Mike Luckovich

By Jay not jay

January 26, 2006 12:55 AM | Link to this

finch, it that you?

Trying to build the dam back up?

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 12:58 AM | Link to this

Maybe there is a little moonbat seminar these folks go to.

ml, with all the incompetent and corrupt Democrats roaming around New Orleans, President Bush probably should step in and do the job himself. Letting your heroes take care of things didn’t seem to work.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 04:41 AM | Link to this

Hey, maybe Schoolbus Nagin could check with God about that new levee.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 04:45 AM | Link to this

Andy,

I’m not sure the blog is ready for you getting started while I’m still up, but let’s give it a shot. Have you seen Zombie’s latest?

By candide

January 26, 2006 05:23 AM | Link to this

I don’t blame Bush for the deaths Katrina caused. I blame him for 2000plus dead American soldiers who have died for nought.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 05:59 AM | Link to this

Love the cartoon!

By Ricky

January 26, 2006 06:02 AM | Link to this

LTD, you love all of his toons.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 06:05 AM | Link to this

Following hours of racially and politically charged debate, the Legislature passed a law Wednesday requiring Georgians to show a government-issued picture ID when voting.

It’s a dramatic story line that’s so far featured angry rhetoric, walkouts, Washington insider politics, and accusations of fraud, racism and power-grabbing all centering around the core of American democracy: voting.

And all that was just from Cynthia Tucker.

RW: I was vacated at 4:45 and missed your post but yes, I saw that the other day. I particulary liked the black clad punk pinkos showing their bravery by harrassing the AARP coalition.

By Ricky

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

Funny how Cindy Sheehan is put on TV constantly, but when she shows her true self and goes to speak publicly with Hugo Chavez none of the major networks want to cover it. I wonder why not?

By Ricky

January 26, 2006 06:30 AM | Link to this

Cindy even said she admired Hugo Chavez for his stand against our government. See, this is where she stops being a grieving mother and because a far left Bush-hater that really thinks we are the most dangerous country in the world

By Ricky

January 26, 2006 06:35 AM | Link to this

So Hamas does better than expected in the elections. The PA PM says he and his government will resign. So now you will have a terrorist group that is committed to the destruction of Isreal in charge of the PA. But hey I guess its okay because Jimmy Carter says Hammas is getting better. He really has never met a dictator he hasn’t liked has he?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 06:45 AM | Link to this

Anybody want to bet that Oddball finch, bleeding heart tightwad miser, champion spender of other people’s money, has never read anything by Thomas Sowell?:

The costs of government include not only the salaries of government officials and other direct outlays, these costs include the devastating impact of half-baked policies that can stifle economic activity or even lead to national destruction from within or without.

Present members of Congress win votes by promising such goodies. That leaves it up to future members of Congress to figure out how to welsh on those promises, which could not be met without jacking up tax rates to unprecedented levels.

Or suing Walmart for it.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 06:58 AM | Link to this

Here’s the Congress that cartoon boy wants Bush to “answer” to:

Drunken jackboot rampaging

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 07:04 AM | Link to this

Andy: Excellent link, clearly addresses the problem. And, from a progressive thinking member of a minority. Yeah!!! Off to work.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 07:15 AM | Link to this

Lies and the lying liars that tell them:

By finch

January 25, 2006 09:02 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie…

Isn’t it more than co-incidence that WalMart is the only employer in Maryland affected by the Medicaid (not Medicare) bill? Isn’t it true that WalMart is subsidizing it’s low prices my denying employees health care benefits, foisting them on taxpayers, while every other large employer in Maryland offers a basic health plan?’

The Wall Street Journal:

The consequences of our Legislature’s override of Republican Gov. Robert Ehrlich’s veto of their “Fair Share Health Care Act” on Jan. 12 will be tragic for some of the state’s neediest residents. The law will force companies that employ over 10,000 to spend at least 8% of their payroll on health care or kick any shortfall into a special state fund. Wal-Mart would be the only employer in the state to be affected.

Pinkos can’t tell the truth. It exposes their flaws if they do.

How could our legislators turn a blind eye to such areas? Partly, of course, they are simply eager for Big Labor’s votes and money and therefore subservient to its interests. The Service Employees International Union actually helped draft what became known as the “Wal-Mart bill.”

the union’s immediate national strategy is to limit Wal-Mart’s (which is non union) competitive reach by raising its costs.

By Mike

January 26, 2006 07:23 AM | Link to this

Wonderful Cartoon Mike! I hope he fries for the terrible mishandling, and apathetic attitude towards hurricane Katrina and her victims.

I guarantee you, if someone were about to have their life support pulled in a hospital down there, he would have been in New Orleans lickety split. Of course, he would have had to maneuver around all the floating corpses just to get there. Truly a sad and sick time for this country.

2008 can’t come fast enough!

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 08:00 AM | Link to this

C’mon ML. It’s a HURRICANE for Christ’s sake. A natural disaster. Bush has made a lot of mistakes but let’s not make him responsible for the weather. If the federal government relief efforts were so dismal, where was/is all that good, kind-hearted, charitable concern that ordinary people say they don’t need to be taxed to provide????? Neos are always telling us that charity is the province of charitable organizations and individuals, not government. Where were/are they, then???

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 08:18 AM | Link to this

Did anyone tell the charitable organizations that they needed to inform Anti R of their planned or occuring charitable actions?

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 08:19 AM | Link to this

In an aside, the US military decided to release 5 Iraqi women, today; bowing to the demands of the captors of American journalist, Jill Carroll. I thought that the US didn’t negotitate with terrorists??? Seeing the “Mental Midget” waffle around and violate every principle he ever “mouthed” is becoming an entertainment bonanza.

With the incredible ineptitude of our military command and their complete lack of comprehension regarding psy-ops, if we get out of this thing with our shirts, we will be very lucky indeed. Jill Carroll made her own bed with full foreknowledge. Let’s save the little darling if we can but let’s not prostitute ourselves in the process!!!

By AntiRadical

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

Scooter: If the charities had the ability or committment to aid New Orleans they have had ample opportunity to do so. The help just ain’t been coming in sufficient volume. Charities simply cannot deal with a disaster of this proportion, they (like us) have to rely on the government. The argument that calamities of this caliber could be handled without government intervention is ludicrous.

By George

January 26, 2006 08:27 AM | Link to this

Objective Observer, good for you going off to work.

Unfortunately some will do nothing but post here all day. How sad that they have no life beyond the keyboard.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 08:35 AM | Link to this

If you say so Anti R. What did people do before government was there as a citizens personal insurance policy? I think there are one or two people down there getting back on track with the help that is there. It may take a little more time for the place to come back to life, even though it is very American to expect reults now. Anyway, it is a perfect opportunity for some to complain about all the troops being in Iraq and they are.

One more little tid bit, you and I do not know all of the logistics and results of what is, will and has gone on. Perhaps you should become a project manager if you can do a better job?

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 08:38 AM | Link to this

George: Some of us can walk and chew gum at the same time! Sorry the ability passed you over.

By KW

January 26, 2006 08:49 AM | Link to this

I love how those most guilty of what happened in the wake of Katrina continue to make it Bush’s personal fault for not acting. Ray Nagine and that idiot govenor should be tried for negligent homicide instead of being held up as shining examples of leadership. They failed their constituents. The govenor is in charge of the national guard of each state during times of crisis but she didn’t call for them. The mayor in his infinite wisdom didn’t move buses away from a known flood zone, levee or not, that could have taken people out of the city and directed them to a football field w/o adequate provisions. The govenor initially said she didn’t need federal help and then waits three days before making the call to FEMA and stands back and claims the federal government didn’t act quickly enough. But this is all Bush’s fault? How convenient some forget about state’s rights and obligations and complain when the government interferes or fails to act. I wonder if those so quick to point the finger would do the same if Clinton were still in office or if Kerry would’ve won the election? This is no more than political finger pointing to re-assign blame from the guilty and it disgusts me!

By Mike

January 26, 2006 08:51 AM | Link to this

AR- I don’t think anybody holds the mental midget resonsible for the weather…what I do hold him responsible for is the apathetic attitude he had during, and after the event.

Comments such as “Nobody anticipated the failure of the levees” and “You’re doing a heck of a job Brownie” ring of just how out of touch and isolated this president is. Making jokes, and smirking while reflecting on all the “good drinking times” he used to have while in the Big Easy…truly sad. Meanwhile, people are dieing in their attics and at the Superdome, and we after three days, can’t even drop one case of water from a helicopter!!! I don’t get it.

By Wilma Lamb

January 26, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this

Who said Bush has learning disabilities, he has switched from cutting brush to building walls. thanks Mike, I have yet to see a cartoon I didn’t like sickofsleaze

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 08:53 AM | Link to this

Scooter: You don’t need logistics to know that when you negotiate with terrorists, you embolden them. Of course, the admin has said that it was doing this release anyway and it had nothing to do with Carroll but even if that were true (and the cow jumped over the moon), the timing is such that the message of capitulation will still be received by the captors loud and clear. Military genius is not needed to see that this is a BIG mistake.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this

“So now you will have a terrorist group that is committed to the destruction of Isreal in charge of the PA. But hey I guess its okay because Jimmy Carter says Hammas is getting better. He really has never met a dictator he hasn’t liked has he?”

Um, this is what democracy in the Middle East looks like. It’s what America has been fighting for, isn’t it?

And if the government is freely elected, how can you call it a dictatorship?

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this

Mike: Can agree with some of your concerns but still think that federal response to Katrina was mostly a product of the degree of the disaster, not presidential short-coming. When we focus on this “excusable” lapse, it denigrates the criticism of the President’s many “unexcusable” ones.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this

AntiR, I agree. I was typing about Katrina.

Katrina was an act of god and the desperate no idea having crowd wants to lump all blame on the President who is restricted by the constitution, if I am not mistaken.

By finch

January 26, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this

I say: “every other large employer in Maryland offers a basic health plan.”

Andy-pie (quoting the WSJ) says: “Wal-Mart would be the only employer in the state to be affected.”

Ummm, and your point is?

And how about this?

“A BusinessWeek analysis shows Costco’s average hourly wage is $15.97, far above the Wal-Mart (Sam’s Club) $11.52 figure, even excluding the 25 percent of Wal-Mart workers who are low-paid part-timers.

“The yearly employer contributions to health care — Costco, $5,735; Wal-Mart, $3,500. Of Costco employees, 82 percent are covered by the health plan; Wal-Mart, 47 percent. Employee turnover at Wal-Mart is three times higher than Costco’s.

“And then comes the clincher, suggesting the low-road approach may not be so clever after all: Costco’s profit per employee is $13,647; Wal-Mart’s, $11,039.”

Which business is thinking long-term smart? Which business is relying on taxpayer subsidies to boost shareholder profits while offering “Always Low Prices”?

And Andy-pie, how did you express your “compassionate conservatism” today? Inquiring minds are EAGER to know!

FYI, of course I read Thomas Sowell. You already know I’m a WSJ subscriber. What makes you think I ignore the noble opposition?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this

AntiR: Did you ever consider that you could be the “mental midget?”:

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Five Iraqi women detainees were released Thursday by the U.S. military, FOX News has confirmed. They were among hundreds Iraqi prisoners released after officials found no reason to continue their detention.

Look at these leftwing pinko moonbats, they whine when we hold prisoners, they whine when we release them.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this

Um, this is what democracy in the Middle East looks like. It’s what America has been fighting for, isn’t it? And if the government is freely elected, how can you call it a dictatorship?

Good point Leroy!

Katrina was an act of god and the desperate no idea having crowd wants to lump all blame on the President who is restricted by the constitution

Scooter, since when has this President EVER been restricted by the Constitution?

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this

By far the largest single corporate donation has come from Wal-Mart, the retail giant, which donated $17 million late last week

Hey! Wal-Mart can’t be ALL bad!

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this

I don’t think the Prez is allowed to use the military within our borders. How did Hitler solidify his power after elected? Also, we citizens are no longer required to quarter troops either even though that has nothing to do with it.

Perhaps you were being sarcastic, if so ignore me.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

Hey Scooter! I was, just a teeeny bit :)

By leroy

January 26, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this

“I don’t think the Prez is allowed to use the military within our borders”

He could if he decided it was necessary to protect us from terrorists. He can do anything he wants as long as he claims it protects us from terrorists, right? We must search out the enemies of the state wherever they exist!

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this

Oh, and my 2 cents on the cartoon: “ML, sometimes I enjoy your cartoons, other times, I just think they’re tripe, this cartoon would fall in the latter category.”

By getalife

January 26, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this

What is Dubya hiding?

Why are they not coorperating with Lieberman’s investigation?

Why no warrant for the wiretaps?

What is Dubya going to do about the Mexican border?

The terrorists don’t have to call, all they have to do is walk over the border together.

Don’t trust the coc criminals!

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this

He could if he decided it was necessary to protect us from terrorists. He can do anything he wants as long as he claims it protects us from terrorists, right?

Another GOOD POINT Leroy!

By Andy

January 26, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this

Oddball finch: Kook bleeding heart tightwad miser, when caught in a lie, change the subject. Confirm your status as a typical pinko. What don’t you understand about your own lies?

