t get caught, yet, this time (or as much). The pertinent point for the citizenry to remember is not which party is the MOST corrupt, it is that BOTH parties ARE corrupt to whatever degree. They have both pointed at each other to prove it to us, afterall, haven’t they? As long as we cut the legs off the p**-ants we elect and never, ever, ever, let ‘em get too much power, we’ll be ok. The only “Imperial” leader I EVER want is the one upstairs. Ironically, Reps claim to favor smaller government but what they have done is embark on a VAST expansion of federalism through police powers, the Imperial Presidency, onerous expenditures, and erosion of states rights. For these reasons, I reserve most of my criticism for the party that has betrayed my support the most.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical,

I hate the idea of the Federal Government growing and usurping powers that should belong to the States, but them doing that is the opposite of federalism. Federalism in the founding structure of our government is States rights.

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this

RW: Federalism is when federal authority superceeds state authority. Jefferson and Madison tried to gaurd against this with their 3-branched organizational system of checks and balances. They hoped to so thoroughly ham-string the federal authority that it would never become totalitarian. Federalism was firmly established as doctrine after the Civil War when union “federal” authority superceeded the confederate “states” authority to succeed.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical,

Federalism

Federalism

and more Federalism

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this

RW: in the United States the term “federalist” describes those who generally favor a more powerful federal government and weaker state governments.- quote from your second reference, above.

I think your getting bogged down by references to past understandings of this term (ie “liberal” when applied to Lincoln in the 1860’s carried a much different conotation than it does today). Of course, federalism implies two seperate authorities (one in control and one subjugated). In the past the two authorities were seen as been independently sovereign. The civil war decided differently.

By gadem

January 23, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

Let us hope that the workers that are about to be a victim of a poor economy will be able to make a seamless transition into their new “Bush” produced minimum wage job.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this

AntiR: May I take the time to point out the civility offered you by a Conservative upon his discovery of your minor clerical error? Please note how RW merely pointed out your mistake to you and then resumed the normal living of his life without becoming your full time pinko stalker. Compare this gentlemanly protocol to that which has been afforded to others ^^^, oh let’s say like at 10:11 this morning. It’s just further proof that Conservatives are a much more refined, civilized people.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

gadem: I’m genuinely sorry that you are unable to find success in this ever changing and turbulent world. While I know of no one over the age of 15 who works for the minimum wage, I’m sure that with some additional schooling or maybe some outside tutoring you gain the skills necessary to become a short order cook or some other higher paying skilled position. Good Luck!

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical,

Did you happen to notice that I said in the founding structure of our Government in my original post?

And you say it was Jefferson and Madison that tried to keep federalism from happening, so if you were correct then the term didn’t change meaning unless you are now trying to pretend that Jefferson and Madison wanted a supreme federal government.

I think you are bogged down in the fact that you are wrong and can’t accept it.

By gadem

January 23, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

Andy, unlike you, I feel bad for those that get laid off. I don’t take the approach that it is their fault for getting laid off or losing their job. For someone that is in their 40’s that is probably making around 70-80 K to go out and compete with younger kids for half that is the point I was trying to make…but then again it is their fault. Andy if I were making minimum wage, I would not be sitting here responding to your thought provoking responses.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this

gadem: So your letting your feelings dictate what American businesses should pay their workers? You advocate not letting the free market decide but instead that we legislate fairness?

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this

RW: Of course my initial post (10:33) referred to the Bush administrations “VAST expansion of federalism”. I assume that you, then, somehow conclude that 1700’s notions of the definition of federalism would be more sensible than the understanding of the word as it is used in current American language?

America today would make both Jefferson AND Madison mad enough to assume arms against what they would see as a totalitarian government, more taxing, onerous, and parasitic than the British they freed themselves from.

By Dusty

January 23, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

Hey, one of those liberal so-called PATRIOTIC statements that keep popping up about our country. It goes like this:”totalitarian government, more taxing, onerous, and parasitic”.

