Mike Luckovich

By Tell Us Again How Much You Love The Dixie Chicks

June 19, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this

The Wall Street Journal agrees:

American and Iraqi forces are on the offensive once again, deploying around the terrorist stronghold of Ramadi and beginning a drive to bring order to Baghdad. This is welcome news, not least because it underscores how wrong and defeatist Congressman Jack Murtha and his Democratic colleagues are in demanding an immediate U.S. withdrawal in Iraq. With a new Iraq government finally in place, and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi dead, now would be the worst time to tell Iraqis they are on their own. This is the moment to capitalize on this recent run of good news to show the Iraqi public, Sunnis and Shiites both, that the insurgency cannot win. If this requires more American troops and more offensive operations for some months to come, then that is what the Bush Administration should now consider.

By We Need A Good Old Fashioned Suicide Bombing

June 19, 2006 08:11 AM | Link to this

And if we can’t get it we will post the same old tired anti American BS over and over.

By Spammin Like Andy June 19, 2006 08:05 AM U.S. troops search for missing GIs in Iraq“>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060619/aponremiea/iraq)

We hate America!

Go Al Qaeda!

By We Need A Good Old Fashioned Suicide Bombing

June 19, 2006 08:11 AM | Link to this

You probably already noticed but let me make mention of the fact that “Spammin” at 10:24 is thoroughly excited about the strength of it’s insurgency based on it’s ability to kill innocent civilians. 5 articles that this maggot brings to show how bad the United States is because Al Qaeda kills women and children.

Not only are these liberals not showing any outrage whatsoever for these killings, they are cheering on the murderers.

This is a mental thing, a sickness, that you would draw upon the murder of innocents as a sign of the strength of your political agenda.

Sick in the most major way.

Thank you but I’ll stick to the good things that America and it’s soldiers do as my sign of strength.

You, sicko, can keep hoping for women and children to be killed.

Loser.

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 08:32 AM | Link to this

^ ^ ^ See Republicans LIE about what other people say just like they LIE about the situationin Iraq. THEY hate America and our men and women in uniform and they show it every day for those who aren’t getting a PAYDAY out of keeping a losing war going for ever, and ever, and ever. Republicans are like the energizer bunny of troop killers! ! ! THEY HATE AMERICA AND ONLY LOVE THE WAR PROFITS THEY CAN SLEAZE OUT OF STANDING ON THE HEADSTONES OF DEAD SOLDIERS! ! !

By w00t

June 19, 2006 08:35 AM | Link to this

You guys both need to get a life. Go get some sunshine, its acctually nice away from the computer.

By @@

June 19, 2006 08:38 AM | Link to this

Whew! I sat down with a cup of coffee and was hit with “Spammin Like Andy”. Spammin? Sure…but not Like Andy.

Andy: Thanks for the wide-range of topics covered in your links.

By Hoping For A Suicide Bombing So We Can Hang With Andy

June 19, 2006 08:49 AM | Link to this

By Spammin Like Andy June 19, 2006 08:32 AM ^ ^ ^ See Republicans LIE

I ain’t the one rooting for Al Qaeda, you are.

Loser.

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 08:57 AM | Link to this

^ ^ ^ Another Republican LIE. I’m not rooting for al Queda, I’m rooting for our Armed Forces who are being USED in order to feather the political nest of the Republicans! ! ! THE AMERICA HATING REPUBLICANS ARE TRYING THE TAR AND FEATHER ROUTINE IN ORDER TO DEFLECT ATTENTION FROM THE FACT THAT THEY STUPIDLY CONTINUE TO GET OUR TROOPS KILLED! ! !

By Hoping For A Suicide Bombing So We Can Hang With Andy

June 19, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this

w00t: Look, man, you’re kind of hanging at the fringes here, so I’m going to be somewhat nice, which requires much effort on my part:

By w00t June 19, 2006 08:35 AM You guys both need to get a life.

If you think posting to blog consumes my whole entire life maybe you might be the one with the issues. I can handle more then one thing at once.

By This day in history

June 19, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this

Today marks the 42nd anniversary of finally breaking the 83 day filibuster by Democrats against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Many of our “enlightened” friends here will tell you that those Democrats all became Republicans.

Don’t believe it, it’s just another lie the libs will tell you to try to hide from their historical record. The three ringleaders of the filibuster were Albert Gore Sr. (D-TN), J. William Fulbright (D-AK and Bill Clinton’s mentor), and Robert “KKK” Byrd (D-WVA). When the “progressives” tell you their lie about the political conversion of these Democrats, ask them when these guys became Republicans.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this

Spammin, sorry that something in your life has made you so angry that you feel the need to post hate filled diatribes on this blog. You are what is keeping the left down. You should stick to the moveon.org and Kos where there are people who really think like you. People who think like you are the reason Dems can’t win elections anymore.

By gadem

June 19, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this

@@ why do you insist on co-signing everything that Andy does?