By finch

January 25, 2006 09:02 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie…

Isn’t it more than co-incidence that WalMart is the only employer in Maryland affected by the Medicaid (not Medicare) bill? Isn’t it true that WalMart is subsidizing it’s low prices my denying employees health care benefits, ——>foisting them on taxpayers<———, while every other large employer in Maryland offers a basic health plan?’

You, kook, are “foisting” debt on the taxpayer, you are the champion of spending other people’s money. You are the reason people live in and depend upon poverty.

Thank you for bringing up Costco. What, pray tell, in your bizarre little kook world, prevents Walmart employees from applying for a job and working at Costco if they so choose to do better?

Look, man, if your inbred pathetic pathological lying is too much for you to control, I would greatly appreciate you not wasting my time with your bizarre kook paranoia.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 09:35 AM | Link to this

You, kook, are “foisting� debt on the taxpayer, you are the champion of spending other people’s money

Andy, don’t you receive a military pension? Exactly who is it that is spending other people’s money?

By Mike

January 26, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this

AR- I think we are somewhat on the same line, but I DO see presidential short-comings that resulted in adding insult to inury with the disaster.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

sicko: I did 6 year in the service. This does not qualify for a pension. Unlike the Walmart employees, who are apparently chained to their work stations in your bizarre pinko world, I chose to do better for myself and left for the private sector.

By dubya

January 26, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this

“This is hard work”. “Where’s Turd blossom when you need him?”

By dubya

January 26, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this

Hey Andy, if you’re like me, nobody saw you during your six ‘year’ in the service. Hee hee hee hee hee.

By Mike

January 26, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this

Why don’t you liberals just admit that yu hate Bush and you will cynically use any pretense to attack him.

This is why nobody takes liberals seriously and this is why conservatives will contintue to run the country.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

The sweetest irony born of Katrina is that on of the men who spearheaded legislation to protect corporations from lawsuits, Trent Lott, is now faced with having to sue his insurance company before he can build that porch - on which GWB expressed fond wishes to sit.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 09:58 AM | Link to this

“Why don’t you liberals just admit that yu hate Bush and you will cynically use any pretense to attack him.”

Fine, here is an exhaustive list of W’s positive accomplishments as president:

There ya go. That covers it.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

Some facts on Katrina that the pinkos hope you don’t remember:

By blogger

January 26, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this

Talk about getting “caught in a lie,” Andy. you idiot.

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 Republican National Commitee

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

As the Cold War ended 15 years ago, we would like to request our sheeplike followers to update their name-calling from “commie” and “pinko.” We suggest “liberoterrorist” and “Muslim-hugger.” Thank you.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this

Dubya just got attacked by a camera.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this

Andy: I can’t believe that you of all people would support the Iraqi women “prisoner exchange”. I guess al-Queda is an official government now that we are “negotiating” and “exchanging prisoners”. That’s not giving them tacit authenticity or authority though, is it? We held these Iraqi women for months/years. Why do we release them, now, when it can only appear to the terrorist cabals that we are doing so from fear/weakness ‘cause we were ORDERED to release them? Terrorists have no government or country so why do we treat them as if they had legitimate world standing as a rightful government? Nothing good can ever come from what might even appear to be capitulation with terrorists. We’re now stuck fast to an intolerable effort that we cannot win or quit. What a great place to be!

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:23 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? Can anyone blame me for falling asleep listening to this stupid a-ss?

By leroy

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

Andy: I can’t believe that you of all people would support the Iraqi women “prisoner exchange�.

AntiR: You forget Andy is a member of the Sean Hannity school of “conservatism,” where you defend without question everything the president does. Suddenly, where W is concerned, everything we know about corrupt, dishonest politicians just doesn’t apply. W is our great leader and is never wrong, and any questioning of his immense wisdom is just anti-American.

Don’t you know that our ancestors fought a revolution against England to escape the oppression of limited executive power? Thanks to the Founding Fathers, we are now free to have a president with absolute and unquestioned authority to do anything at all, especially in secret, without answering to the judicial or legislative branch.

By getalife

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

D’oh!

By Liberal Texas Democrat

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

Leroy: “Fine, here is an exhaustive list of W’s positive accomplishments as president:

Removing the Taliban from power in Afghanistan.”

Diminished only by Bushes Faustian Deal with the Taliban

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this

AntiR: Moonbat, which is it you would like us to do? Hold the prisoners or release them? You can’t have it both ways. Life is not looking under your pillow for what the tooth fairy left last nite. Psychotics.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this

Ooops:

Leroy: Moonbat, which is it you would like us to do? Hold the prisoners or release them? You can’t have it both ways. Life is not looking under your pillow for what the tooth fairy left last nite. Psychotics.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

Listening to Dubya, it is painfully obviuos, he is in way over his head.

Just resign like Nixon for God’s sake.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

Militants last week said they would kill Carroll if all female prisoners in U.S. detention in Iraq were not freed. The freelance reporter for the Christian Science Monitor was abducted January 7.

Nine female prisoners were in U.S. custody, the military said. The other four female prisoners will remain in U.S. custody, the military said.

Nice job, AntiR, so far this morning you have spelled “radical” correctly but that is all that you have gotten right.

By Leroy

January 26, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

“Life is not looking under your pillow for what the tooth fairy left last nite.”

Andy, your well-reasoned, ironclad arguments are beyond my abilities to disprove. I’ll have to consult with the Easter Bunny and get back with you.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this

Andy: At this point, we should have held them, of course. Unfortunately, the President took a swing at the “Tar-Baby” and like “Brer’ Rabbit”, we are all stuck fast where we wish we weren’t. We will be swallowing that bitter, bitter medicine for some years to come, yet.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this

Leroy: Instead of getting up with the Easter Bunny why don’t you listen to Rush Limbaugh at 12:00 eastern? You would be doing all of us a favor.

By candide

January 26, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this

Here is the rightwing solution to our Iraq problem: drop copies of Brokeback Mountain over Iraq. Watching the movie will undermine the insurgents’ morals and make them gay. They will stop fighting against us and start gay sex. All will be well.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this

Andy: At this point, we should have held them, of course. Unfortunately, the President took a swing at the “Tar-Baby� and like “Brer’ Rabbit�, we are all stuck fast where we wish we weren’t. We will be swallowing that bitter, bitter medicine for some years to come, yet.

Pardon me?

By leroy

January 26, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this

I can’t agree with holding people prisoner for one second after you’ve determined they’re innocent, especially not for political reasons.

Andy: I already listen to Hannity most days, so I won’t be adding Limbaugh to the list. One propagandapologist a day is enough for me.

Does anyone else like the ridiculous word I just invented?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this

Here’s something that should excite all of you liberals.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this

Andy: Sorry, the metaphor came from “Uncle Remus’s Tales” (made into the movie “Song of the South by Disney). In this fable Brer’ Rabbit was a fiesty smart-A who had trouble controlling his temper and was duped into hitting a scarecrow made from tar (the “Tar-Baby”). After having done so, he was stuck fast to the “tar-baby” and could not get lose. Disney refuses to re-release the movie due to its’ supposed “racist” underpinnings. (complete BS by the way)

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

“Does anyone else like the ridiculous word I just invented?” I’m going to use it, today, in as many sentences as possible.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this

Thanks, LTD :).

Andy—For you, I’d recommend the American Conservative magazine, to help you distinguish between real conservatism and W’s policies.

By Semper Fi

January 26, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this

I can’t believe blogger is still dragging that old bone around about the DOJ. At the time, I thought Andy made his day, now I think it made his month. What a loser.

You go Andy.. RW should be in later to help you fight moonbats.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this

LTD: Thanks for link to “Bush’s Faustian Deal With the Taliban”. Wow, was that an eye-opener. So, the President gave the Taliban $43 million in aid just 4 months before 9/11. Just when I thought my respect for the “Mental Midget” could sink no lower.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

Yeah LTD, I realy liked Robert Sheer’s biography.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

“Just when I thought my respect for the “Mental Midgetâ€? could sink no lower.”

I know, it’s crazy how that keeps happening. Now it’s the NSA warrant-free wiretap program. It seems like every couple of weeks there’s a new offense you never would have expected from an American president.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 11:24 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical: And one must pause to wonder just how much of that $43 million went to the Taliban’s close ally OBL to finiance, oh say flight lessons?

By leroy

January 26, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this

LTD: At least it took care of eliminating that opium production!

Does anyone else think Bush’s “coke jaw” has become more pronounced in the last couple of months? Somehow I doubt he’s actually going to sleep at 8:30 or whatever early bedtime he claims; it’s hard to believe he’s sleeping at all.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this

The package includes $28 million worth of wheat from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, $5 million in food commodities and $10 million in “livelihood and food security” programs, both from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Powell called the crisis a “looming catastrophe,” and said that he was working with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to press upon potential donors the need to respond to the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan “with energy and dispatch.”

The blind hatred of you all is amazing you will eat anything up like you say ditto heads do

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this

LTD: Ironic that GWB probably assisted financing for 9/11. If THIS is the end product of America’s “War on Drugs”, we should decriminalize all of it, sell it through pharmacies and execute anyone trafficking outside those legal channels. We would be through with this problem for good and all once the addicts have all overdosed. This is a self-correcting problem that we have turned into a political football and national welfare program for police agencies.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this

And the beat goes on….

WASHINGTON — Warning that Afghanistan is “on the verge of a widespread famine,” Secretary of State Colin Powell Thursday announced a $43 million package in humanitarian assistance for the Afghan people.

Pathological liars. Robert Scheer is the premiere pervert.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this

LTD: Thanks for link to “Bush’s Faustian Deal With the Taliban�. Wow, was that an eye-opener. So, the President gave the Taliban $43 million in aid just 4 months before 9/11.

Sick, just freaking sick….

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this

leroy: “LTD: At least it took care of eliminating that opium production!” or did it?

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this

Robert Sheer knew it wasn’t 43 dollars in cash given directly to the Taliban, but he is not lying right. He is simply censoring the info that doesn’t fit his agenda perhaps?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

You can’t trust anything these pinkos say..

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

Powell said the U.S. aid is administered by the United Nations and non-governmental organizations, and bypasses the Taliban, “who have done little to alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people, and indeed have done much to exacerbate it.”

Robert Sheer is as honest as the day is long.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this

So, giving AID to the people of Afghanistan did nothing to assist the Talibans hold on power. But giving AID to the Iraqi people would have cemented Saddam’s grip.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this

Scooter: This is the same pervert that Barbra Streisand cancelled her subscription to the LA Times because they got rid of him. Even the ultra pinko Times wants nothing to do with this a-sshole. But Babs enjoys him, getting mind screwed, these libs only hear what they want to.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this

And I should trust Powell and his cartoonsof mobile weapons labs?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this

Look at these pinkos, now they want us to starve people to death. Is this not just so bizarre? How is wheat supposed to help the Taliban anyway?

By RE

January 26, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this

George W Bush Appeaser in Chief

Five Iraqi Women Freed, but Will Reporter Be Released? By SAMEER N. YACOUB, AP

BAGHDAD, Iraq (Jan. 26) - The U.S. military released five Iraqi women on Thursday, a demand sought by militants holding a kidnapped American journalist. U.S. officials said the releases were routine and not related to the kidnapping.

This guy is more Chamberlin than Churchill

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

I’m sorry but why is it o.k. to give government mandated aid to the Afghani people but some people on this blog just about s-h-i-t a COW when the government mandates that a multi-billion dollar company hand over a measly 8% more for healthcare?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this

Welcome to the pathological liars club, there, RE:

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

Militants last week said they would kill Carroll if all female prisoners in U.S. detention in Iraq were not freed. The freelance reporter for the Christian Science Monitor was abducted January 7.

Nine female prisoners were in U.S. custody, the military said. The other four female prisoners will remain in U.S. custody, the military said.

Sick, just sick….

By getalife

January 26, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this

New trend for the blog? Now you have to email comments

By tim

January 26, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

Had to give this toon a really reluctant no but only because the Bushwackers dont deserve even joking credit for what they’re forced by their own abject stupidity to do in the light of their own failures. If repeated budget cuts had not been made maintenence repairs would have been kept up and the end results would not have been nearly as tragic.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this

Sick: Nobody is stopping you from handing over every freakin penny you got. I couldn’t care if you spent the day washing the feet of the homeless. Just because you are too much of a blooming idiot to let the free markets create wealth, jobs and health insurance without government obstruction doesn’t make it anyone else’s problem but your’s. Travel the world, dude, minister to all the feelgood socialist problems you can think of, whether they are real or not.

You clowns are too stupid to see that you have created a welfare dependent underclass, void of life, motivation and hope.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this

Changing the tack a little, but did y’all see the column by the religion writer on Wednesday declaring that our nation should follow Jesus’ teachings by taxing the rich to help the poor. My question is this: Why is it wrong for conservatives to push a government agenda based on faith-based morality on any number of issues, but those on the Christian left find it perfectly acceptable to push their brand of morality in the form of tax-funded social programs? If government is going to be based on Christian morality, who gets to choose which parts to enforce?

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this

You clowns are too stupid to see that you have created a welfare dependent underclass, void of life, motivation and hope

Please provide proof that I have created anything remotely resembling a welfare state.