Anti-Radical, the main thing sticking in your craw is not yes/no federalism. You are simply angry because Democrats cannot find someone suitable for the presidency of the United States. You haven’t before and you cannot now. Sorry, AR, you haven’t got it and don’t get it. Try to adjust.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical,

I disagree with you that the accepted definition of “federalism” is any different today than it was then. (I agree that the accepted meanings of “liberal” and “conservative” has done a 180 over the years).

Federalism isn’t discussed enough to have taken on a new meaning.

One school of thought says that you should educate people to the real meaning of a concept, another says just let it mean whatever you think it sounds like. You subscribe to the latter idea, which just contributes to the dumbing down of America.

I also happen to agree with you that the Federal government has, over the years, taken on a multitude of things it has no business in. It certainly hasn’t been the sole province of the Bush administration, though. At least most of their expansions have something to do with areas of government that actually have something to do with federal responsibility.

By finch

January 23, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

RW, JayNJ,

I don’t get the Buford T. Justice reference. Good movie though, and Gleason was such a ham… oh, wait! Ham? Diablo sandwich? Hmm…

Thanks TONS for the link to comments on Parade’s “worst dictator” list. Hysterical! I’m not exactly GWB’s biggest fan (duh), but some of those rants against Fearless Leader were too weird to be satire or fiction. We should invite those idiots to please look up “dictator” in the dictionary.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this

finch,

Or they could look up the definition of “dictator” right at the top of the very article they are posting comments on.

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this

RW: See above posts. I let YOU define the word (see your second reference above, which I quoted for you). I accept your rejection of your own definition if it now disturbs you, but I must still insist that the word “federalism” in current conotation refers to the sovereignty of federal power over state power. Does anyone else think that the term means anything different in todays’ world?

By Andy

January 23, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this

AntiR: Sorry, but it’s exactly opposite of what you are describing-

fed·er·al·ism- noun- distribution of power in a federation between the central authority and the constituent units (as states) involving esp. the allocation of significant lawmaking powers to those constituent units —compare COMITY, FULL FAITH AND CREDIT, STATES’ RIGHTS

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this

AntiRadical,

I haven’t changed my definition of “federalism” in any post. I pointed out that I had said founding to refute your claim that Jefferson and Madison were trying to halt the spread of federalism.

Good lord, I was only letting you know that you were using a definition that was completely wrong and, as has been noted, tried to do it quietly.

By finch

January 23, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie,

You could at least show a little sympathy for Ford workers facing layoffs. But nooooo… instead you show contempt for them.

You declare your hope that with “tutoring (they) gain the skills necessary to become a short order cook”. You’re so constructive. So positive. (/sacrasm)

You not only put the con in conservative, you put the con in condescending. You’re most definitely a con, Andy-pie. Part of a political movement that not only has no brain; it has no heart.

By ShadowMarch

January 23, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this

Just an idea.

Amendment XIX 1. Congress shall apportion all budgetary items in legislative sections, not to exceed $1 million dollars, for auditing purposes.

By ShadowMarch

January 23, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this

Another Idea.

Amendment XXVIII
1. By convocation of the collective will of the individual State Legislatures of the union, if a two thirds majority of the legislatures of the collective states find an act of Congress, Executive Order, Federal Regulation or Judicial interpretation to be in violation of the 10th amendment it shall be made null and void.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this

ShadowMarch,

Does your XIX supercede the existing XIX that gives women the right to vote?

How do you make those bold dots?

By ShadowMarch

January 23, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

Heh. That’s XXIX.

….I don’t know…I think if you put in a numbered list it does so automatically…ala…

Maybe.

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this

Andy: in the United States the term “federalist� describes those who generally favor a more powerful federal government and weaker state governments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism (this is RWs reference, by the way)

You will notice the phrase “central authority” in your quote. This means “controlling” authority. Just ‘cause states have been afforded some power, does not mean that they are not subject to federal super-authority under the current understandings of federalism. Do you really propose that federalism does not refer to federal super-ceeding authority?

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this

AntiRadical,

You can’t take the term “federalist” to try to prove your redefinition of the word “federalism”.

A Federalist was a member of the Federalist Party, that did want a strong federal government. Why do you feel the need to obfuscate the issue?

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this

ShadowMarch,

1) Thanks.