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

Rickity, you have shown us all your love for the left many times over (NOT)! The fact that I am not a liberal or a Democrat and that real conservatives are appaled by the current Republican BIG, BIG, BIG, OPPRESSIVE GOVENMENT escapes you because you are pushing YOUR political party probably because you are raking in WAR PROFITS paid for with the blood of American service men and women! ! ! Yea, that makes me angry, just like a bully on a school yard makes me angry except in this case you are killing brave men and women who have dedicated their lives to keeping us safe. I would like to return the favor and keep THEM safe, you DO NOT but just try to dredge up wedge issues to feather your political nest. Eat me!

By gadem

June 19, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

This day in history, if you would like to research your information rather than regurgitate whatever you heard on talk radio, you will see that it was more split along regional lines rather than party. Tell those lies to someone else.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this

Whew! I sat down with a cup of coffee and was hit with “Spammin Like Andy”. Spammin? Sure…but not Like Andy.

Andy: Thanks for the wide-range of topics covered in your links.

(Thanks @@, perfectly worded and oh so true)

gadem,

Why do you insist on trying to strong-arm people when you clearly lack the ability to do so?

By @@

June 19, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this

gadem:

Why would you have a problem with me supporting diversity of topics?

By gadem

June 19, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this

RW, the same reason that you and Andy resort to name calling when you are backed into a corner. You facts are for sissies….

By This day in history

June 19, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

Goldie should be along shortly to spank gadem for calling Wikipedia a valid research tool. This could be one of the few things I might agree with that womans rights crusader on. We aren’t alone in this belief.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this

gadem,

NOOO!!! You facts are for sissies…(what does that mean by the way?)

By Midori

June 19, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this

LOL

Sad day (?) when Spammin Like Andy makes more sense than Andy, himself :)

By @@

June 19, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this

Spammin & Screamin:

Why?

By Midori

June 19, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this

This is dedicated to Ricky

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this

Spammin, I work for a living as an Army officer that has served two tours in Iraq. So before you start popping off at your mouth about who works for a living you might want to inquire what that person does. Despite what you say you are not a conservative. Keep it up though, all you do is make yourself like bitter, angry, and small.

By @@

June 19, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this

About the cartoon. “Paying to play”….I do it when I gamble. Nothing wrong with the concept unless your addicted, of course.

By gadem

June 19, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this

Is this a better and more telling source for you? The south has always had wolves in sheeps clothing. RW it was supposed to read “You know that facts are for sissies”….Isn’t that your mantra?

By Hoping For A Suicide Bombing So We Can Hang With Andy

June 19, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this

Granted, readers sometimes have only the dimmest comprehension of the difference between an opinion they don’t happen to agree with and some lunatic’s unpublishable ravings. A year or so ago, the Los Angeles Times actually began running opinions on its op-ed page that dissent from the liberal party line, and this can flummox loyal subscribers. “Why does the Times provide a forum for such misguided commentary?” asked a typical clueless letter-to-the-editor about one such piece.

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this

^ ^ ^ At least one more Republican lie. I never said anything about “working for a living”, did I? If Rickity LIES about that, then I can only assume that he/she/it is LYING about being an Army officer. Officers I have served under DO NOT want their men and women killed in wars that are only maintained for political grandstanding. REAL military men stay out of politics in order to maintain their neutrality and integrity (two things Rickity has none of). Eat me again!

By This day in history

June 19, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this

Thanks for the informative link gadem. As you could tell from my original post we had some agreement with the regional aspect of this, but your link shows just how widespread the political opportunism of Democrats was. Your link even tells us that Kennedy decided to through blacks under the bus because of his thirst for power.

As an added bonus your link is a handy primer for the next time the libs try to tell us that the filibuster rules are sacrosanct. Much better than Wiki.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this

gadem,

I don’t have some mindless mantra to spew. You may have noticed I’m not a Democrat.

By gadem

June 19, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

Sorry, got you confused with Andy and his neocon talking points of the day…but you do cosign everything that he says….so indirectly you do spew a mindless mantra.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

gadem,

What’s with the cosigning today? Do you need a loan? I’ve seen Andy link to several informative stories on a variety of topics all of which are open to differing points of view that could promote a good and lively discussion. The fact that your kneejerk reaction is to try to belittle Andy or anyone that might be inclined to take that side says volumes about you.

By Amazing, Isn't It?

June 19, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this

It must be a great mystery to these libs like gadem that Republicans actually agree with other Republicans. And we don’t cave in to the first thing every pinko says, immediately abandoning all of our long held principles and beliefs.

It baffles them.

By gadem

June 19, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this

This day, you said no such thing. You made it a point to say that Democrats filibuster the bill. When in actuality it were southerners. I can say that NO southern republicans supported the bill…what excuse do you have for that?

By GodHatesTrash

June 19, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this

@ By this day

So why does racist white trash vote GOP in 2006? You know - guys like you?

Why do you vote differently than your redneck forefathers?

By gadem

June 19, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this

Amazing, would those principles be discrimination, racism, xenophobia, and greed. In my opinion those are not great beliefs and principles to be proud of.

By AntiRadical

June 19, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this

Good toon, ML. Nipple or v**** orifice turned on its’ side; who cares?

Interesting discussion in reference to the civil rights bill. So, Dixiecrats never really existed and LBJ didn’t really push his “Great Society” program through on the coat tails of the civil rights ammendment?