By Daniel

January 26, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

Christianity? It would be nice. The current leadership has betrayed Christianity and America. Both the National Conference of Bishops, I.e. the ruling body of Roman Catholicism in America) and the National Council of Churches, (The ruling body of Protestantism in th U.S.) oppose the War on Iraq. You can push the government all you want for morality. Let us know when you start getting some. These creeps aren’t Christian.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

My God, sick, have you heard of FDR? Your telling me that your ideas for extortion are based completely on what other pinkos have told you? That it’s the fault of the neocons? Have you ever attended school? You’re dangerous, dude, shooting your mouth off about things you don’t even understand.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

Andy, at least we know that there is someone allegedly in or from Texas that has even less credibility than Barbara Streisand.

Also Andy, they will never relate the hopelessness and despair seen after Katrina to the welfare state they have created. Many will never see the absolute power dependency affords government, as they love some government. They and their government are the ones that have all the smarts.

Dr. R., I think your example illustrates the opportunism of many socialist.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this

A recent study published by the Urban Institute reported that in 1997 61 percent of former welfare recipients were employed and three-quarters lived in a family with an employed adult. This study also explored the personal and work characteristics of former welfare recipients, and showed the incidence of economic hardship. Another study, focused on current welfare recipients, showed that 21 percent were employed, while 44 percent reported at least two significant obstacles to work. The findings of both studies drew upon nationally representative data from the 1997 National Survey of America’s Families (NSAF)

So, in 1997 61% of welfare recipients were employed compared with only 21% of welfare recipients being employed currently…hmmm interesting.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this

Who’s creating a welfare state?

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this

Which welfare recipient do you think requires MORE aid? Those with a job or those without a job?

By Daniel

January 26, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this

Sick: You’re making sense. They won’t respond.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this

How many total welfare recipients were there in 1997 and now? That is one thing we will need to make an intelligent comparison.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this

I don’t know how many welfare recipients you’ve come in contact with but I have helped several and I can honestly tell you that most, not all but most are looking for a “hand-up” not a “hand-out” and hardly any were devoid of motivation or hope…

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

The whole exchange here is why we need to keep morality, or someone’s narrow definition of it, out of our laws. Beyond not killing someone and stealing their stuff, it’s not the job of the state to govern individual behavior. That includes who we cuddle with at night, what we drink, smoke or eat, what we drive, and whether or not we tithe. Charity should come from individuals, not government. It is acceptable to a point to set up a social safety net for those who struggle, if only for pragmatic reasons, and certainly the scope of that is always a point of contention. But the notion that it’s our duty as Christians to fork over tax money for the poor (many of whom are hard-working folks who can’t get ahead, many others lazy deadbeats who make bad decisions) is no more acceptable to the idea of a secular government than whatever nonsense Pat Robertson is spewing these days.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this

sickof, yeah and I have worked with people who quit mid year so they don’t make enough money to cut off their benefits. They aren’t stupid but hand outs are easier than work. I have also seen people walk off job sites because they felt they were too good for a task that I had no problem performing myself. Also, I’m sure those job leavers didn’t have an entitlement mentality that the dems helped create.

Dr R, well said my man. Let me buy you drink

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this

I’ve been researching that Scooter and it seems that with TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) it doesn’t matter how many people are on the dole, there is a flat $100 million per year that funds the program (through 2008, it may change after that).

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this

Our nation was founded on the notion of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (note, a pursuit, not promised happiness). Where in there did someone get the idea that affordable health care is a right? It is a consumer product like any other, provided by trained professionals who need to make a living. If and when we decide that it is the government’s purvey to step in and see that all have equal access regardless of finance, what’s next? Do we then decide that cable TV is everyone’s right as well? Where do we draw the line on what society should provide for us and what we should acquire for ourselves through our own efforts? If there is no line, then clearly we are ceding our hard-won liberty to the state for the sake of security.

Prisoners and animals in the zoo are provided shelter, food and ample health care. Is that what we want to be?

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

sickof, until we know what they were a percentage of the stats mean nothing to me as they are half the picture.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

Dr R: Good job pointing out the HYPOCRISY of the religious right who espouse the teachings of Jesus but not when he said “Tax the rich to feed the poor”. Like the brown-shirts before them, Neos only USE Jesus to disguise their own greed. When he has said something that may affect the overly-rapid accumulation of their fortunes, he’s a moonbat.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

It would just about KILL me to have to rely on someone else to provide for me…I guess I’m just a sinner, I have too much pride. What would make someone want to sacrifice their self-worth and, in essence, go begging? I’m not saying that ALL welfare receipients do that, or even the majority, but the minority of lazy, do-nothings, how can they do it?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this

My goodness, anyone can figure this out, I don’t even need to fact check your lies. There are only the “hardcore” on welfare assistance now as compared to 1997. That’s not the nicest term to use but it reflects people that aren’t employable, for what ever reason. in 1997, alot were still making the transition from work to welfare. Thus they have no jobs.

Dangerous to our society, they have no clue, just feelings.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this

Dr R, may I pose I conspiracy theory to you? If we get socialized medicine and eventually that and the other social dependency programs become too expensive, what would prevent the government from stealthily relaxing the health care so they can reduce their “client” base? I don’t know why that doesn’t scare the proponents.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this

Both sides are hypocritial. The problem with defining morality is that it’s subjective. To those on one side, it’s fine to spit on homeless folks as long as you don’t watch porn or drink whiskey. To the other side, enjoying the trappings of financial success while others go hungry is all but Satanism. Who knows, maybe they’re both right? But let’s keep all of this in church and out of our laws. Those who wrote the Constitution saw the dangers herein and did just that. Some 230 years later, they remain far wiser than any of us hope to be.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this

The coc coverup of the Katrina response always turns into a coc talkng point about welfare.

What is Dubya hiding, is it the Brown disaster?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this

Listen to these stupid feelgood socialists, totally oblivious to the destruction the wreak on society. What would Jesus do?- Would Jesus extract a 8 month term infant from it’s mother’s womb and drill a hole in it’s head? I think we would all be better off leaving the Eternal Father out of our worldly affairs, you sick little perverts.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

Sickof, we are not saying the poor shouldn’t be takin care of, we are simply saying government can screw up a wet dream. They are innefficient at it, they have no motivation to do it as it gives them power and the private sector can do a fine job.

Governments power to levy taxes should not include a corrupt progressive tax code. Support the Fairtax and take the power back from Washington, while alleviating the poor from any taxes.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this

Scooter, sounds like a Michael Crichton novel. But we should always devise public policy with an eye toward how it can be abused. Sure, withholding health care would be an option, and also a way to govern behavior. Say we get Ted and Hillary’s Health Care Bonanza, all docs bought and paid for. Now you go to the doc ‘cuz you’re feeling bad and he says, “Scooter, buddy, you’re eating too much red meat and smoking too many cigars. Cut that out or Uncle Sam won’t pay the bill.” The government could, in theory, take away all individual behavioral choices that it deems to be unhealthy. Now a whole ‘nother segment of our liberties has been taken from us.

Or say a big drug firm decides to push its new cure-all and inks a big deal with the government. Now the state-run health biz forces everyone to gulp down these pills. Every soul who worries about the White House ties with big oil and how it effects policy should do the same with health care choices. We should not trust a big federal government with any aspect of our lives that we can control ourselves.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this

Query? If conservatives are all about states having the power and a state legislature requires companies that operate in it’s state with more than 10,000 workers to provide more healthcare coverage then where’s the problem? Obviously, if the citizens of that state don’t agree with that law, they’ll kick out the lawmakers that pushed it through during the next election cycle and vote ina legislature that will repeal it…Nationally, we have a Republican controlled Senate, a Republican dominated House and a Republican President and in a few weeks, a Conservative leaning Supreme Court. Conservatives/Republicans should be able to do pretty much anything they bloody-well please. So why all the hubbub Bub?

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

Sickof, or business would just lay people off until their employee total is 9,999, or not locate there at all, leading to unemployment. How about politicians stay out of business’s cost functions since they don’t know the business, the self important boobs.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

Scooter: I made an appointment for my daughter to see her OB/GYN yesterday. The soonest available appointment was over 3 months away. The American population of Docs has been artificially limited by special interests (AMA). We turn thousands of 4.0 grads away from medical school who have passed MCAT. (You are probably unaware of the “Legacy” rate in medical schools- not all acceptees have 4.0’s). This has eliminated free-market principles due to the perversion of supply and demand. Docs charge what they wish ‘cause there is no competition, per se. Currently, we are “dumbing down” the care that is being provided by allowing minimally trained Nurse Practitioners and Physicians Assistants to act as defacto Doctors with script writing priviledges and autonomy. We do so ‘cause there are not enough Docs to provide the care otherwise. If you really want to reign in medical costs, demand more Doctors. Free-market will do the rest.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this

I’m troubled by any government, federal or state, telling businesses how to operate beyond the safety and lawfulness of their workplace. Health care insurance is a perk companies offer to remain competitive in a worker-friendly era, and should. Requiring a company to do so undermines the free market. Don’t be surprised if the courts ram that thing back down the Maryland legislature’s throats.

Bottom line: you don’t like the benefits Wal-Mart offers, go somewhere else. If enough workers to that, it will be forced to compete by offering better perks. The reason that hasn’t happened is that job options for unskilled, uneducated workers are growing fewer with our manufacturing base shrinking (see Ford, GM) and many don’t have the marketable skills to work elsewhere. That’s not Wal-Mart’s fault; in fact, it is providing a paycheck for many folks who would have trouble earning one elsewhere, however meager it may seem. In fact, you can’t blame anyone for that, however hard you may try, because the economy cannot be steered or “handled” as easily as James Carville and others have led you to believe.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

Dr R, don’t we already have a legislature in this state that tries to legislate choice? Smoking ban…no gay marriage….ultrasounds before abortions…show me that ID or you can’t vote…you are a sex offender, you can’t live here or here or here or here or here…seems like we’re already heading in that direction.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

Sickof, to address your question about republican form of gubment. It is fine for the states to individualy make those requirements of business, California did, or tried. If I give you my .45 and you want to shoot yourself in the foot, I will have you sign a waiver then let you do it.

By Daniel

January 26, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this

Not this crowd. This pack of scum-bags aren’t conservative. I don’t know what to call them. They know how to win.They ar experts at manipulating the media and the public.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

Allow me , you call them the coc.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this

Now, most people will say that those laws are for our protection, safety and health but I don’t buy it. I think they’re the first steps down that old slippery slope to if you don’t do/say/act like we want you to, then we’ll just enact a law that will force you to…

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this

AntiR, you stated that yesterday, I responded you missed it.

How can I demand that more free individuals choose to spend twelve years in school and training to become doctors. If they are being turned away, as you say, the demand is there and the market will supply more schools.

Aren’t OB/GYN’s the most heavily sued group of doctors and would that prevent people from wanting to spend all that money and time to become one?

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this

Sick, I’m a libertarian so I agree on some of the measures you mention. Government has no business dictating personal relationships. And as much as I hate cigarette smoke, I think businesses should get to decide whether they allow it (you don’t like it; eat somewhere else). No doubt, Republicans are pushing their own agenda of government controls, different from the other side but just as restrictive and dangerous. A pox on both their houses.

The voting thing is a bit different. I understand how it’s seen as a partisan thing to require IDs, but if they’re free and easy to get, what’s the big deal? I’d rather fix potential fraud before it happens. Wish the idiots in Florida had done that with their punch-card ballots and saved us all a lot of grief.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this

Smoking ban: Smoking effects the health of others.

Gay Marriage ban: Would provide benefits to people who are unable to propagate future tax payers.

Ultrasounds: Offers protection for the life of an unborn child.

Voter ID: Ensures the legitimacy of our elections.

Legislating Walmart to provide health insurance:

By getalife

January 26, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this

Back to the toon, what is Dubya hiding stonewalling the Katrina committee. Is it the Brown fiasco? That advisor confidential crap is a crock.

Dubya mentioned the corruption in Palestine was why they lost the election.I wonder if people will wake up here and vote out the criminals.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this

“Gay Marriage ban: Would provide benefits to people who are unable to propagate future tax payers.”

So what?

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this

Yeah, I’m not with the ultrasound thing, either. I think it’s legit to offer full informational disclosure to a woman as to what will happen with an abortion and offer all available choices, counseling, etc. Requiring a sonogram is forcing someone to undergo a medical procedure and that’s a violation of individual rights. Abortion is a brutal, barbaric way to practice reproductive choice, but that’s a moral point of view (mine, in this case) that should not be reflected in law.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this

Leroy: Come on, man, can’t you guys figure out anything on your own? If we don’t replace ourselves, that meaning we have children, who’s going to pay social security and for the upcoming Iranian war? Gay couples have no rights to the same benefits that normal child bearing couples recieve. Read up on France, take pictures of them because they won’t be a country in 10 years. There’s no new Frenchies being born.