2) No really, Thanks.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this

OK, I guess you didn’t mean numbered that way. With nothing after the number?

By ShadowMarch

January 23, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this

Use a period instead of the ).

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

By Ricky

January 23, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

So what is everyone’s feeling on the proposal to stop blind earmarks? I think it is a good idea and will hopefully put an end to the ridiculous practice of adding pork to bills that have no relation to the intent of the bill

By AntiRadical

January 23, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

RW: So a “federalist” does not practice “federalism”? (it is a simple tense derivation of the same word, I’m afraid, made by the editors of the reference work). Not my definition in any case; the quote is from your own reference. If it makes you feel better please replace all reference above to “federalism” with the words “system championing federal authority over those of the state and local citizenry”. Since, you don’t want to call it “federalism”, let’s just call it “Bushism” instead, then.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this

AntiRadical,

No, a federalist does not practice federalism. That may be part of the reason people say English is one of the hardest languages to learn.

Wikipedia is often written in a strange way, but I read that to mean they were pointing out that a federalist did not promote federalism.

As for it being your definition of federalism, it is. You are the only person defining it that way.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this

finchy-winchy: If you were able to read carefully and not let hysteria gain control of your functions, you would have made notice that I was ridiculing gadem in my comments not any laid off Ford workers.

It must be a great thing to be a pinko and have the ability to claim both sides of the argument, when ever it fits your needs. Is it not the pinko/ auto workers union philosophy to strangle a company, striking to get more pay, insurance and other benefits? Has there not been a recent pinko legislature that forced Wal Mart to provide health insurance? So when these extorted companies can no longer compete in the free market and they lay off workers to compensate, of course this is the fault of the greedy Conservatives, right?

hy·poc·ri·sy- n.- The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

AntiR: When you said Federal usurping the power of the State is where you went off course. Be thankful you are not being stalked by some wormy little pinko right now.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this

Ricky,

I’m not sure earmarks are really the problem. I think you are right that spending bills should stand on their own and I would extend that to every project needing to be attached only to a spending bill that it has some relevance to. Of course, that would make every project an earmark, but at least you wouldn’t have to approve paying for “AntiRadicals” New American History Dictionary just to get a highway built.

By For Suzanne

January 23, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this

There was a UAW strike at a Ford plant? When, where? When did the Maryland legislature force Ford to provide more healthcare coverage? Perhaps, it’s just the result of making an inferior product or a product in less demand? I don’t think anything but the forces of pure capitalism at it’s best has forced Ford to restructure…

By Dusty

January 23, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this

hmmm—just wondering if finch is driving an American made car. Maybe it is not a big factor, but —You sell a lot of cars. You build a lot of cars. You wouldn’t be closing plants. My GM production runs just fine, thank you. Economical too. Nice car.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this

Ford sells more trucks than anybody on the planet. They are second only to GM in car sales. Isn’t it sort of a coincidence that both of them are big time losers even though they sell more product than anybody else? That Toyota sells less automobiles but is a more successful business?

Go to Japan and see what kind of health care you can get at Toyota, Suzanne.

By gadem

January 23, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this

So Andy I guess by your rationale, it is ok for the Miners in West VA to die because some mine owners refuse to let them have unions. Man Andy..you guys are all for big business and the common man needs to just get out of the way.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this

gadem: Say what? How about if you pinkos quit obstructing the nuclear energy industry and we don’t have to mine as much coal as we do? Besides which, what the h-ell do the Unions have to do with mine safety? Isn’t that the job of MSA, the mine safety authority?

By Ricky

January 23, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this

I love how whenever a company announces it is going to lay off workers, it is immediately the conservatives fault. Whould you rather Ford just to continue to operate the way it is and go out of business and all their employees lose their jobs? While it sucks that people are losing their jobs, the company has to do what is best for their future.

By Edd Williams

January 23, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this

Comrade Lukavich, once again, you prove that you are just stupid. You just have to open your mouth or use your pen to do so.