I don’t think I’m quite ready to let LBJ and the Dems off the hook that easily but if that’s the way it really happened, then who did push the civil rights and great society agendas, the Reps?

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this

The thing that kills the Dems is that one of their big talking points is that the Reps are racists and bigots. Yet is was a Rep president that emancipated the slaves and Reps that were responsible for the passage of the Civil Rights Acts. They will never admit that they were on the wrong side of those issues, they will just say that well those Dems would be Reps now. What a joke.

By AntiRadical

June 19, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this

Ricky- Since the civil rights ammendment and the great society programs are so intrinsically linked, it’s pretty hard to own one without the other. Is this really an accomplishment you want to give the Reps responsibility for?

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Anti, the great society expanded government to levels that I would never support, but if that was the trade off for the civil rights act I will take it. The passage of the civil rights act was one of the watershed moments in this country’s history. Surely we can all agree on that.

By Toad

June 19, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Lincoln, as a Republican, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. Southern Democrats opposed the abolition of slavery so that’s why Southern conservatives stayed Democrats. Northern Republicans typically were less conservative than Southern Democrats. That’s why the Civil Rights Act was voted on by many Republicans and Northern Democrats. It was not until the late twentieth century that southern Dems figured out that the national Republican party was more in line with their thinking.

By rushncap

June 19, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

Ricky, is it that you don’t know history, or that being a Republican the idea of misrepresentation is just second nature to you?

I would like to know, Ricky, why is it that minorities, Jews, and highly-educated people (graduate degrees) all vote overwhelmingly Democrat? Did the blacks just forget about Licoln altogether? Do the Jews not know that Republicans are all about the Promised Land? Are the most educated amongst us happen to be the ones who are most susceptible to brainwashing? Let’s hear it, Ricky.

By Tigerlil

June 19, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this

Why do none of the comments have anything to do with Mike’s cartoon? What I would like to know is — why is the sight of a woman’s nipple worse than seeing Jack Bauer carrying around a severed head?

By finch

June 19, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this

This is certainly a vibrant group today. Maybe I’ll do more than just lurk at Wooten’s site, which seems a tad more civil.

In a logical world here, there will be no more quotes or links to the Moonie Times… excuse me, the Washington Times. I enjoy thrusts and parrys from the right. I pay good money for my WSJ subscription, dammit! A good cogent argument is food for thought.

But the Moonie Times is just propaganda. It’s the pre-1989 wingnut version of Pravda.

Click here for a very recent summary of how the “Reverend” Moon is no different than Al Capone.

Well, there is a difference. The product they shill. Here’s a clue. It’s not booze.

If you’re comfortable with a man who says Jesus was flawed, and he’s the real Messiah, go for it.

If you have no problems with a man who isn’t a US citizen, can’t speak English, was convicted of a felony, deals with North Korea and (somehow) holds on to his Green Card, read no further.

And if you think that the owner of a newspaper in the capital of the world’s only superpower doesn’t use it to further a political and personal agenda, then you believe in Santa.

I’m happy that only the ideologically warped treat the Moonie Times seriously. There’s a reason the paper has lost more money than the annual GDP of some nations.

It’s trash.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

rushncap, the reason the majority of blacks tend to vote Democrat is because the Dem party has done a great job of scaring them into believing that Reps are racists. Not to mention that Dems have supported big government programs like welfare and raising the minimum wage. The reason most “highly-educated” people vote Democratic is because education cirlces are inherently liberal. The suscribe to ideals and theories more than concrete facts. And honestly I have never understood why Jews vote Dem, since Reps are much more supportive of their struggle with the Palenstians. I see that you have reverted to the liberals are smarter than Reps and you just can’t fathom why Reps keep winning elections. How can people be that stupid right? And by the way facts are on my side. Lincoln was a Republican and the majority of those that voted against the Civil Rights Act were Democrats.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this

finch, the AJC, the NY Times, and the LA Times are all losing tons of money too. Does that make them trash? Are is it only papers that you disagree with that you think are ideologically slanted?

By Answer The Questions, Save The Lib Talking Points

June 19, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

By gadem June 19, 2006 10:25 AM Amazing, would those principles be discrimination, racism, xenophobia, and greed.

A and B. Which party has a former member of the KKK as a Senator? Which party called Michael Steele an oreo cookie? Which party has editorial cartoons depicting the Secretary of State as a house slave?

C. democrats were in favor of the Dubai ports deal??? democrats are in favor of unchecked immigration?

D. How much money is the Kennedy estate worth? The Pelosi family fortune? Harry Reid’s net worth?

It’s so easy to say how good you are, that’s why gadem even has an answer. If he had to think he’d be a church mouse, all quiet.

By This day in history

June 19, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this

I know this is difficult for you gadem, but I listed the states that the three livelong Democrats, that stood hard and fast against civil rights, hailed from. That would be a regional linkage to the south IMHO. Maybe the fact that southern Democrats are proven bigots is also the reason they are becoming extinct. As for your misdirection about southern Republicans in that day and age, could it be no southern Republicans supported the legislation because there weren’t any to speak of?