By Daniel

January 26, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this

Dr R: You said it! I am opposed to abortion. I believe in adoption. But I don’t want the government telling us what to do. Can anyone say: Schaivo? We’re lead by a gaggle of misguided headcases. I am sick of them shoving their pseudo-chriatianity down our throats.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this

Scooter: Not even specialists generally spend 12 straight years in active training (all Docs are in school for life, though, really). Problem is that the market is being perverted by special interests (particularly American Medical Assosciation lobbying). If the market were free it would accomodate more medical schools; it isn’t. Gynecology IS the most sued specialty and has gained the reputation of “poison” from internists who haven’t already decided that this is what they want to do as their life’s work. There are several “orphaned” specialties like OB/GYN, Peds, Podiatry, Pulmonology, Rheumatology, etc. The reasons vary from high litigation exposure to low patient populations ( and thereby low profit). Across the board, however, there are few general or specialty areas of medicine that could not sustain Doctor populations at least ten times what they are now.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this

There’s enough propagating going on as it is without forcing people to do it against their will. Does that mean we also penalize hetero couples who don’t have kids? Andy, do you think you’re going to turn gay folks around by denying them a piece of paper? They is what they is; let’s butt out and let them live their lives the way they want without interfering. You and I can crank out enough kids to make up for them (well, with women involved, of course).

By Daniel

January 26, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

To be frank. I would put up with all of their crap if I thought they had any talent. I’m off to my work-out. Bye, bye.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

DR R: Requiring a sonogram is forcing someone to undergo a medical procedure and that’s a violation of individual rights.- Before an ultrasound can even be done, we are talking late term infants, I feel as though we owe an unborn child some basic rights also. Like not getting a hole drilled in it’s head.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this

Getalife, thought the same thing when Dubya mentioned corruption in Palestine. I could picture Ney and DeLay cringing. Priceless.

Don’t know what’s up with Katrina, but the Brown mess is pretty well known by now so there isn’t much left to stonewall. Unless someone still believes the Farrakhan theory that the guvmint blew up the levees to kill poor people and de-chocolatize the city.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this

DR R: I’m not try to change anybody’s behaviour. The only thing I care about along the gay line is that they don’t teach it in school or they don’t parade out in front of my house. I don’t shove my sexual practices down your child’s throat, leave mine alone. And no, we don’t owe them any benefits. It is a choice they make, why should I be burdened with it?

By leroy

January 26, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this

So Andy, if gay couples adopt kids or have them via sperm donor or surrogate mother (as appropriate), then they DO deserve marriage rights?

If a heterosexual couple is infertile or chooses not to have children, then they DON’T deserve marriage rights?

This is your argument?

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this

The problem with any abortion policy is that one person’s rights intersect with another’s. In few other issues is there such an overlap that the law must address. Where does the fetus’ rights end and the woman’s begin, and vice versa? Smarter people than us have to figure that out. I want women to be less self-absorbed at conception and more in tune to the life within them, but it ain’t just about what I want. The law gives us all the right to be selfish a—holes, and we can’t and shouldn’t change that.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this

Leroy: I believe you can claim children as dependents in this situation. And couples without children can’t claim benefits.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this

Well, I agree about not teaching it in school (teach what?) and parading it in front of your house (nor should hetero strippers do the same). And I won’t even comment on shoving something down someone’s throat, given the topic. As for benefits, gay folks should get no more and no less than anyone else. The law should not single them out in any way. For the most part, benefits accrued through marriage or civil unions come from insurance companies, businesses and other sources, so you probably won’t be paying for much (we shouldn’t be paying anyone just for who or if they marry). I don’t really feel burdened by what other folks do in their private lives, and if I did I would resist whole-heartedly, whatever their inclination may be.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this

AntiR: The law gives us all the right to be selfish a—holes, and we can’t and shouldn’t change that.- I don’t agree with that at all, there is a definite harm done to a child during an abortion. Society has many punishments proscribed for doing harm. Abortion is done today as a convenience which makes it an abomination. There is no moral high ground for it.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this

“And couples without children can’t claim benefits.”

Not true. They can make decisions regarding such things as emergency medical care for their spouses, and all spousal rights and inheritance laws apply, regardless of whether they have children.

That’s the kind of thing gay couples want and currently can’t have. It won’t cost you a single precious dollar. It won’t interfere with your life in any way.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this

DR R: So what if people started claiming cattle as dependents because they were having sex with them? Are you saying that we should set them up with a nice benefits package? Homosexuality is a selfish, unproductive choice that does not benefit society in any way shape or form. In fact, considering broken homes, diseases and the like you could say it causes more harm than anything.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this

leroy: The majority of married male female couples have children. The benefits they recieve are an incentive to have children.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this

“So what if people started claiming cattle as dependents because they were having sex with them?”

Dude, you’re weird. We’re talking about consenting adult human beings here.

“Homosexuality is a selfish, unproductive choice that does not benefit society in any way shape or form.”

What about interior decorating and fashion design? Hair stylists? I’m kind of joking, obviously, but are you saying that any activity which does not benefit society in a measurable way, such as sitting on your couch watching television, should be outlawed?

It looks like Dr. R can help you understand what limited government means.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this

Save your finger muscles guys…Andy has always been an advocate for legislating his view of morality and always will be…

By Bill

January 26, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

A great one, ML.

Way to go, JOSH. Nothing like properly defining these Republiscum for what they are. Spose we’ll have another great victorious day today in Iraq? We sure do intimidate the hell out of Hamas, eh? We are fools to the world - courtesy of The Absent Aviator & his gang of mindless thugs.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this

To Leroy:

I really like your new word, too :)

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this

For goodness sake, he’s one of those neanderthals that still thinks homosexuality is a choice…

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this

Daniel,

What happened to “Ta-Ta”?

leroy,

If you seriously want to listen to one conservative a day, why Hannity? His show is nothing but a three hour commercial for that night’s Hannity & Colmes. If you don’t think you are ready for Rush try Laura Ingraham.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this

Anybody want to take a guess at what AIDS has cost society in both lives and capital? Don’t even try the heterosexual disease claim, that dog don’t hunt. You people are all freaked out over the 2200 herioc soldiers who gave their lives for freedom, why are the millions who gave their lives for sex not worthy of your concern?

By Leroy

January 26, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this

“The benefits they recieve are an incentive to have children.”

Most of the legal benefits of marriage are more in the vein of: “In the event of emergency or catastrophe, I designate this person my medical, legal and financial representative.” But you sure side-stepped that, didn’t you?

Midori: Thanks!

By leroy

January 26, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this

RW- Basically because a couple of ladies in my office listen to Hannity every day, so I hear him whether I want to or not. They mainly listen in order to rip on him.

One of them, by the way, is an Army veteran, and her husband is career Army, and they hate Bush and his war.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this

Sick: I don’t believe it’s a choice, I know it’s a choice. When the pinkos said it wasn’t, you have to go 180 degrees opposite of that. It’s the lying deal.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this

“I don’t believe it’s a choice, I know it’s a choice.”

When did you choose to be hetero? Or is it a choice you have to consciously make every single day?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this

Evergreen Park, Illinois, Walmart one block outside of the city limits of Chicago, which had voted down the Walmart in the city limits, had 25,000 job applicants for their grand opening. 25,000.

Nice job, there, libs.

By gadem

January 26, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this

Hey Get…what is coc an acronym for?

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this

leroy,

I have no idea what you are implying with the last sentence, I always thought freedom to have different points of view was a good thing.

If you’re in Atlanta and they want to listen to someone they can rip just as much, but get some actual entertainment try Kim Peterson, in the same time slot. Although I bet the ladies in your office really listen because they think Hannity is hot.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

I’m sorry, 24,500 of the job applicants had Chicago addresses.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this

Leroy: ““So what if people started claiming cattle as dependents because they were having sex with them?â€?”

Actually, cattle would be on the tax books as a liability, wether or not one has sex with them, until they’re slaughtered. All this sex/animal talk kind of reminds me of Ezekeiel 23:20 “There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.”

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this

leroy: You might want to sit down for this one, I’m really gonna floor you; What do you think your reproductive organs are for?

By getalife

January 26, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this

gadem,

coc=culture of corruption

A big day for the coc.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

Andy, I have many gay freinds and your views are your views, but I don’t see why anyone would “choose” it. If they are in the closet are they still choosing or conforming to others standards? I certainly do not envy the situation they are in.

By gadem

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

RW different points of view are a good thing as long as they agree with what Bush and his Administration does. Other than that, they will sick the dogs on ya’….like rove, hannity, limbaught, et.al

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this

gadem,

We listen to your drivel, don’t we?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

I never said that if you want to mutate your existence here on Earth so that it feels good for you, that you could not go for it. Have at it. Just don’t feed me full of the bull——. Homosexuality is deviant, your reporductive organs are just that, an anus is incapable of supporting human life. It’s your thing, do it if you want!

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

A blog for all you non-pinko’s

By gadem

January 26, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

This is troubling

By leroy

January 26, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this

Andy-

Since they’re MY organs, they can be used for whatever I want, so long as I don’t harm others.

I see where you’re going, but look, just because I have hair follicles on my face, it doesn’t obligate me to grow a beard.

By finch

January 26, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this

LTD - That $43 million BushCo gave to the Taliban probably WAS for flight lessons! What morons.

Scooter - So the $43M was for humanitarian aid instead? Peachy!! Freeing up Taliban money that would have been spent on, oh, food for…. oh, flight lessons!

Andy-pie - “You, kook, are “foistingâ€? debt on the taxpayer, you are the champion of spending other people’s money. You are the reason people live in and depend upon poverty.” Au contrare! It is YOU who want to spend taxpayer dollars propping up WalMart shareholders and subsidizing their “Always Low Prices”. You are such a ditto-idiot.

“Homosexuality is a selfish, unproductive choice that does not benefit society in any way shape or form.” Well, the vast majority of homosexuals were raised in heterosexual families. Better do something about that, Andy-pie. Oh, and it’s NOT a choice. Who chooses to be ridiculed and persecuted? More mumblings from the virtual village idiot.

Who pays for the mandatory sonograms 1st trimester pregnant women seeking abortions don’t want, Andy-pie? The women? Government extortion. The government? Well, we can’t have THAT, can we?

“What would Jesus do?- Would Jesus extract a 8 month term infant from it’s mother’s womb and drill a hole in it’s head?” Well, if Andy-pie were Jesus, he’d force all pregnant women to have babies, and then let those whose parents weren’t rich or insured die for lack of food and medical care.

It’s the “compassionate christian” in him.

Hey, Midori, hope you’re feeling better!

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this

finch,

Powell said the U.S. aid is administered by the United Nations and non-governmental organizations, and bypasses the Taliban, “who have done little to alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people, and indeed have done much to exacerbate it.�

The facts,nothing but the facts

By getalife

January 26, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this

Did ya’ll know the king had meetings with Jack?

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this

Andy, did you know that chimanzees have been observed having same-sex relations in the wild, did they choose to be homosexual too?

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Is your story supposed to point this out?

The company’s worldwide crude oil refining operations ran at 88 percent of capacity in the quarter, as a Louisiana refinery remained shut due to damage caused by Hurricane Katrina in August.

Why won’t President Bush fix that refinery?

Why does the word “profit” trouble you so much? Did you notice that your story never once mentions profit margins.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this

I guess if you can claim a cow as a dependent, a chimp would be a step up the evolutionary scale (oops, did I say a bad word there?) At least you could eat the cow if the relationship went bad. And if you get into a lover’s tiff with a chimp, you could have feces tossed at you. Bad as my mate may be at times, she’s never resorted to that.

I’m sorry, am I not taking this as seriously as I should? Good …m,

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this

See how screwed up liberalism is, look at 2:30. He starts out ridiculing the government for giving humanitarian assistance to starving people and he ends up saying that we are not doing enough for starving people. This is masturbation (which I have no problem with as long as you do it in private) it is solely to make this Oddball kook feel better about himself.

Look, oddball finch, I wasn’t specifically saying that you were a deviant. You know, love the sinner, hate the sin. I’m sure it’s embarrassing for you to show affection for your man and I honestly wish that you didn’t suffer such ridicule. I’m sure the sex feels so good for you that it doesn’t seem like it’s a choice. Many people are fooled by this “pleasure.” Have you ever thought about keeping it in the closet?

By Midori

January 26, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this

Thanks, Finch

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:49 PM | Link to this

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this

Andy, did you know that chimanzees have been observed having same-sex relations in the wild, did they choose to be homosexual too?

This is the best excuse you could come up with, sicko, is that you are a “chimanzee?” Did you know that antelope will run straight at each other and slam their heads together? Did you know dogs will eat their own feces? I’ll bet things get pretty wild at your house, don’t they?

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this

gadem, before you get troubled about profit surges you should look into the futures market and inventory profits. See, this guy has to rip O’Rielly for being an ignoramus.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this

Democracy?

By physicsDawg

January 26, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

hmmm “tax the Rich to feed the poor.” Don’t rmember that one. Can one of you point to that scripture for me? I DO recall him telling the rich young ruler to sell all he had, and give to the poor. “And the young ruler went away sorrowful, for he had great possesions.” OK, we’re all smiling, because what a great picture of what OUR rulers are like. But the point here is he told an individual to give what he had; That would be charity. He didn’t say: “Raise taxes to make sure every one is fed, covered by health care, and while you’re at it, happiness insurance” …

By finch

January 26, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie, I would you would stop practicing virtual self-mutilation in public. It’s messy, it’s bloody, and your virtual neighbors are starting to complain. Please keep it private, like the good little dittohead you are.