By Ricky

January 23, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

Wow it is a slow day on here today

By gadem

January 23, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this

Andy, In your opionion what do you think that unions accomplish? Have you ever belonged to a union? In know that you may not agree with the political leanings of the unions, they actually accomplish a lot of good on behalf of the employees. What does unions have to do with mine safety? Well if the MSA was doing such a bang up job, the miners would not constantly complain about the lack of safety in doing their job….but I know that those are liberal union members that the liberal media sought out to make those comments.

By Ricky

January 23, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this

gadem, while I agree that unions do provide some good(safety, for example), in alot of cases they have outlived their usefulness. Unions were created to combat intolerable working conditions and low pay. That problem has been resolved. Unions now hamper companies in my opinion. They keep them from running at optimal efficiency. So like I said, while I still think they can help in areas like safety, in the areas of compensation they have outlived their usefulness and hinder the companies their members work for.

By gadem

January 23, 2006 02:36 PM | Link to this

So Ricky, do you feel that same way about police unions and fire fighters?

By Ricky

January 23, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this

gadem, I feel the same about all unions. I don’t think there is the same need for pay and safe work places like there were in the first half of the 20th century. Should their be a union to make sure companies or police/fire departments are adhereing to proper saftery precautions. Sure why not

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this

Well,well…President Bush just finished taking open questions from the public at Kansas State University. What kind of hard-hitting enlightened questions did we get from the left?

1.Mr. President, I’m a rancher and since you’re a rancher I want to know if you’ve seen Brokeback Mountain.

2.Mr. President when is the United States going to destroy all it’s weapons so there can be peace in the World?

and so on…

Good work moonbats, now you know why the President doesn’t often waste time meeting with you.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Don’t you think there is a considerable difference between a union that protects your interest against that of the government, as in police and fire, and one that operates in the public sector?

By getalife

January 23, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this

I got a question since he joked about no lobbyist rules like it is some kind of sick joke.

As head of the coc, how are you going to stop being a coc? What changes need to be made so the coc can’t get their greedy hands on the American taxpayer’s money?

By gadem

January 23, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this

RW In my opinion, a union is a union. There is no difference. They serve the same purpose which is protect the rights of the employees.

As far as someone thinking that Bush is/was ever a Rancher is laughable. See that is what is wrong with America…people listen too much to TV without reading. Any educated person would know that he is no more of a rancher than I am.

By physicsDawg

January 23, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this

I think there is a lot of good that, theoretically, can be done by unions. But, What happens when the [CompanyX] doesn’t want to raise wages (or not make cuts), and goes to hire a non-union employee, on their own terms. Correct me if i’m wrong, but many unions would strike to block such a capitalist notion, which amounts to socialist control of the production. The only good unions, would be the voluntary ones, who would give new employees the freedom of choice to join, and wouldn’t take some sort of action against the company when it hired non members. I don’t know much about actual unions, but this would be the only correct way to do it. The Union workers would strike when conditions were unsafe (and many non-members would probably join them). But they would not control wages, because the company could hire any worker it wanted, and negotiate wages with them individually. In the present case, Ford or GM could offer a wage and/or benefit package to anyone skilled to do the job, and fire those employees most costly to maintain.
ONE additional thought: Unions for teachers/Police/Fire are more understandable, because they are government funded. Most people want/need their services, but aren’t willing to up the taxes from their own pocket to pay what the free market would supply for such worthy services. Case in point: private school wages compared to public school wages.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this

gadem,

I would think that even you would be able to see that ranching had nothing to do with that idiot’s question.

You might be right that there is no difference in the purpose of the union, my point was that I might be able see a need for them when dealing with a government. In the public sector market forces should dictate. But I’ll give you this one, let’s get rid of all of them.

By Spike

January 23, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this

Well now. The “Absent Aviator” has just choked forth more scam.Not unlike the “Mute Marine.” Is there REALLY any difference between drunken Bush and OBL? At least OBL is quite up front with his philosophy and desires re the filthy, evil work he plans and carries out. Plus he has 100 times the intelligence level of Bush. One can pretty well believe Osama. Definitely not so with Bush.

By gadem

January 23, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this

PhysicsDawg you are somewhat wrong. Everything is optional. In my experiences with Unions, regardless of whether you are a member or not, they will help you with whatever problem that you may have. Being a member only ensures that you are able to voice your opinion. If you have problems with management that you feel is not being handled correctly, and you don’t think that your union rep is doing a good job, you can vote them out and speak on behalf of your co-workers. You actually have a very skewed view of what a union is.