By rushncap

June 19, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

Because, Tigerlil, according to our society sex is evil. In fact, the greatest of all evils, basically. Violence is OK. Violence against “bad guys” is not just OK, it’s encouraged.

We’re still a Puritan society, basically. Sex is still taboo, dirty, sinful for a vast portion of America. I assure you that if bin Laden had somehow snuck porn onto broadcast TV instead of killing 3,000 people, we would have nuked the entire Middle East the next day, no questions asked.

By finch

June 19, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

‘Scuse me??

The AJC, the NYTimes and the LA Times (Tribune) are MAKING money!

Next….

By Propaganda For The U.S.A, Not Al Qaeda

June 19, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this

Maybe that’s why General Seeker has such a big issue with the “moonie times?”

We got our cheering section, you got yours:

AlJazeera.net

Whackjob.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this

finch, you are wrong on those papers making money. Compared to the same quarters as two years ago all of them lost money.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

finch,

Don’t look now, but your penchant for McCarthyism is showing again.

Would you mind seeking out an example or two of the evils being perpetrated on us by the Washington Times?

By rushncap

June 19, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this

No, Ricky, the facts are not on your side. Sorry, bud. No can do. Are Democrats smarter than Republicans? Well, on average, yes. Of course you carefully avoided my question as to why the most highly educated people vote blue. Your “inherently liberal” brushoff is a meaningless copout. What, do they pump “liberal gas” into the dean’s office? You still have not answered why is it that those who are, by training and profession, most likely to question, to analyze, to investigate, to debate and to follow the news, why is it that this segment of the population so liberal?

As for the Jews, the answer is simple. They are, by and large, highly educated. It’s funny, my Jewish parents came into this country and were Republicans. For a few years. By now, if you mention the word “Bush” around my father, you better duck and cover, he will go on an hour-long, profanity-laced tirade about him.

As for “Lincoln was a Republican bit”, I’ll give you the benefit of a doubt, and assume you’re just incredibly ignorant. So, to put it simply, in the 1930’s the parties switched their tacks. Republicans were always the liberal, progressive party. Democrats were always the stodgy, racist one. FDR made Democrats prograssive during the Great Depression. Therefore the Republicans were left to become the regressive one. The only thing that the modern Republicans have in common with the party for which Lincoln was a standard-bearer is the name. That is all.

By Midori

June 19, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this

Finch, Finch, Finch,

why do you hate America? :)

The Moonie Times is more American than Apple Pie. Get with the program :)

By Republican Musical Chairs

June 19, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

Yet another rat jumps the sinking ship!

Zoellick resigns from State Department

Bye, bye to another Cheney/Bush Republicrat. See ya’, wouldn’t wannna be ya’.

By If Democrats Are So "Smart" Where Is Their Plan?

June 19, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this

How about naming an idea one of you liberals has had in, let’s say, the last 40 years, rushncrap. (Bush sucks doesn’t count. Haha, I kneecapped you.)

Cheering suicide bombers is a sign of intelligence?

By What's A Zoellick?

June 19, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

And why would anyone care?

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this

Iran urged to suspend uranium enrichment

Oh please, please, please, with sugar and a cherry on top, please stop making weapons of mass destruction. I stuck my dick in Iraq and can’t pull it out for years and years and years. The only thing I can do now is eat crow and go begging to the United Nations! ! !

By Midori

June 19, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this

How about naming an idea one of you liberals has had in, let’s say, the last 40 years, rushncrap. (Bush sucks doesn’t count. Haha, I kneecapped you.)

and what ideas have you supermen come up with? attacking and bombing unarmed countries that had nothing to do with 9/11 doesn’t count.

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this

^ ^ ^ Looks like once the rats jump ship, even the Republicans don’t want ‘em any more! ! !

By So You Want Us To Invade???

June 19, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

By Spammin Like Andy June 19, 2006 11:52 AM Iran urged to suspend uranium enrichment Oh please, please, please, with sugar and a cherry on top, please stop making weapons of mass destruction. I stuck my dick in Iraq and can’t pull it out for years and years and years. The only thing I can do now is eat crow and go begging to the United Nations! ! !

I thought this as-shole was against war?? I guess just being a Republican, no matter what they do, is enough to set this little maggot off.

By I'm Still Waiting For Yours, Tic Toc

June 19, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this

Here’s mine, one of many: Freedom and democracy in the Middle East (Asia.)

Yeeeeesssss!!! Conservatives rock!

And yours…………..

By A Democrat Sanitation Worker In Atlanta Retires

June 19, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

Proof! Proof that democrats are corrupt! They’re crooks! I know it now! You can run but you can’t hide!

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this

^ ^ ^ Yet another Republican LIE. I’m against initial/continued American involvement in wars we had no provocation to initiate so that we can be available to fight the REAL bad guys when they rear their ugly heads. But Bush Republican Don Quixotes would rather swing at windmills than the real thing as long as they can suck a few more votes from the deaths of the American soldiers they are USING to pander votes!

By Midori

June 19, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this

Here’s mine, one of many: Freedom and democracy in the Middle East (Asia.)

You mean Dumb as a Rock.

One hardly brings democracy and freedom via the barrel of a shotgun.