How’s that “compassionate conservativism” going? What’s your plan for caring, feeding and educating unwanted babies? Is your garage big enough? No? I guess we should just let them die, right? A silly waste of taxpayer dollars, saving them and all. Much better for greedy selfish folks like you to hang on to every penny.

You’re still an idiot and a liar, Andy-pie. And clueless.

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this

Well done Andy…totally ignore the point, then again, your good at that. I can’t figure out which is funnier, you calling me a chimpanzee or you inferring that I’m homosexual. Sometimes things do get a little wild at my house, but it has nothing to do with the animals. I can imagine things also get wild at your house what with you slapping around your barefoot and pregnant wife everyday before settling down to a nice long night of lovemaking with your sister….

By Andy

January 26, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this

Thank you, physicsDawg, there is a huge difference between freely giving of your heart and forcing someone else to empty out their pockets. There is also a difference between giving a man a fish and teaching a man to fish.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this

Andy, I apologize for disagreeing with you. I thought people would be more mature, but they are not. They seem to be like sharks when chum is in the water. You can handle it I’m sure.

By finch

January 26, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this

Golly, sickoftheneocons, Andy-pie apparently thinks you’re gay, too? Do you suppose he thinks he’s insulting us?

Maybe he’s trying to set us up on a blind date? Goodness!!

That Andy-pie, he’s such a card. Dumb as a box of rocks, but a real prankster!

By Scooter

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

finch, did you aknowledge that you mistated all sorts of facts about the 43 million dollars to Afghanistan. No you didn’t.

By RW-(the original)

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

Good job Andy!

You’ve reduced the “finch” to a smoldering pile of epithets.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this

Oddball finch: Man I’m sorry about the gay deal, I never realized you were so sensitive about it. I’m not trying to be mean, I honestly would like to guide you into seeking assistance. This thing can be beaten, you become a part of our secular culture and all of it’s lies and labels, once you start to see the truth, the rest is easy. This is a great place to start, they will give you every thing you need to overcome this. And remember, I am here to help if you only ask.

By finch

January 26, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this

Scooter, what’s there to concede? Feeding a despot’s people unconfitionally is enabling the despot. Simple as that.

RW,

Thanks for the nod. Although I’m not seeing any epithets. Much less smoldering piles of the things.

By buff

January 26, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Finch and/or RW

So, my closest neighbor is about 250 feet. Should I be concerned about security w/ a wireless router?

Midori, how ya’ feeling”

By finch

January 26, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie,

Thanks for the link. Not very useful, but the thought was there.

You are not really dumb as a box of rocks. I apologize to the rocks for this unfair comparison.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

You guys are the ones telling me about gay monkeys and about how it’s not a choice and all that, I just assumed, how would you know unless you like, you know, partaken in the experience, not that there is anything wrong with that. Don’t be ashamed.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this

finch,

good little dittohead; idiot; liar; clueless; Dumb as a box of rocks

No I guess there isn’t an epithet to be seen.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this

finch you said; “LTD - That $43 million BushCo gave to the Taliban probably WAS for flight lessons! What morons.”

“Scooter - So the $43M was for humanitarian aid instead? Peachy!! Freeing up Taliban money that would have been spent on, oh, food for…. oh, flight lessons!”

Look I know you hate Bush with every fiber iof your being but the Taliban wasn’t spending the money on the people so nothing was freed up. You also said that Bush Co gave the money to the Taliban was a direct fabrication.

Blinded by the hate, wrapped up like a duesch another rumor in the night.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this

buff,

Yes.

By Andy

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

RW: With you starting late and them not cutting me any slack, there’s no way you’ll get caught up today. Mrs. G might as well not even count.

By sickoftheneocons

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

Flip…

Homosexuality is a selfish, unproductive choice that does not benefit society in any way shape or form

Flop…

I just assumed, how would you know unless you like, you know, partaken in the experience, not that there is anything wrong with that. Don’t be ashamed

By finch

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

RW,

Frankly, when I think of epithets, I think of words most of us don’t use around our mothers.

I’d put moonbat and pinko in about the same category as dumb and clueless. Too weak to be epithets. I had no idea dittohead was so offensive! I’ll reserve it’s use for special occasions.

As for liar, Andy-pie accused me of backing class action suits against the health care industry and other large corporations.

I have never said that. In fact, I’m opposed to them. Therefore, Andy-pie lied, and calling him a liar is justified.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this

Flip:

Hate the sin.

Flop:

Love the sinner.

By leroy

January 26, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this

Why Andy is a funny bunny:

“By Andy January 26, 2006 02:13 PM Sick: I don’t believe it’s a choice, I know it’s a choice.”

“By Andy January 26, 2006 03:14 PM You guys are the ones telling me about gay monkeys and about how it’s not a choice and all that, I just assumed, how would you know unless you like, you know, partaken in the experience”

No need to be ashamed, Andy. I think we understand why you have such an interest in gay issues.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this

finch, I replied to you and your falsehoods.

You should look at this link and then the next link, so you can see the CNN article.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this

finch,

Dittohead isn’t an epithet, it’s just that you decided to use it as one. Moonbat and pinko are descriptive terms, remember?

As for liar you would have to establish that Andy knew what he said to be false and since you use the typical moonbat trick of slightly changing your argument with every new post, it’s very difficult to say what you are for from one minute to the next.

epithet, just because you and others here like to have your very own personal definitions for words doesn’t make your version the correct one.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

This is from oddball gay finch: As for liar, Andy-pie accused me of backing class action suits against the health care industry and other large corporations.

I’m just asking a question in general, anybody can answer it-

It is YOU who want to spend taxpayer dollars propping up WalMart shareholders and subsidizing their “Always Low Prices�. You are such a ditto-idiot.

If that is a perceived “wrong” how else would you remedy it other than suing Walmart?

By finch

January 26, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

At the risk of repeating myself, I’ll repeat myself. Unconditionally aiding a despot’s subjects enables the despot. It is the humanitarian thing to do, but it has a stiff price.

Do you really think the Taliban didn’t benefit? Do you really think they spent their unexpected windfall on schools or hospitals?

Andy-pie, I’m still waiting to hear how your “compassionate conservatism” will provide food, medical care and education to unwanted babies after you ban Medicaid and other wasteful welfare programs. Or is it better to just let them die, so that the “culture of dependency” can die with them?

Inquiring minds still want to know.

Why don’t you just answer the question, silly?

By getalife

January 26, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this

Corruption is worse than prostitution. The latter might endanger the morals of an individual, the former invariably endangers the morals of the entire country.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Mrs.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

G

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

If the despot does not care about the people, how does it enable him? Either the people die of starvation or they don’t he doesn’t care either way. So now call me stupid and explain it to me, thanks.

By finch

January 26, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie,

“If that is a perceived “wrongâ€? how else would you remedy it other than suing Walmart?”

Passing bills requiring WalMart to fund health care workers, as Maryland did, comes to mind.

Are you asleep, or what?

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

may

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this

see

By Midori

January 26, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this

Hi, Buff :)

I feel so much better today.

I actually have an appetite!!!

That Mucilex is really good.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this

a thrilling comback!

Now that really was taking too much time.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this

A government, for protecting business only, is but a carcass, and soon falls by its own corruption and decay. Amos Bronson Alcott

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Somebody mentioned you on my “Zombie” post.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this

Flagrant money corruption, deceitful communication of public plans and purposes, shocking incompetence - take your pick, all are involved. None are new to American politics, but they are potently fused in the present circumstances. William Greider

By getalife

January 26, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this

Who dat?

By getalife

January 26, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this

Man, I just pimped your blog again.

By AD

January 26, 2006 03:55 PM | Link to this

getalife, politicians ARE prostitutes. Existing only to serve their special interest and corporate pimps…and themselves of course.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 03:55 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Thank you sir! May I have another?

By getalife

January 26, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this

AD,

Well, I do have a cartoon on that here.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

finch, you are going to continue running around spreading that 43 million dollars given to the Taliban lie aren’t you. That was the link that fit the Liberal Texas Democrats preconceived notions and she posted it as fact. However, a little research revealed that much of Mr. Robert Scheer’s writing was half truths and outright misinformation That did not matter because the blinded by hate people in this blog jumped on it as the gospel truth and refuse to acknowledge that it was full of distortions, because it is what they wanted to hear.

Read those two links and see who is telling the lies.

If you adopt children does it enable people to have illegitimate children? Never mind the rampant corruption, but did the UN Oil for Food Program enable Saddam and were you against it?

By Jay not jay

January 26, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

finch looks like he is becoming the human pinata

By Andy

January 26, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this

oddball gay finch: I guess then my humble question must be; what is the difference between the legislature forcing Walmart to pay health care or the courts forcing Walmart to pay healthcare? I already know my answer, you little homo you, there is none! I win, yea me!

By AD

January 26, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this

getalife, I just went to your link and it is great. The one “cutting lawmakers off from “educational” travel is classic. It also proves that these guys think that the electorate is flat stupid. “Educational travel” my a$%! Slopping at the special interest trough is more like it. If I had my way the only lobbying allowed would be the lobbying we do at the ballot box. Lobbyist and corporate campain contributions co-opt the entire system and guarantee that we the people are at the bottom of the list when it comes to representation.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 04:17 PM | Link to this

AD,

Yes, I thought it would be business as usual like the coc wanted but it is getting a lot of press. Canada and Palestine just voted out corruption and hope we do the same.

By AD

January 26, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

Amen!

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this

Take it easy on the politicians will ya! I mean, they have to make tough decisions everyday…let’s take tort reform for example. Now if a politician were to support or sponsor a bill in favor of tort reform he’d be getting money from the AMA…if he were to oppose the same measure drafted by another politician then he’d be getting money from the Trial Lawyers Association…which way to turn? Who’s offering the most money…decisions, decisions…

By Midori

January 26, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this

Getalife: I’m very impressed with your blog.

Very pleasing layout, and easy to follow/navigate.

Thumbs up to you.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this

Thanks Midori.

It is easy, I think everyone should have one.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this

Scooter: “If the despot does not care about the people, how does it enable him? Either the people die of starvation or they don’t he doesn’t care either way. So now call me stupid and explain it to me, thanks.” Was that not the argument that was being put forth by the neocon chastizement of the food for oil program when the neocons claimed that any increase in medical or food aid to the Iraq PEOPLE enabled Saddam to stay in power. I seem to remember many a neocon explaining to me that Saddam profited when Iraqis received aid. Now the argument doesn’t suit you, so now you dismiss it. I can understand why you’d do that.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this

LTD, did you hear me say that? You see, at that time I was a huge liberal, so I don’t know. I will wait for you to tell me what else I was saying back then, thanks.

So, were you against the Oil for Food Program and agreeing with neocons on that issue, or are you an opportunistic critic?

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this

LTD, also, you didn’t address any of Mr Robert Scheer’s half truths, you just told me what I was saying in the late 90’s.

By RE

January 26, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this

“The U.S. military released five Iraqi women detainees Thursday, a move demanded by the kidnappers of an American reporter to spare her life, but an official said the release was coincidental.

The women were freed from U.S. custody and delivered to the home of a senior Sunni Arab politician in Baghdad, where they were returned to their families, according to an Associated Press photographer at the scene. They were later driven away in taxis.

Armed men who abducted Jill Carroll on Jan. 7 in Baghdad have threatened to kill the freelance reporter for the Christian Science Monitor unless all Iraqi women prisoners were freed.”

So by freeing these prisoners, is Bush more of a terrorist enabler or an appeaser?

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this

Scooter: “If the despot does not care about the people, how does it enable him? Either the people die of starvation or they don’t he doesn’t care either way. So now call me stupid and explain it to me, thanks.â€? It’s the same rationale applied to the trade embargo with Cuba. When Fidel finally dies it will be the common market countries and Canada who will have the leg up on exploiting a limited, but available market

By Midori

January 26, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this

Scooter - it appears there are several links backing up Finch and LTD

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this

LTD, first you tell me what I was thinking and saying in the nineties and then you speculate on future events. All the while Robert Scheers misinformation remains.

By AntiRadical

January 26, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this

The jewel of Republican thought in recent decades has been, for me, supply side economics ala Milton Friedman (Nobel Prize). Basically, “what’s good for the boss is good for the worker and both are good for the system.� (Sounds pretty basic, right?) The thing I never really got about Friedman economics, though, is the notion that governmental taxes are so thoroughly parasitic to business, etc. Taxes don’t just disappear once they are collected. They are used to pay for goods, materials, and work that is, generally, sub-contracted out to the private sector; the country gets schools, bridges, hospitals, and highways (among many other things) in return. Even money the government sends overseas is generally used is some way or another to establish and nurture markets for American citizens to able to ply their trades and is thereby returned to our own economy. The government surely collects the onerous taxes but then reinjects them right back into the private economy. Since I think a lot of you guys are business majors and may have a better understanding of economic theory than I, can anybody explain why taxes should be seen as parasitic to the economic system when they are looped back into the private sector, anyway?

By Midori

January 26, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this

Exactly, RE.

I thought we didn’t “negotiate” with terra-ists?

By RE

January 26, 2006 04:54 PM | Link to this

Flip:

McClellan 1-19 We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business.