By Midori

January 23, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this

Good work moonbats, now you know why the President doesn’t often waste time meeting with you.

Wow. That speaks volumes.

What an enabler.

I thought a “president” met with people of all political persuasions. After all, he is supposed to be president of the entire country, not just the part(s) of the country that he agrees with.

what a cynical, self-serving view you have.

Would you be so accomodating if a Democratic president practiced this alienation that you are affording Bush?

Back to calling people names again too, I see.

Yet when I do it, I’ve committed a mortal sin. Never mind that I only bite after I’ve been bitten.

When you do it, I suppose it’s a right? cute? appropriate? all of the above?

I saw no one provoke you.

By gadem

January 23, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this

Well, i saw on the news that the President was starting to take more unscripted questions. It was said that before, he would take questions that had been screened and prearranged…man that must be tough to take a test after you are given all the correct answers.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

{These union workers are just like church volunteers, alright](http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock060903.asp)

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters was on strike against Overnite Transportation between October 1999 and October 2002. In Overnite’s resulting RICO lawsuit against the Teamsters, Memphis-based federal District Court Judge Bernice Donald said that 55 shootings and additional brick and projectile attacks against Overnite’s non-striking drivers were “related to attempted murder.”

20-year Overnite employee William Wonder was shot in the abdomen while driving a company vehicle near Memphis, Tennessee on December 1, 1999.

“Overnite bears a heavy responsibility here,” Teamsters president James Hoffa Jr. said in a statement that appeared to capitalize on Wonder’s near-fatal injuries. “Overnite can end this strike at a moment’s notice with a binding agreement.”

So striking union members shoot someone and it’s the companies fault, with a dash of blackmail added in.

By Dubya

January 23, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

Achtung! Achtung! All you little Repub would-be Nazis out there, listen up! This week I’ll be pushing my “Why it’s important to spy on you” theme. So make sure you use the magic words of “troop morale,” “patriotism,” “terror on our streets,” “good Murcuns,” “traitors,” “we’re winning thee war on terrorism,” “I luv Amurca (circa Nixon),” and so forth. This always works on our ignorant masses. You’re doing a heckuva job, Nazis!

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this

Midori,

When a Democrat is in office I expect him to use his time for the good of the country, not answering questions about gay cowboys and crackpot theories that if we would just disarm we could have peace and love in the world.

I don’t care if you call me anything you desire, just don’t do it and tell me that isn’t something you do.

And in that particular case I think it was right, cute is subjective so I can’t answer that, and appropriate. Thanks for asking!

By Bill

January 23, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this

Dubya. Shucks. I’ll drink to that! Hell, I’ll drink to ANYTHING. - Bushie

By AD

January 23, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this

Check out Ford’s profits. Not shabby. Getting rid of people immediately boosts the bottom line and fattens top executives wallets with increased bonus bucks. Hasn’t the time come to put people before dollars and country before commerce. All of these plant closures cannot possibly be good for the economic security of this country.

By Dusty

January 23, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this

Well, here we go out in the “boonies” again with all the rejects spouting forth. Spike, your bid at propaganda makes ignorance your personality. Please don’t burden us with it. Viva la difference of opinion but down with stupidity.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Do you have a source for your “i saw on the news” story.

Link repair from above

By gadem

January 23, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this

CNBC…and CNN while getting ready for work this morning. Listening to it while I was getting ready for work.

By Leo Strauss

January 23, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

You don’t get it do you AD? In order for the neo-cons to create the oligarchy that they so desperately want in this country they have to eliminate the middle class. What better way to do it than to get rid of good jobs. The cons were listening when Mao Tse Dong said that when people were most concerned about where their next meal is coming from, they have no time to think about what government is doing. Just part of the grand neo-con plan AD.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

gadem,

So that would be speculation on the part of their hosts.

By gadem

January 23, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this

RW i did not say Fox News, I said CNBC and CNN.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this

gadem,

OK, it would be a wild a-ss guess on the part of their hosts. Better?