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this

Yup, the Iraqis are freely and democratically spiraling further and further into a civil war of our own making! ! ! But they’ll be peachy keen next year, or the year after that, or the year after that, or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that,or the year after that, or the year after that! ! !

By So What, Exactly, Has Iran Does To Us?

June 19, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this

By Spammin Like Andy June 19, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this ^ ^ ^ Yet another Republican LIE. I’m against initial/continued American involvement in wars we had no provocation to initiate so that we can be available to fight the REAL bad guys when they rear their ugly heads. But Bush Republican Don Quixotes would rather swing at windmills than the real thing as long as they can suck a few more votes from the deaths of the American soldiers they are USING to pander votes!

Oh, so now this idiot has come around to the Bush Doctrine of preemptive attack, very good, moron.

Welcome aboard.

By You Mean Like How The U.S.A. Was Born?

June 19, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

By Midori June 19, 2006 12:08 PM Here’s mine, one of many: Freedom and democracy in the Middle East (Asia.) You mean Dumb as a Rock. One hardly brings democracy and freedom via the barrel of a shotgun.

Y’all might want to study up on your history, er, you do know what history is, don’t you?

By finch

June 19, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

By Propaganda For The U.S.A, Not Al Qaeda June 19, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this

Maybe that’s why General Seeker has such a big issue with the “moonie times?”

We got our cheering section, you got yours:

AlJazeera.net

Whackjob.

You are SUCH a loser!

Al-Jazeera has not spent BILLIONS over decades to ingratiate itself with the US. Your “Father” has.

Al-Jazeera can’t even find a single US cable or satellite operator to carry it’s service.

Your Messiah, Sun Myung Moon, “Our Father”, and his “Holy Children”… the man who, among other things, consorts with North Korea’s Kim Jong Il, who even as I speak is funding nuclear tipped missles that can hit California, is a far graver threat to the US than Saddam Hussein ever was.

Would you please get your head out of your….

By Hey Spammin

June 19, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

Why’d the AJC take down your 8:05? You reckon they’re getting tired of seeing the same post over and over?

By Jeez, It's Only A Newspaper

June 19, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this

You must really hate the news their getting out:

By finch June 19, 2006 12:18 PM Your Messiah, Sun Myung Moon, “Our Father”, and his “Holy Children”… the man who, among other things, consorts with North Korea’s Kim Jong Il, who even as I speak is funding nuclear tipped missles that can hit California, is a far graver threat to the US than Saddam Hussein ever was.

Well, good for Reverend Moon. I hope he drives all you enemies of America over the edge, like General Seeker.

Rage is a sure sign of ignorance.

Not that we didn’t already know.

By Spammin Like Andy

June 19, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

They pulled most of Andy’s morning spam too. Maybe these weiners are finally going to put a stop to the spam. The AJC always has coddled Andy’s outrageousness cause when he gets his feelings hurt he goes crying to the moderator like Bush is crying to the UN about Iran now. Those big bad other bloggers are pickin on him. The crying baby gets the bottle! Just another action from the Republican STFU party!

By Dusty

June 19, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

What a lovely blog—

blatant discrimination==racist white trash,

blatant black lettered hate for Republicans,

blatant black lettered hate for war efforts,

blatant black lettered hate for country,

phony intelligentsia reports by liberal phonies,

great spewing event also for other looney liberals and moderate whackos.

Conservatives beware. This is a mudhole.

By Midori

June 19, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this

Spammin,

you are so spot on!!!!!

By finch

June 19, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this

Rage is a sure sign of ignorance.

And you should know, Mr. Suck spammer… you should know.

By @@

June 19, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this

I have spots on my carpet that demand more immediate attention than “Spammin”. It’s my dog “Buddy”, sometimes he can’t control himself either.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

This blog use to be a pretty good place for debate, yet is has spiraled into a place to post vitrolic talking points. There are very few real ideas debated. And before you liberals flip out, Andy is just as bad as Spammin Andy so calm down.

By w00t

June 19, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this

You know, the solution to all of this would be for the US to become Isolationist again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UnitedStatesisolationism

Have fun.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this

It is so ironic to hear libs complain about the Bush administration using the UN to attempt to solve the Iranian problem. For three years all we have heard is that we should have gotten more allies and used the UN more before going into Iraq. Now going to the UN over Iran is bad. It just goes to show that their arguement is based more on hating Bush than on principal. But what do you expect from the far left. It is sad that Dems like Evan Bayh, John Breux, and Joe Libermann don’t have a voice in their party anymore.

By finch

June 19, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this

I see that all of the links to the Moonie Times have disappeared.

I hope this means that the ajc moderators have decided to limit posted links to legitimate news outlets.

By Midori

June 19, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this

Ricky,

before you embark on your current expedition, I’d like to know what you think about Rushncap’s comments.

The far left isn’t half as looney, racist and ignorant as the “far right”.

And take Joe Lieberman. Please.

By Midori

June 19, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this

But what do you expect from the far left. It is sad that Dems like Evan Bayh, John Breux, and Joe Libermann don’t have a voice in their party anymore.

yeah - your party is just full of acceptance and different voices. Yeah. Right.