Flop: The U.S. military released five Iraqi women detainees Thursday, a move demanded by the kidnappers of an American reporter to spare her life, but an official said the release was coincidental.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this

LTD, did you hear me say that? You see, at that time I was a huge liberal, so I don’t know. I will wait for you to tell me what else I was saying back then, thanks.
I was responding to a post, not quote, under your name at 3:35PM. Wether or not I personally agreed with the food for oil program is strawman, knock it down yourself.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this

Dang, I thought Kerry was a flip flopper but he ain’t got nothing on Dubya.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this

Midori, since the money was not given to the Taliban and it was not all money why don’t you revise your google search to include aid and afghanistan. I specifically linked to a CNN article for source credibility and you choose to ignore it and point me to a google search with.

Midori, how about this one. It seems Bush is doing something for alternative fuels. You will probably want to ignore that as well.

By Jay not jay

January 26, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this

RE, if they are negotiating with terrorist, then where’s the girl?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this

RE has his one little lie and he’s gonna drag it around all day:

By Andy

January 26, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this

Welcome to the pathological liars club, there, RE:

By Andy

January 26, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

Militants last week said they would kill Carroll if all female prisoners in U.S. detention in Iraq were not freed. The freelance reporter for the Christian Science Monitor was abducted January 7.

Nine female prisoners were in U.S. custody, the military said. The other four female prisoners will remain in U.S. custody, the military said.

Sick, just sick….

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 05:03 PM | Link to this

LTD, a straw man? So, you can have it both ways, nice. I am responding to the misinformation that you posted of Robert Scheer’s.

This is what you typed; Now the argument doesn’t suit you, so now you dismiss it. I can understand why you’d do that. that specificaly implies I was making hte argument.

By RE

January 26, 2006 05:06 PM | Link to this

SO it was only a little appeasement. Please, I would love to hear your apology/ justification for this flip/flop.

I guess if terrorists demanded $900,000 but you only gave them 500k, then that would not be giving in either?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

The package includes $28 million worth of wheat from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, $5 million in food commodities and $10 million in “livelihood and food security” programs, both from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Powell called the crisis a “looming catastrophe,” and said that he was working with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to press upon potential donors the need to respond to the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan “with energy and dispatch.”

One minute the pinkos want you to feed the starving, the next minute they don’t want you to feed the starving.

Sick, just sick…

By Midori

January 26, 2006 05:08 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

I thought the disparity/question was whether 43 million went to the Taliban, courtesy of the Bush administration?

Now, “YOU” are defending CNN as a credible source.

faints

Damn, that Liberal media.

Bush is famous for signing bills and not funding them, or woefully inadequately funding them.

When that happens (the funding, that is), I’ll take it seriously.

Remember No Child Left Behind?

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

LTD this is what you said in your response.

RE, I don’t know if you are looking for an argument or what, or if you are even typing to me, but I agree we should not be percieved to negotiate with terrorist.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

Midori, since the money was not given to the Taliban and it was not all money why don’t you revise your google search to include aid and afghanistan

apples and oranges, dear.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

Skooter: I made the comparison with what you posted and what the neocons argued with me during the nineties and said they were the same argument, which I believe to be true.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 05:12 PM | Link to this

RE: Look, moron, Bush threw in 195 more just because he loves dem terrorists:

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Five Iraqi women detainees were released Thursday by the U.S. military, FOX News has confirmed. They were among hundreds of Iraqi prisoners released after officials found no reason to continue their detention.

One minute the pinkos want to release all enemy prisoners, the next minute they want to keep all enemy prisoners.

Sick, just sick…

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 05:13 PM | Link to this

Midori, you did ignore the fuel cell link like I thought you would want to. Robert Scheer’s half truths will remain I guess, because you all keep trying to get me lost in some nuance. Believe CNN or Robert Scheer’s or whatever you want to believe. Just keep giving that power of dependence to the government, OK.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 05:18 PM | Link to this

BAGHDAD The U.S. military said Thursday it would release five Iraqi women detainees, a move demanded by the kidnappers of an American reporter to spare her life. A U.S. official said the release had nothing to do with the kidnappers’ demand.

The women will be freed Thursday and Friday as part of a release of 419 Iraqis to be freed after officials concluded there was no reason to keep holding them, Lt. Col. Guy Rudisill, spokesman for the U.S. detention command, said.

[Link}(http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/26/africa/web.0126bush.php)

So now you want to keep people that have been determined to have done nothing wrong in prison. You are a very strange bunch.

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 05:18 PM | Link to this

LTD, this is the last time and I am out.

Now the argument doesn’t suit you, so now you dismiss it. I can understand why you’d do that.“>http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/entries/2006/01/26/bushandkatrin.html#comment-282543)

I never accepted the argument then, I was a liberal at the time

Robert Scheer’s half truths remain gospel in your mind I’m sure.

By RE

January 26, 2006 05:20 PM | Link to this

No Scooter, no trying to start an arguement with you. You seem to actually have a set of principals by which you judge things, which while I do not always agree with, I can respect.

However, watch Andy search for justification to apologize for GWB. The man has no principals upon which he bases his views, it seems like his moral compass always points to GWB. Apparently if Bush negotiates with the terrorists, he does not have a problem with it.

I hope that girl is released unharmed now that we have met the terrorists demands, however I think there will be many more kidnappings now that the US is seen as flexible on negotiation.

On a side note, watch how quick this story is dropped, within the last hour it has been dropped from CNN, Drudge, and has a dead link on HuffPo.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 05:20 PM | Link to this

link

By Midori

January 26, 2006 05:21 PM | Link to this

[Scoot (I mean that literally), I trust the Cato institute more than I trust CNN. Sorry.)[http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-02-02.html]

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 05:21 PM | Link to this

If poor Jill Carroll makes it home, I’d love to be her agent. She’ll have a helluva book deal and get to do all the big talk shows. It’s really sad to see her parents pleading with her captors, as if they were actual human beings with a shred of compassion.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this

Scoot, I’ve changed my search parameters

By Midori

January 26, 2006 05:26 PM | Link to this

It appears there will be a filibuster in the Senate.

Your thoughts?

By Midori

January 26, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

Let me try that again:

Scoot (I mean that literally), I trust the Cato institute more than I trust CNN. Sorry.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 26, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

Then fair is fair Skooter you say I put words in your mouth, whilst you plant thoughts in my head. “Robert Scheer’s half truths remain gospel in your mind I’m sure.”

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

Midori, thanks that link carries more validity. I think drugs should be legalized even though two of my aunts are addicts to the horse.

As far as what source you trust CNN or the Cato institute, I’ll bet the farm it is whoever says what you want to hear.

Do you recognize the 5-year pact the US Dept of Energy signed with GM, BP, and Daimler Chrysler to produce marketable fuel cell vehicles?

Now I’m out, but thanks again for a more respectable link.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 05:30 PM | Link to this

Anyone who subscribes to the philosophies of the Cato Institute is clearly a person of intelligence, distinction and an open mind. There is hope …

By Scooter

January 26, 2006 05:31 PM | Link to this

LTD you are a master. You linked to the article so you must have believed it.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 05:35 PM | Link to this

Midori,

As much as would love to see the Democrats try a filibuster I can’t see it happening. Even Robert Byrd was blasting the Democrat(ic) members of the Judiciary Committee.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 05:37 PM | Link to this

Hard to justify a filibuster over political philosophy if the guy is qualified. Dems have to get their guy in the White House if you want justices who swing their way. I heard Diane Feinstein say she thought Alito was “out of the mainstream.” Gracious, where does she think the mainstream is these days? Hint: It ain’t anywhere near San Francisco, puddin’.

By RE

January 26, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

“The people are demanding honest government. The people want services. They want to be able to raise their children in an environment in which they can get a decent education and they can find health care.”

GWB today talking about…..Palistine

Anyone else find this ironic, sounds like he wants a big govt. liberal agenda in Palistine, socialized medicine and all

By buff

January 26, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

Midori

I think the filibuster will backfire, if they get the votes, which is suspect. Kerry is desperately trying to get some ‘08 momentum going. It might work, but I doubt it will get them any new public support

By getalife

January 26, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

The HP has got this story and I just saw a commercial on CNN.

The honest leadership act.

By Buzz Brockway

January 26, 2006 05:39 PM | Link to this

Mike,

Instead of drawing cartoons that mimick moonbat craziness, why not come up with something original?

Buzz

By Andy

January 26, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this

There are very few things in life that I actually hope for anymore, it kind of keeps disappointment at bay if you don’t get what you want, but the one thing I think I would act like a kid on Christmas morning if I were to receive it, would be a democrat filibuster of Alito.

Are they allowed to show suicides on live TV? I know Kevorkian got away with one but didn’t they avert the camera? What would happen when the Republicans dropped the hammer on that punk liberal a-ss, would the C-span camera have to pan on to the ceiling?

Oh, please do it, please, please…

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 05:54 PM | Link to this

I don’t think the Dems are gonna filibsuter, they don’t have the votes nor do I think their hearts are really in it… so Repubes will have the Presidency, congress and the Supreme Court, plus the majority of the governorships and a host of state legislatures…what could you POSSIBLY have to whine about after that?

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 05:54 PM | Link to this

Seriously. If Kerry, Ted and Co. try to filibuster and get busted, it’ll set them back a bunch. They don’t have the votes. Makes them look like desperate, screeching ninnies, which in Ted’s case isn’t hard. Better rattle some ice in a glass to distract his attention and get him off the floor before he hurts himself. Dean, Hillary or somebody with designs on winning an election down the road needs to tell them it’s best to eat this one and hope Stevens lives until a Democrat takes the oath (which at the current rate might have to be some kind of Biblical-style record).

By Andy

January 26, 2006 05:56 PM | Link to this

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush said General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. should develop more appealing products rather than look to Washington for help with their heavy pension burdens, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

Well, well, so old GM and Ford didn’t ask for help with their heavy executive pay, with help “putting their finger on the pulse of the market” or with help designing better cars. Nope, they asked for help with exactly what Andy said did them in, their pension burden. I win! Yea, me!

By sickoftheneocons

January 26, 2006 05:58 PM | Link to this

Of course, Pres. Bush said it so it’s automatically Gospel.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this

Kerry’s an empty bag of wind. He’s Al Gore with a yacht. Dems need a serious, likable populist who comes off as sincere and down to earth, not another career pol who’s never spent time working for a living in flyover land. The guy they ought to nominate, and should have last time, is Edwards. Bright, articulate, comes from a blue-collar background, no crappy Clinton baggage or the like. He’s got game. But they keep picking the tried-and-true blue state hack who can’t get arrested in this part of the world. They’re like a football team that keeps running the same dang plays without scoring but doesn’t have anything else to fall back on.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 06:01 PM | Link to this

The Chicago Sun-Times reports on the Windy City’s War against Wal-Mart:

Eighteen months after the Chicago City Council (packed with socialists) torpedoed a South Side Wal-Mart, 24,500 Chicagoans applied for 325 jobs at a Wal-Mart opening Friday in south suburban Evergreen Park, one block outside the city limits.

The new Wal-Mart at 2500 W. 95th is one block west of Western Avenue, the city boundary.

Of 25,000 job applicants, all but 500 listed Chicago addresses, said John Bisio, regional manager of public affairs for Wal-Mart.

As blogger Steve Bartin notes, “The morons who run Chicago don’t appear to want jobs in the city of Chicago.”

That’s for you, oddball gay finch.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 06:05 PM | Link to this

Buff — I think his heart is in it, however, I do not want Kerry to run on the Dem ticket in 2008.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 06:07 PM | Link to this

Dr. R,

nothing ventured, nothing gained.

what’s the worse that could happen?

at this point, it’s all irrelevant.

Alito will get in.

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 06:08 PM | Link to this

Midori, who do you like in 2008?

By Midori

January 26, 2006 06:10 PM | Link to this

I can’t say right now, Dr. R.

However, I know who I would not like to run in 2008: John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.

By buff

January 26, 2006 06:11 PM | Link to this

Midori

If not Kerry, then who?

I think Evan Bayh would be a good candidate, but, we don’t elect Senarots, do we?

Edwards is a weak politician on issues, but he comes across well on the camera. I got sick of “the two Americas,” line,” but, I do think it resonates with a lot of people

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 06:11 PM | Link to this

I wish we all had a viable third choice, not another big-government pimp who tries to buy votes with our tax money. (that’s the MO of both parties these days, by the way.) Someone who believes in civil liberties at home, fiscal sanity, and big stick foreign policy. What we need is to dig up Teddy Roosevelt and clone him.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 06:15 PM | Link to this

Evan Byah is a DINO.

I lived in Indianapolis for 8 years.

I’m very familiar of him.

By RE

January 26, 2006 06:16 PM | Link to this

I have noticed that as well sick, there is a very religious aspect to a lot of the Bush supports beliefs. The whole concept of all things good come from God, and all bad things are either God’s tests or man’s fault seems to apply. Bush can do no wrong in many peoples eye, maybe that is why he gets such a loyal following from the more religious people in this country, they already have that concept ingrained in their psyche

By RE

January 26, 2006 06:19 PM | Link to this

2008 Dem candidate will be either John Edwards from NC or Mark Warner from Virginia. At least those are the two with a shot. Gore, Kerry, and Clinton are all dead ends, they have too much baggage attached.