By gadem

January 23, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

RW, no they were actually talking to part of the Bush Team. It is not speculation or guessing on anyone’s part.

By ChickenHawk Bush

January 23, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

“You’re doing a heck of a job Sonny”

By Scooter

January 23, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this

RW, the leftist are really out expousing their compassion today, are you having fun exposing their socialist ideals? Now they have our private property rights, they insist our children are educated by the same government that gets its power from incompitent people and they would love to get rid of inheritances. Keep up the fight.

Where would they be without the “progressive” tax code that doesn’t treat all men equal?

By finch

January 23, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this

RW,

Do you really think that questions about “Brokeback Mountain” and unilateral disarmament represent the questions held by most Bush critics? I don’t. Those are the last questions I’d ask Mr. 5 yard penalty for cheap shot!

Two points for Bush for actually taking questions that weren’t pre-screened.

And the Teamsters are NOT representative of unions in general and certainly not the UAW or AFL-CIO (of which I’m a member). Additional 5 yard penalty! Forfeiture of possession! First down, libs!

Seriously, I’m saddened by the Ford cutbacks, but they were inevitable. There’s more than enough blame to go around for both unions and management here.

Dusty, I drive a Buick and a Ford.

Andy-pie, I’m GLAD Maryland is making WalMart pay for employee health benefits. Seeing as how the chain pays so many workers so little (with no medical benefits) that they qualify for Medicaid in Maryland, I’d rather WalMart and not tax dollars pay for the benefits.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

I’ve been reading this to keep up.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this

finch,

I’m not one to talk with my wild and crazy punctuation,

Those are the last questions I’d ask Mr. 5 yard penalty for cheap shot!

but that sentence could have been the inspiration for this.

By RW-(the original)

January 23, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this

All the talk of WalMart must have spread to the AJC. Whenever I open the main page a huge ad for the Carrolton WalMart drops down.

finch,

One other suggestion, if you don’t mind. It’s not a great idea to capitalize “GLAD” right after calling someone Andy-pie

By Dusty

January 23, 2006 05:11 PM | Link to this

Ah, finch, you drive a Buick and a Ford. There is still hope for you. You gained a couple of yards on that one.

As to WalMart, I can bet you don’t shop there. Is there a WalMart at Beaufort? (Are the sand gnats biting yet?) Some say that the American auto industry gives TOO many benefits causing profit losses. It is then called poor management. WalMart gives no health benefits. Now they are forced to give health care and will raise prices accordingly. Is that also poor management?

By Sam I Am

January 23, 2006 05:27 PM | Link to this

George Bush. My God, what an inspiring and intellectual speaker you are. Now sit down, and have another sip of your life-support.

By Neil Manimala

January 23, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this

What an awkward forum…I’ve been misrepresented by people obsessed with politics

By finch

January 23, 2006 06:09 PM | Link to this

Dusty, how about if we settle for employee health care at WalMart, slightly higher WalMart prices, and a DROP in tax dollars spent on Medicaid for WalMart workers.

It’s no co-incidence that the ONLY large employer in Maryland that will be affected by this bill is the ONLY large employer with thousands of employees and dependants on Medicaid.

WalMart

Everyday low prices should not be subsidized by tax dollars.

By MOC

January 23, 2006 06:10 PM | Link to this

Imagine that! The Bushies want Google’s search data. All of it. Every search item from every person using Google during a specified period. Yep…big brother is alive and well. Kudos to Google for telling them to go f&*# themselves. All of us should just say no to these nazis.

By finch

January 23, 2006 06:12 PM | Link to this

There is a WalMart in Beaufort County. I’ve been there, but bought almost nothing. Outside of Walkman batteries, Hershey bars and lightbulbs, the stuff they sell is crap.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 06:15 PM | Link to this

By gadem

January 23, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this

Andy, In your opionion what do you think that unions accomplish? Have you ever belonged to a union?

I’m a little late but, yes, I did belong to a union, local 58, brotherhood of carpenters and joiners, Chicago, Il. My experience with these people is that the steward and the business agents got bigger raises than I did and drove a real nice car bought with my money. I grew tired of that scam, and unlike finchy poo with his weak mind, did not want to subvert myself to a bunch of crooks for the rest of my life, so I worked hard (physical labor, long hours for you pinkos who know nothing, nothing of what I speak of) and moved up into management.