Any time a Republican goes off the plantation, he/she is immediately vilified and deemed anti american. That vilification isn’t reserved just for Liberals. But what the hell, if it ain’t broke, why fix it?

By SSDD

June 19, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

Nice one Mike L.

He-he-heee. You said npple. Hey, where’s RW or Andy with an anatomical-related story about someone having something to do with a npple or other sexual-related anatomy? What would Freud call that? Hmm? The re-pube obsession with things that involve sadistic sh*t and then where they proceed to post links to these weird stories on boards… what would that be called?

To address today “beaten-horse” dialogue: Hey, re-pubes.

Ever hear the phrase “fighting for peace is like f*ing for virginity”?

Don’t ya’ll need to be glued to Faux News right now getting your talking points down for the day? Like calling a stripper who was gang-raped by a group of white ball players a whore? Or throwing support behind a psuedo-chrisitian re-pube like Rush? Where’s that part in the bible about he who casts the first stone…. something about righteousness… anyone? Beuller?

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

Midori, the far left and the far right are equally as bad. They have lead to the destruction of American politics as it is today. The fact that you want to get rid of Lieberman shows the destruction the far left has done to the Dem party. He is one of the most respected members of Congress. He has more integrity than all the members of moveon and Kos combined.

By Dusty

June 19, 2006 01:31 PM | Link to this

You are right, Ricky

Joe Libermann is a very fine man who tries to do the right thing. He is hindered by his party and we rarely hear from him

I am a Republican who listens when Libermann speaks because he is not blinded by hate or Democratic loyalty.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this

Midori, the two leading candidates for the Republican nomination are John McCain and Rudy Guilani. Not members of the far right as you would call it. When was the last time you heard Guilani called anti-american. There is no need to go over the top Midori.

By @@

June 19, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this

There is a very angry victimized radical over at Wooten’s usually “civilized” site. Just a warning for anyone who was thinking about partaking in reasonable discussion over there.

By Griffon

June 19, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

WHOOOOOSH Victomized radical… Mad rush to Wooten’s site.

By Midori

June 19, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this

Midori, the two leading candidates for the Republican nomination are John McCain and Rudy Guilani. Not members of the far right as you would call it. When was the last time you heard Guilani called anti-american.

Last time I looked, those guys pretty much walk lockstep with your party. McCain sure learned his lesson, didn’t he? He has now fallen back in line with the rest of the hateful loons.

Go back and read what I wrote.

You are either again evading the issue, and not able to comprehend it.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this

Midori, maybe you don’t know this but Guilani is pro-choice, which pretty much disputes your “lock-step” comment. And McCain has oppossed Bush and the RNC on a number of issues from spending to gun control to immigration. Maybe you should do a little research before you paost.

By Midori

June 19, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this

I think one of the many reasons Rudy G. bend over backwards kissing Bush’s hiney is because of all the photos of Rudy in drag circulating on the net.

Like I said: disagree with you guys and BAM!!!!

They don’t care which political persuasion you are.

By Luchovich is a funny guy

June 19, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this

Luchovich is a very funny guy. What do I mean when I say he’s a funny guy? I mean that I think he’s a clown for my amusement.

He makes me laugh, but that’s not all he does. I read, look at the picture, laugh, and then I reflect upon the message and wonder about the shift in the Zeitgeist his cartoon might cause. That’s when I stop laughing. I dont like people shifting the Zeitgeist. I want the Zeitgeist to stay exactly where it is. Why? Because if the Zeitgeist shifts, then the terrorists win. Vote Redstate in November, or dont vote at all, and whatever you do, do not shift the confounded Zeitgeist. (or the Shadenfreud or the Farvenugen)

By Midori

June 19, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this

Midori, maybe you don’t know this but Guilani is pro-choice, which pretty much disputes your “lock-step” comment.

Whoop de doo!!! Guilani is pro choice. Do you have a sock of rocks in your head?

I don’t recall Guilani ONCE speaking out and or against this administration — even about abortion.

Is that the best you can do?

And McCain has oppossed Bush and the RNC on a number of issues from spending to gun control to immigration

Maybe that’s why they slimed him, and put the rumor out that his wife bore a black baby.

By Midori

June 19, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this

Let me try to break this down to you, Ricky.

Paul O’Neil? remember him and what happened when he SPOKE OUT against this administration?

He was one of MANY “disgruntled employees” who didn’t know his job because he was stupid because he completely sucked because Bush and his attack dogs said so.

I’m not even going to list the others.

Why bother, anyway?

You are stuck on, um, what’s that word?

By Midori

June 19, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

Maybe that’s why they slimed him, and put the rumor out that his wife bore a black baby.

and by “they” I mean YOUR PARTY.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this

Midori, it doesn’t matter what facts are put in front of you. You will never admit that someone who is not from the far left has done something good. You are blinded by your ideology. That is okay and it is your right. You probably even believe like rushncap that you liberals are smarter than us conservatives anyway, so whats the point right? Good luck this fall and in 08. Becuase if you guys can’t win an election after this disaster, then you never will.