By Midori

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

Agreed, RE

By Dr R

January 26, 2006 06:33 PM | Link to this

Either of those guys could get elected. Getting nominated is another thing. They have to run the gauntlet of diehard party libs, most of them still wearing their tie-dyed shirts with the peace signs. By the same token, Rudy and McCain are going to have to get through the hallelujah chorus on the GOP side to make it to November. That’s why most of our choices come from the far wings and not the sane middle.

By RE

January 26, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

I don’t trust anyone who does not understand barbeque is both a verb AND a noun

The dems need to pick someone a little further south than Mass.

By Daniel

January 26, 2006 06:38 PM | Link to this

I think they’re all watching Paul Hackett. Check out his web. He is hitting them real hard. If Hackett resonates with Ohio, some National pol may listen and find his voice. Hillary would drive the headcases wild. I’m just an old goat. I am weary of the divide in our country and the failure of the goverment to lead. I’m with you RE. Warner-Edwards or the other way round, would be a ticket. I just want someone honest from both parties. Bush wants another Bush. No surprise there.

By RE

January 26, 2006 06:39 PM | Link to this

I would vote for McCain, Gulianni, Warner or Edwards, but I don’t think any of them are going to get through the primary. I think the dems have a better shot of getting Warner or Edwards through primaries than McCain or Gulianni. You have to be a party insider to get the base for the GOP, and they maintain strict dicipline. The Dems are kind of a loose federation at this point, no telling how those primaries will go.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 06:43 PM | Link to this

George Will on Tom Delay

Furthermore, he is not about to plea bargain in the court of public opinion. He chafes under prudential reticence: His attorneys tell him not to trumpet the fact that the Justice Department told them he is not a target in the Abramoff investigation. But about other matters, the bantam is belligerent.

I know, it’s only rock and roll, but I like it…

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 06:44 PM | Link to this

RE,

I think I understand your logic with McCain, Gulianni, and Warner if you are looking for a centrist. How on earth does Edwards make it onto that list? Unless it’s just the BBQ thing.

By RE

January 26, 2006 06:51 PM | Link to this

I guess I am looking for a centrist as a first choice, and if not that then an outsider who is not a complete special interest hack. Go ahead, tell me he is a lawyer…I know that. Maybe it was an act I bought into, but he seemed like he would bring a new way of doing things to DC. He hasn’t been in politics long enough to be completely corrupt, it does not look like he would be an extremist.

If you think he would be extreme, please tell me why, I am interested. I haven’t seen anything in his views that way.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 06:52 PM | Link to this

Referring to his trial on campaign finance charges brought by a notoriously political Democratic prosecutor, DeLay says, with a confidence that might be misplaced but clearly is unfeigned, I'll be acquitted by the end of April.'' Then he says he will secure a 12th term, winningthe most expensive congressional race ever.” The national Democratic Party and several liberal groups — already running ads and phone banks — spend, well, liberally.

Because undecided voters are thin on the ground — he estimates they are about 13 percent of the district — this election will be about mobilizing the faithful. So the piling on by his critics — their wretched excesses in response to what they perceive to be his — may help him.

Ummm, donate to the Tom Delay re election fund right here<——-

I stand with Tom!

By RE

January 26, 2006 06:53 PM | Link to this

and BBQ is important, south east NC BBQ, pit cooked, vinegar based. The best

By RE

January 26, 2006 06:55 PM | Link to this

Wow Andy, that seemed like an unbiased piece of reporting…did you get that from the GOP website or right from Rush?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 06:58 PM | Link to this

RE: Click the link, moron. It was George Will, you sissy, look what else he said:

Congress under Republican control has increased earmarks 873 percent in a decade and validated the axiom that the more solicitous government becomes, the more servile it seems and the more scorn it receives. Congress has not been so unpopular since 1994, when Democrats lost their 40-year grip on the House. But here on the east bend of the Brazos River, unlike on the Potomac, the fever for reform is not high. To a visiting columnist who waxes censorious about earmarks for highway projects, DeLay responds with a notable lack of repentance: “You just drove out on one.”

Real biased, ain’t it?

By Daniel

January 26, 2006 06:58 PM | Link to this

Edwards works very hard. The Heritage Foundation will never, NEVER, ok McCain or Giuliani. Bush has given the wacko’s so much power they are addicted. They want to stay in. It will be interesting to watch. The R’s are geniuses at perception. The morons and troglodytes are bending over frontwards while emptying out their pockets.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 06:58 PM | Link to this

RE,

It seems like had one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate. Didn’t his “two Americas” speeches sound awfully Socialist. (Before anybody throws down here I’m not calling Edwards a socialist) He has no executive experience unless you count setting himself up as an S-corp to shelter millions of dollars he would have had to pay in Medicare taxes. Which in itself is perfectly legal, but flys in the face of his public pronouncements.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this

Andy,

don’t you think people have better things to do with their money?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 07:03 PM | Link to this

Midori: Delay calling the 2007 House of Representatives to order is second in worth only to the democrats filibustering Alito.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 07:06 PM | Link to this

RE,

Some of the best BBQ I ever had was outside of Burlington in Haw River. It had to be good too, because it was sitting right between a waste water treatment plant and an animal shelter.

By Midori

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

Andy,

I fail to see your logic.

Why would the House GOP want Delay out front for them?

Perhaps their standards/convictions may not be on par with yours?

But then again, let’s see how his trial progresses.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 07:13 PM | Link to this

Midori: Yes, let’s see, it hasn’t occured to very many overactive liberals that this guy is innocent.

By Midori

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

Regardless, Andy.

I just don’t see how Delay going back to the House leadership has anything to do with filibustering Allito.

Try as I may, I just can’t.

P.S. - I don’t consider myself “overactive” but as a woman, I detest his antics in the Marianas island.

Slavery and forced abortion are not the hallmarks of a great society.

By RE

January 26, 2006 07:22 PM | Link to this

Politics is always to some extent about class warfare, and of course one side always accuses the other of exploiting it. GOP takes on “Welfare Queens” Dems take on “Corporate Fat Cats”. Campaigning is a dishonest thing. Generalizations are always used, usually groups no one falls into because the politicians don’t want to alienate anyone. I still don’t see that make him too far left to lead from the middle..

My best BBQ, Greenville NC, the restaurant was a doublewide. Parking on the grass, of course. Fire pit behind the restaurant clearly visible from the road. Dog under the porch, waitress had 7 teeth. Paper plates, dixie cups. Amazing BBQ, and of course sweet tea.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 07:27 PM | Link to this

Of course, if you google getalife

By Todd

January 26, 2006 07:30 PM | Link to this

Is there any wrong doing on the democrats part ? If you go by what the AJC prints, as politic satire, there isn’t it’s apparently the Republican’s that are the root cause of evil itself

By Andy

January 26, 2006 07:38 PM | Link to this

Mark steyn is no silly pinko cartoonist, thank you..

Who exactly is in need of the ‘truce’ here? Head office has already been obliged to send a memo to al-Zarkawi’s franchise in Iraq advising him to ease up on the bombings of mosques and shopping markets and the assassination of respected septuagenarian Sunni imams and so forth, and gently hinting that the marketing department wouldn’t mind seeing a return to the days when al-Qa’eda killed — what’s the word? — infidels.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 07:40 PM | Link to this

Todd,

I sincerely doubt that most of us get our news solely from the AJC.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 07:41 PM | Link to this

I know ya’ll like songs

By getalife

January 26, 2006 07:51 PM | Link to this

Kerry on Kos about Alito filibuster

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 07:56 PM | Link to this

You couldn’t be more right on Mark Steyn. A no-nonsense kinda guy. Love his sarcasm. But just visited R.W.’s site and read the Hewitt interview with Joel Stein. If his monetary compensation is equivalent to his two-cents worth, he is grossly overpaid. And he graduated from where?

What an idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By finch

January 26, 2006 08:01 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie, you poor deluded idiot….

“By Andy January 26, 2006 04:08 PM

oddball gay finch: I guess then my humble question must be; what is the difference between the legislature forcing Walmart to pay health care or the courts forcing Walmart to pay healthcare? I already know my answer, you little homo you, there is none! I win, yea me!

No, you lose. If you can’t tell the difference between a legislative act and a lawsuit, you lose. If you think its okay for a highly profitable company to force its workers into government funded healthcare programs so it can boost profits, you lose. If you don’t know the difference between Medicare and Medicaid, you lose. If you think, even if an instant, that the Attorney General reports to the Supreme Court, you lose. If you believe abortions are awful, but denying babies food and healthcare is okay, you lose. If you claim a poster is for class action lawsuits when the poster had repeatedly denied it, you lose. If you’re losing so badly you make wild conjectures about a posters sexuality, you are not only way off topic, you lose!

You are the ultimate “con”. A condescending, contemptuous pri…. con.

You lose.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 08:07 PM | Link to this

Finch:

OW!!

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 08:09 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Do you think Kos knows we are on standard time?

By getalife

January 26, 2006 08:13 PM | Link to this

RW,

Don’t know but they love Kerry over there. I had to spam him again.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 08:29 PM | Link to this

getalife,

You told him to say no to Alito and invited him to see your coc. Do you think he might get the wrong idea?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 08:29 PM | Link to this

Au contrare, gay finch, oddball: I only deal in the truth and the truth will never lose.

I honestly don’t think Walmart gives a rats a-ss whether their employees have health care or not, just like McDonalds, Publix and all manner of other businesses don’t. It’s not their calling in life to provide lifetime positions to shelf stockers. Walmart is the perfect target for weak minded socialists who’s only calling in life is to spend other people’s money on their pet feelgood causes. Your pinko legislature, had they not had the power to override a lawful veto, would have sued as their next step. It really doesn’t make a hill of beans how you pinkos achieve your extortion, it’s the fact that you are extorting. I win!

I am not a government hand out program expert like you apparently are. I would never consider using a service that some needy person may really need and I would be taking from them. That is the bottom line here, you pinkos have coaxed everyone into looking for a handout, you’ve created a nation of “where’s mine” professionals. You say you have a cushy pension but yet you have scouted out all of the government services that you plan to exploit at the first opportunity, taking food and shelter from the truly needy. Scumbag.

I knew about the attorney general all along, I lost my focus dealing with some immature kook pinko, I admitted my mistake on the spot. I had a brain fart resulting from boredom. At least I didn’t admit to a room full of people that I was gay, like you did.

My two abortion opportunities are upstairs right now doing their homework. Any time you want to shut your freaking mouth about responsibility to our children, baby killer, you are more than welcome to do it.

Nothing has changed. You are still a silly dangerous pinko who has contributed to the creation of a whole underclass of welfare dependent, spiritless, motivationless people who will forever rely on you to sue, legislate or adjudicate on their behalf. All that suffering in the name of your political parties never ending search for votes.

Or at least until the Republicans lead them back to responsible, productive, proud citizenship.

I win! Yea, me!

By Pink Salmon

January 26, 2006 08:31 PM | Link to this

Well howdy folks. The nitty gritty accordion band has accompanied the salmon to sing an ode to the finch. Ok boys, fire up those accordions to “Free Bird”!

….

If I became a lib tomorrow, would you still remember me?

Cause I’m a lib just like the finchy and there’s too many cons that he wants to try to play

But if I stayed here with you finch, I’d loose my lunch and that’s just ashame

Cause I’m a lib just like the finch now, I’ll give all money to the demo-crates.

And this finch you’ll never change, Lord knows finch can’t change! Lord help him, he can’t chaaa aaa aaa aaa aaa aaa aaa ngge

Bow to the Salmon.

By getalife

January 26, 2006 08:35 PM | Link to this

RW,

I spelled it out for him. Did you spam him or voice your opinion on Alito?

By Andy

January 26, 2006 08:35 PM | Link to this

Bravo, Salmon.

By Semper Fi

January 26, 2006 08:37 PM | Link to this

Damn that was good Andy. You would never make it in politics, because you call it like it is, but a street fight with libs, you’ll win every time.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 08:40 PM | Link to this

Hey, while we are doing a Skynyrd ode to gay finch, how about “Sweet Home Government Agency?”

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 08:41 PM | Link to this

getalife,

I’m not signed up to post there, I’d probably get locked out too quick to make it worth bothering.

By finch

January 26, 2006 08:44 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie, you’re gonna have to find that post where I “admitted I was gay”… but you can’t, because it doesn’t exist.

Which means you lied again.

You have no brain.

Tell me again, how you express your “compassionate conservatism” to help those less fortunate than you, and (but for you and your ilk) would only be trapped in a cycle of dependency if they were to take filthy handouts?

You can’t. Because you don’t.

You have no heart, Andy-pie.

By finch

January 26, 2006 08:46 PM | Link to this

Andy-pie,

Have you figured out the difference between Medicare and Medicaid yet?? Should we let both the old people and the babies die?

Loser.

By Andy

January 26, 2006 08:47 PM | Link to this

Semper Fi: If I were to be elected to office, the first question I got from a pinko at a press conference, I’d probably dive into the crowd going after him. I wouldn’t last but a few days.