You spend a lot of time being laid off when you’re in a union. They raise the cost of construction to where no one wants to build anything or they will go with non union labor. When Ford sells 4.1 million vehicles, 4 times what Toyota sells, and the Toyota makes a better profit, there is something seriously amiss; If I were Ford, I would lay off 25,000 people too.

Finchy-wenchy (why the bizarre name calling, anyway? Is this dude odd or what?): Maybe Maryland has set the medicare limits a little to low, go figure! When the average Walmart worker is making $9 an hour, nearly double the minimum wage, and they qualify for medicaid, which was originally meant to serve retirees only, it’s Maryland’s problem, not Walmart’s. Anyway, look for Walmart to lay off 10,000 workers because of this, and who do you think the pinkos will blame?

By AD

January 23, 2006 06:22 PM | Link to this

Obviously Andy, you have spent alot of time laid off anyway based on your presence here almost every minute of everyday.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 06:23 PM | Link to this

MOC: So what have you been typing into google, man?

By MOC

January 23, 2006 06:26 PM | Link to this

None of your business Andy. Just as it is none of the government’s business.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 06:31 PM | Link to this

Well, actually AD: Seeing how I separated from you pinkos and quit whining my way through life some time ago, I’m now so successful that I don’t have to slave over the griddle like you do. If you think unemployment is the way to get ahead in life, it explains why you and the griddle spend so much time together.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

MOC: I’m talking about in general, not specific to you, just like the “nazis” want. Do you do porno searches? Or buy porno on line? What’s to hide?

By AD

January 23, 2006 06:35 PM | Link to this

You are Mike Luckovitch, Andy?

By Andy's Mom

January 23, 2006 06:35 PM | Link to this

Please leave my Andy alone, he is very lonely and very angry, this place is all he has.

The internet is a great place for lonely people, don’t take that away from him. Try to understand.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 06:37 PM | Link to this

You have to follow this one through to it’s logical pinko conclusion: You are in court, surrounded by the Republican Brownshirts, the guy in front of you has just been handed over to Cheney for his torture sentence and the Judge, a neocon, asks you “On the 23rd of January, Mr. MOC, did you google the words ‘Rosaenne Barr naked?’”

By Andy

January 23, 2006 06:41 PM | Link to this

By AD

January 23, 2006 06:35 PM | Link to this

You are Mike Luckovitch, Andy?

What is the meaning of this question, anyway? I’ve always wondered, it’s one of those mind of a pinko things.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 06:43 PM | Link to this

By Andy’s Mom

January 23, 2006 06:35 PM | Link to this

Please leave my Andy alone, he is very lonely and very angry, this place is all he has.

Hi, blogger: Did you think about me all day long and dream about me in your sleep?

By Marion of Texas

January 23, 2006 06:59 PM | Link to this

Mike, this is another cartoon that tells the Truth completely and hilariously. Bush and his nut-case cabinet have managed to recruit more members for Osama bin Laden than he ever dreamed possible.

P.S. Sometimes I do think Andy is a moron but most of the time I think he is just pulling our legs. He is a prankster and enjoys getting the majority of people who enjoy Mike’s cartoons all riled up.

By Scooter

January 23, 2006 07:05 PM | Link to this

Recruiting is so good, mighty UBL is offering the dems other “idea” retreat for “peace”.

By Pink Lady

January 23, 2006 07:09 PM | Link to this

By Andy

January 22, 2006 08:25 PM | Link to this

RW: It’s kind of funny that Tucker was able to go a couple of weeks seeming almost normal before she had to have an outburst to relieve the swelling. She went off like someone who had just smashed their thumb.

ANDY: Bravo for Ms. Tucker. Andy, do you hit your thumb alots. Is that why you spew out your __ all the time?

By finch

January 23, 2006 07:09 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie, for starters, Medicaid is primarily for poor families. MEDICARE is for retirees. You’ve obviously never been to Maryland, where $10/hr = $400/wk = $1600/month doesn’t go far in the land of the $1100/month 2 bedroom apt.