By Shuckin' Oysters

June 19, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this

Well, at least Midori was able to admit the far left is looney, racist and ignorant. Good Donkey.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

OO,

Are you sure this crazed maniac is over at Wooten’s or are you talking about Midori over here?

finch,

Very typical moonbat thinking that only sources you approve of are credible. Are you planning to come up with that evidence of the evil the Washington Times is doing or are you going to continue with your unfounded guilt by association tactic?

By Toad

June 19, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

Well, at least Midori was able to admit the far left is looney, racist and ignorant. Huh? I didn’t see that post! Wasn’t it the Republicans who refused to vote for McCain when the Rove machine used push polls to suggest that McCain fathered a black baby?

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this

Toad,

The supposed push poll in South Carolina could have happened and would be wrong. That being said nobody outside of South Carolina ever heard anything about it until a post-mortum of the McCain campaign was being done, so it didn’t cause him to lose the nomination no matter how hard people try to blame the loss on that one thing.

By Tadpole

June 19, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this

So…. RW: it wasn’t wrong for the Bush people to mobilize a racist phone bank to smear McCain in Carolina with the “black baby” story because he would not have got the nomination anyway? Does that mean it would have been wrong if he had a chance at the time? Or is it just a matter of, “If it’s wrong, then it’s wrong, unless Bush’s people do it, and then it’s good for America?” Please clarify for lil’ tadpole.

By @@

June 19, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

RW:

Well now that you mentioned it….

As to another poster’s response to the cartoon…

Good toon, ML. Nipple or v* orifice turned on its’ side; who cares?*

AntiR looked at it ^^^ from two different perspectives. From this :/ angle and, again from this @@ angle. Very good AntiR. Once again…I laughed, chuckled, giggled or snickered. Take your pick. I was amused!!!

By finch

June 19, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this

RW,

“Supposed” push poll?? It happened; it was well organized (phone banks, automated calls); and it was in the news in the days before the 2000 SC primary that sent McCain packing and Bush on the White House road.

You could say I had a front row seat.

The most convincing bit of circumstantial evidence tying Bush/Rove with the push poll linking McCain with his “illegitimate black baby” was the stunning silence from the Bush camp after this charade became news in the Palmetto State.

Bush/Rove could have denounced it as perverse political pandering of the worst kind. Or they could have dismissed it as the extreme acts of renegade supporters.

But they didn’t say a word.

By Griffon

June 19, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

I don’t think the point is that the supposed push poll caused McCain to lose momentum, but an example of the Bushies smearing those who disagree with them.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this

Tadpole,

The supposed push poll in South Carolina could have happened and would be wrong.

Now just for fun could you tell me how you find that to say it wouldn’t be wrong?

@@,

I just saw that too. Good one AntiR!

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this

finch, I guess the “push poll” would be similar to the Gore camp leaking the Bush DUI story days before the election right. Or does your morality only apply to people you disagree with.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this

finch,

Not being in South Carolina it was a “supposed” push poll to me and everybody that wasn’t in South Carolina. Despite your feelings of self-importance South Carolina does not get to pick the nominee.

It is ridiculous how often you cite silence as evidence of guilt. Man you are taking the McCarthyism right into brown shirt territory today.

By @@

June 19, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this

I’m just guessing here, but if Bush/Rove had denounced the push poll as perverse political pandering the rabid, radical, extreme leftwing response would have been. BUSH LIED, ROVE DENIED. Possibility?

Or maybe you just don’t comment on things you have no knowledge of.

By Ricky

June 19, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this

@@, great point. It doesn’t matter what Bush does, the rabid left will kill him for it anyway. That is the way they think they will win elections.

By Tadpole

June 19, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this

So, if it “would be wrong” it isn’t really wrong if they deny doing it, or deny knowledge of it, or then also if they don’t deny doing it since denial might be seen as actually condoning such behavior, but it’s still okay to propell slanderous race-baiting lies onto the voting public as long as it wins them elections because their poo is the only poo, afterall, that doesn’t stink, is that what y’all are saying? How does that play if I, (just for fun and not serious election bizniss) call RW’s wife and tell him my sister had his own lil’ black baby and would they please offer that child their support, or scorn… depending on whether it’s an election year or not? Please clarify for lil’ tadpole.

By gadem

June 19, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

For the life of me I can not understand why people still support Bush. He is/was a total disaster. Is it hard to admit that you all wasted a vote on him or what? I can not think of anything positive that he has done while he is in the white house. I ask myself am I better off today than I was when he took office, and I can honestly say no.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this

Tadpole,

I really don’t have the patience to deal with your learning disability.

gadem,

I thought you guys were always about “the greater good” and all that. Why are you being selfish and only thinking of yourself?

By finch

June 19, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

RW,

Man you are taking the McCarthyism right into brown shirt territory today.

That’s hilarious! And here I thought you liked Tail Gunner Joe!

The Bush/Rove “Deception Express” effectively strangled McCain’s national campaign in SC. And without momentum, he was toast. McCain’s no dummy, and he’s learned since then, which is why he’s kissing Bush’s nethers today.

What Bush/Rove did probably wasn’t illegal. Technically. But it smells. Good Lord, it just stinks.

By Midori

June 19, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this

@@, great point. It doesn’t matter what Bush does, the rabid left will kill him for it anyway. That is the way they think they will win elections.