By buff

January 26, 2006 08:48 PM | Link to this

Ok

Finally a serious and worthy discussion: bbq

I use a rub for 24 hours on baby back ribs, then, slow smoke for about five hours at around 175 degrees, then, sear the bone side down on a gas grill set on high for about seven minutes, then, put the ribs, meat side up, on the upper rack of the gas grill, put the heat on low cover the meat with bbq sauce, I make my own, and leave about 20 minutes

I will be doing so Super Bowl day

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 08:52 PM | Link to this

Buff: Is that a vinegar based sauce? If it is, I’m inviting myself over.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 08:53 PM | Link to this

PARTY AT BUFF’S HOUSE!!!

:)

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 08:54 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

I think that was a tacit invitation for all of us. What time buff?

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 08:56 PM | Link to this

Are you offering a football pool?

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 08:59 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

You’re the one with a pool, are we moving the party to your house?

By finch

January 26, 2006 08:59 PM | Link to this

Thank you, pink salmon.

Here’s one for you AND Andy-pie!

Now… was somebody saying barbque?

BTW, Kos is on PST ‘cause that’s where Kos is (Berkeley). When you sign up, you can change your time zone.

By Poor Richard

January 26, 2006 09:00 PM | Link to this

No propaine for my BBQ thanks. I’m a pureist… fill a hogs belly with hot hickory coals and bury it in a stone lined pit. Build a fire on top and wait 18-20 hours. Now thats BBQ.

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 09:02 PM | Link to this

Sure R.W., we can all be like the polar bears. If there’s no football pool, I’ll have to keep my appointment with my “Ragin’ Cajun” neighbor. Now that is a wild time.

And I win the pool, too. Irritating isn’t it when someone who doesn’t care for football wins in the pool.

By buff

January 26, 2006 09:02 PM | Link to this

O-O

I have done both a vinegar and tomato-based sauce. I have even combined them; depends on my mood. I also have done a mustard-based pre-cook marinade which is interesting. I NEVER boil my ribs first, that is for fake bbq-ers

My scheme is to have the smoked flavor and the grill flavor; a buddy of mine taught me the trick

I am pretty good at smoking and/or grilling, but my friend is THE MASTER. His wife calls him “The Meat Man.” I never inquire too far

He and I get together and knock down a few cold ones and watch college football. Hmm, maybe that is why the meat tastes good

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 09:06 PM | Link to this

Mustard or vinegar! Whatever leaves that little bitter on the back edges of the tongue. That gets me every time.

And there is nothing better with BBQ than an “ice” cold beer. If I just didn’t have to watch football to enjoy all the delight.

By Poor Richard

January 26, 2006 09:07 PM | Link to this

good BBQ doesnt need sauce

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 09:07 PM | Link to this

finch,

Kerry is posting on PDT, not PST.

By Midori

January 26, 2006 09:10 PM | Link to this

Damn Richard,

you’re making me mighty hungry!!

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 09:10 PM | Link to this

Poor Richard: Then what are you gonna lick off of your fingers. That’s dessert!

By buff

January 26, 2006 09:16 PM | Link to this

PR

My bride agrees with you. She cooks down beef until it is pulled apart, and then puts a “bunch of stuff” in it and it is incredible “bbq” with no “bbq”

Personally, I find it anti-American, but, it is good

BBQ is meant to be saucy, greasy, tangy, and as 0-0 said, with COLD BEER. BTW, I also make my own beer

By getalife

January 26, 2006 09:16 PM | Link to this

Poor Richard,

Wasn’t there a Poor Richards pub. I have been to many parties with buried pit BBQ and BBQ cookoffs.

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 09:20 PM | Link to this

Getalife: I used to vacation in Ft. Meyers, FL, same time every year, some guy down there would bury a pig and invite everybody within hollering distance to come and enjoy. It was great BBQ and great times.

By buff

January 26, 2006 09:23 PM | Link to this

I was at a luau on Maui where they buried the pig in a pit for all day, had hula girls in grass skirts dancing and drinks with umbrellas in them

I think that is where our second child was conceived. I assume I am the father; I was pretty drunk :)

By getalife

January 26, 2006 09:25 PM | Link to this

OO,

Yes, I like those parties with big bonfires and lot of kegs. Very good times. We use to go to Panama City for Memorial Day and Daytona for the 500 every year.

By Objective Observer

January 26, 2006 09:25 PM | Link to this

R.W.: I have placed the only remaining “nut with teeth” on a chain around my neck. I will wear it until…………..

Goodnight! My feet are cold.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 09:28 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

That’s is so nice of you. If I ever manage to measure up my wingnut will be the most coveted of all.

By buff

January 26, 2006 09:29 PM | Link to this

0-0

Come on over, I will rub your feet

A few years ago I took a 12 hour course entitled “Sensual Massage”

You are a chick, right? :)

By getalife

January 26, 2006 09:30 PM | Link to this

Goodnight and say hi to those kids for me.

By finch

January 26, 2006 09:37 PM | Link to this

RW,

I think PDT must be the default time for Kos. All I know is that when I log in (as a subscriber) I get EST. And I set my time zone so long ago I forget how it’s done.

Sorry about that, chief!

By Mike Parker

January 26, 2006 09:59 PM | Link to this

Bush could get more done on that wall if he would pull his foot out of his mouth.

By Dusty

January 26, 2006 10:20 PM | Link to this

Uhh, folks, you ate something that had been dead, buried and burned? Did it have rigor mortis? There’s no accounting for taste. What you need is a South Carolina chicken gently barbequed in the local golden delight sauce. Now that is something you could raise your children on. They’d support you for life.

But barbeque somehow makes me think of Democrats searching for a presidental candidate. Don’t ask me why. It is kinda like looking for the loch ness monster. They can’t find it. But they do have a treasure in their midst. One who is experienced in politics, government, diplomacy and smart enough to teach in a college. Honesty is his trademark. The one, the only ZEL MILLER.

Before you laugh, think of the votes he would get from both sides. Better still, imagine Kennedy, Shumer, Pelosi, Hillary all having to support either Zel or a Republican. What joy! And Zel is a Southerner!! It just doesn’t get any better. Wake up, Democrats. Stupid it OUT. Smart is IN.

By Jay not jay

January 26, 2006 10:27 PM | Link to this

Hi Dusty, looks like we missed the cookout but I agree, Zell would give ‘em hell.

By buff

January 26, 2006 10:45 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Naw, Dems will not put a con up on the tab

Makes tooooo much sense; Bill C. got elected b/c he had pizazz and he came across as a conservative Dem

What will they do? Gallup found that 51% will not vote for the Hildebeast

Hmm…

By Dusty

January 26, 2006 10:47 PM | Link to this

Jay not jay, some of that cooking I don’t mind missing. Yes, Zel is a good guy. He’d be another Truman.

By Jay not jay

January 26, 2006 10:49 PM | Link to this

buff, probably still put Hilde on the ticket…

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 10:53 PM | Link to this

buff,

It’s not enough for 51% to say they wouldn’t vote for Hillary, they have to be sure to vote for her opponent and we have to hope there aren’t two strong opponents. Bill would never have been elected without Ross Perot.

Dusty,

When we take the pig out of the imu you will be sorry you got stuck with that scrawny yardbird.

By Dusty

January 26, 2006 10:54 PM | Link to this

Buff,

Zel is a con in disguise, isn’t he? He doesn’t have the right kind of pizazz is true. Dems got more pizazz than they expected from Clinton. But they never learn. They are still looking at the “pretty boys”, Edwards and Warner.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 11:00 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

In disguise???

I would vote for Zell in a heartbeat, but he better watch his back really well if he has a VP that the Dems liked.

By Dusty

January 26, 2006 11:00 PM | Link to this

RW,

I don’t like the sound of imu. Is that a pig coffin? And don’t be talking about those yardbirds. My husband’s a Gamecock and you’d better watch it. You sound like somebody from Clemson.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 11:08 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

I happen to love the Gamecocks, night games with the band playing the theme from 2001… (which I know isn’t the name of the song in case finch is lurking and ready to pounce)…, the guy that sells beer from a building that you have to walk through to get from the parking lot…but I went to school a little further north.

By buff

January 26, 2006 11:09 PM | Link to this

Dusty

I think Edwards is a fraud. He is a charlatan ambulance-chasing shyster, but, the American voters might elect him.

He is incredibly weak on policy. But, he has that Breck-Hair, and is from a blue collar background.

I hate to say it, but the Hildebeast would be as good him

By Dusty

January 26, 2006 11:10 PM | Link to this

Well, RW, Zell is designated as a Democrat. Just because he likes a little bi-partisan ship, just shows his diplomacy. Good old North Georgia diplomacy. Just what we need.

Yep, he might need a bullet proof vest with a popular liberal VP.

By Jay not jay

January 26, 2006 11:11 PM | Link to this

RW, that is a great speech. ‘Night all.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 11:13 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

More imu information. Were you to roast one of those yardbirds, would you call your oven a chicken coffin?

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 11:14 PM | Link to this

Jay not jay,

Challenging Matthews to a duel after it was pretty sweet too.

Goodnight!

By Dusty

January 26, 2006 11:25 PM | Link to this

Buff,

Edwards reminds me of those lawyers on TV. You know—“Have you been in an accident? Call me. I’ll get the money you deserve.” His speeches were better than Kerry’s but seemed like just a good show. Blue collar is ok if you come across like Lincolm.

But not the Hildebeast! NO NO NO She is having a hard time keeping her ambition in check. Bill looks sick. No wonder.

By Dusty

January 26, 2006 11:42 PM | Link to this

RW,

I don’t bury my birds in the oven. I tuck them tenderly in a roasting pan and then into the oven. Which does not make them good SC golden barbque but edible (usually).

I’ve heard more wild stories about Carolina, most of which I cannot repeat. Of course, I didn’t go there either. Like you, my school was a nice “refined” place a little farther north.

G’nite, Jay.

By RW-(the original)

January 26, 2006 11:52 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

That is quite the ritual when they retrieve the food from the imu, although the last time I went to one I had to quickly make my wife turn her head because she didn’t realize a whole pig was getting ready to emerge. This talk of higher education is disturbing. I like it when the “Michael H’s” of the world think I barely got out of the third grade.

By Dusty

January 27, 2006 12:16 AM | Link to this

RW,

Is that called The Second Coming in Hawaii? My head wouldn’t turn but my stomach certainly would.

Of course you went for higher education, RW. Summa cum laude right out of the fourth grade! (Michael H. aint got no class at all! Don’t pay him no mind.)

By Dusty

January 27, 2006 12:20 AM | Link to this

WHAT is wrong with c-u-m? Is Latin objectionable?

By RW-(the original)

January 27, 2006 12:26 AM | Link to this

Dusty,

I think we can forgive ml’s censor for that one. It’s better than Parade magazine one where class is cl* and Dick Cheney is ** Cheney.

By RW-(the original)

January 27, 2006 12:28 AM | Link to this

Well that should be more asterisks and no bolding, but I guess the point is still there.

By Paul

January 27, 2006 12:44 AM | Link to this

Semper Nothing. Come see me, tough guy. I’m real easy to locate. High visibility. Even pick up your expenses for you. C’mon down, clown.

By Dusty

January 27, 2006 12:46 AM | Link to this

RW,

I think Michael H. has been messing with the ml censor. Probably what he does with his “higher” education. Puts in those little asterisks.

Well, I am going to bury myself in my electric-blanket imu. Tomorrow I shall arise half-baked but tasteful.

G’night, RW.

By RW-(the original)

January 27, 2006 12:51 AM | Link to this

Dusty,

Put one of those yardbirds in and you can have it for breakfast.

Goodnight!

By Andy

January 27, 2006 04:38 AM | Link to this

Broadcaster says serious news at risk

“Truth no longer matters in the context of politics and, sadly, in the context of cable news,” said Aaron Brown, whose four-year period as anchor of CNN’s NewsNight ended in November

See you libs can start being honest, er, i mean, telling the truth, well, nevermind..

By Andy

January 27, 2006 04:51 AM | Link to this

As I was saying:

More recently, some of the same Democrats now lashing Republicans for their real and perceived sins have, themselves, taken money from Abramoff. There may be nothing illegal about taking the money, unless members traded their votes and influence on behalf of Abramoff’s clients. It is whether members “sold” their votes and influence that has attracted the Justice Department’s attention.

By Semper Fi

January 27, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this

Looks like that Paul idot has called me out last night. I can hardly type on this key board, I’m shaking so bad. He probably just wants to meet me somewhere and do his Broke Dick Mountain thing. He knows I am such a small frail man.

I don’t meet men that ‘fanny pack’ is a verb.

By Brian Curtis

January 27, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this

More spinning, more distractions, and more lies from the Republicans. Some irrefutable truths for you morons still supporting Bush:

*Osama—the guy who actually attacked us—is still alive and well.

*Iraq HAD no WMDs and was no threat to the U.S.

*The President has admitted to breaking the law (in the area of illegal, unwarranted wiretaps, i.e., spying on Americans).

*Abramoff is a solid Republican who contributed millions to Republicans, as part of a Republican influence-peddling program.

And there’s non sane way to claim that Bush did even a *halfway decent job of handling the Katrina/New Orleans mess.

The only tactic the neocons and their tools have left is to keep trying to shift the blame elsewhere and muddy the waters… but it’s not working. America is waking up to the truth of what a corrupt fraud the Bush administration has been.

By Scott

February 1, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

Of course “Chocolate Ray” gets no blame for the catastrophe in his own city!