And that’s just for starters.

Sorry about your unhappy union experience. Mine, with the AFL-CIO was just fine, thanks. Good pay, good benefits, and a nice union (not company) pension that’s so flush with cash it’s silly!

By Objective Observer

January 23, 2006 07:13 PM | Link to this

Scooter: Just talked to “The Cat” will this suffice for the Big Day? Or are you going to be greedy?

By Andy

January 23, 2006 07:23 PM | Link to this

finchy poo: Why is this Walmart’s problem? I thought they were in the business to provide affordable merchandise to as many people as their profitability model permitted?

I can imagine that a union pension probably does seem “flush” with cash to someone who considers the government to be there to improve their condition in life. It’s kind of sad that you didn’t aim higher, there is so much more to be had if you had just worked for it. Applying for government benefits and suing businesses for them has no future.

Enjoy what little bit you got from the government!

By Objective Observer

January 23, 2006 07:26 PM | Link to this

Pink Lady: I saw Cynthia Tucker’s recent column as the equivalent of a pre-emptive strike based on speculation. Why is that acceptable from Ms. Tucker?

By Pink Lady

January 23, 2006 07:36 PM | Link to this

OO I have not read Ms. Tucker’s column so can’t comment. I was just amused at Andy since he always responds like he has smacked his thumb with a hammer.

By Objective Observer

January 23, 2006 07:47 PM | Link to this

Pink Lady: The “Bravo for Ms. Tucker” was misleading! Have fun with Andy, he can handle fun with all ten digits.

By Andy

January 23, 2006 07:48 PM | Link to this

Dear Ms. Pink Lady: I can assure you that if every time I said the word “pinko” it was because I had hit my thumb, I would no longer have a thumb to hit. Or that hand either.

By getalife

January 23, 2006 08:25 PM | Link to this

Google it

By Andy

January 23, 2006 08:36 PM | Link to this

Lobbyist linked to Abramoff quits Indianapolis firm

FORT WAYNE, Ind. — The Indianapolis-based law firm of Barnes & Thornburg has accepted the resignation of one of its Washington lobbyists implicated in the bribery and corruption scandal swirling around Jack Abramoff, a report Sunday said.

The two other former Abramoff associates, Kevin Ring and Edward Ayoob, remain members of Barnes & Thornburg, Levin said.

But when the three lobbyists joined the Indiana firm, its lobbying revenues tripled.

Ayoob was an aide to Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the leader of the Senate Democrats.

By finch

January 23, 2006 09:58 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie, When WalMart’s low prices are subsidized by MY tax dollars, it’s a problem. It’s WalMart’s problem, though.

For someone who abhors government handouts, it astounds me that you could condone WalMart’s sucking off the government teat like this.

If families don’t have insurance, and they don’t have a fallback like Medicaid, they’ll STILL get sick. They’ll STILL end up in hospitals. And they’ll end up costing taxpayers LOTS more than Medicaid because THEY WON’T ABLE TO PAY!

What are we gonna do, Andy-pie, turn them away andlet them die. I guess you would, because that’s just the kind of selfish moron you are.

When I think of “compassionate conservativism”, I think of YOU, Andy-pie.

And since when is a guaranteed union pension flush with non-government funds that will pay me well above the median income a sign of complacency and comparable to government handouts? I’m doin’ well, dude! I’m laughing all the way to the bank! I worked hard for it. It’s mine.

You would kill to be in my shoes.

By Andy

January 24, 2006 04:39 AM | Link to this

Finchy-poo: So what came first; government or business?

Only a socialist would say that anybody is due health insurance. So which labor camp do you think we should open first? Should we all share the same food? Ride the same bus? Sleep in the same bed?

Sicko.

Unless you belong to the rocket scientists union you can have your pension. Good Luck!

By Rudy Yarbrough

February 2, 2006 10:57 PM | Link to this

If you had any balls you would join your Danish cartoonist and print the real truth about this abhorrent religion. But you would rather poke fun at the only President that has had the gut to stand up to these terrorist. You are shameful and a disgrace to your profession.