What is it with you and this “win elections” mantra of yours? That’s all you keep repeating. You love to keep yelling “Democrats can’t win elections”.

You’re like a parrot. All you can observe is: 1. Democrats hate Bush and 2. Why can’t Democrats win elections. I don’t care what the conversation or the cartoon depicts, that’s all you have to add.

Parrot.

You people have made a mockery of “winning”. You slugs leave no one unslimed, no family member unaffected, no veteran swiftboated, no principle sacred, for the sake of “winning”.

Then when you do “win”, you don’t know what to do with it — other than to keep gloating and using that stale, dumb talking point. You can’t govern. You can’t lead. You can’t balance the budget. You can’t relate to the rest of the world.

all you can do is steal elections, slime people, disenfranchise minority voters and yell: “They can’t win elections!!! Na na na, boo boo!!”

Do you beat your chest when you say it?

Parrot.

By Toad

June 19, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this

Is anyone better off than they were when Bush took office? Oh right, the rich who are not paying as much taxes and the oil company CEO’s who are raking in the bucks.

By Tadpole

June 19, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

RW, You obviously have the time, so why don’t you dig deep for some patience. You’re here all day. And I don’t think your abmiguity and adherence to a double standard qualifies as a learning disability on my part. You come here every day to show the fence sitters why the lefties are wrong, do you not? Expect to answer a question or clarify yourself once in awhile, or be ready to admit you have no credibility whatsoever.

By finch

June 19, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this

…but if Bush/Rove had denounced the push poll as perverse political pandering the rabid, radical, extreme leftwing response would have been. BUSH LIED, ROVE DENIED. Possibility?

By golly, you’re right, @@!! Principles? Schimpicles. Ethhics? Smethics! By all means, avoid standing up for a greater good if it might cost you that tactical victory.

All Bush/Rove had to do was say three words. “That’s not us!”

But they didn’t.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

finch,

As you well know McCarthyism is a term that describes using guilt by association tactics. Something the good Senator was accused of through countless iterations of untrue stories. The fact that Tail Gunner Joe didn’t deserve the label can’t really change the term.

So I guess you are planning to just keep ignoring the fact that you have provided no evidence to back your assertions about the evils of the Washington Times and you will make a mocking reference every hour or so in hopes that the subject will go away. It doesn’t matter, you will throw the same charges around again sometime and I will question you all over again.

By gadem

June 19, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this

Actually I am thinking of friends and family members that have had it rough. I received my bachelor’s in 2000 and fortunate enough to have had my job pay me to go back and get my master’s. But I have friends that were unemployed for sometime and could only find jobs that were in sales…making half of what they were making.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this

Tadpole,

I said in the very simplest of terms that if that push poll happened as described it was wrong. I really can’t get more clear or less ambiguous than that.

By buff

June 19, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this

Hey, RW, whatcha been up to?

By Tadpole

June 19, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this

No, you said it “would be wrong.” That implies an “if.” You also modified your stance by saying it didn’t really make a difference in the outcome anyway. Just wanted to clarify your “if” since the times we live in seem to be defined by selective morality and a subjective code of ethics. Here, I’ll make it muliple choice, which should save you the energy of explaining yourself:

Which is your stance: (a) “It would be wrong if it affected the outcome.” (b) “It would be wrong no matter who did it.” (c) “It would be wrong if the Democrats did it.” (d) It would be wrong if the Republicans did it, but I support them with my whole being anyway, because I don’t care who they hurt.”

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this

buff,

Apparently just irritating pond dwellers. How’s the poker tour? Do you need a map over to my blogs?

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this

Tadpole,

This isn’t that difficult. It would be wrong no matter who did or what the consequences were, which is exactly what I said. Just because you have decided to parse my words doesn’t mean I have to accept your interpretation.

By Linguist

June 19, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this

Would is the conditional sense, so since RW phrased it as a supposed poll, if it happened it would be wrong. So the if is whether it really happened or not. Would was used correctly in that instance.

By Tadpole

June 19, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this

RW, thank you for making it clear you feel it was wrong of the Bush people to use racist lies in South Carolina to smear McCain, and that their actions are indefensible. I am glad you do not subscribe to a subjective code of ethics!

Is it just a knee-jerk reaction then, when you defend, excuse, or explain away bad behavior from the Bush supporters? Would you like some help learning how to control these irrational impulses to jerk your “knee” at everyone who makes a valid point that puts your Bush & Savior in a less than favorable light?

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 05:04 PM | Link to this

Sure Tadpole,

Knock yourself out and be sure to link to some examples of this. It should be pretty easy if what you say has any basis in reality.

By Censored!

June 19, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this

Read this quick before the AJC takes it down!

By Dear Ricky

June 19, 2006 05:26 PM | Link to this

Honey, just because you don’t understand something doesn’t make it extreme, dear. I fully understand if you are confused by all the big words and differing opinions and I will endeavor in the future to speak more slowly and as sweet as I possibly can so that I don’t upset your tender little sensibilities. Love, Andy.

XOXOXOXOXO

By General Seeker Attacks!

June 19, 2006 05:34 PM | Link to this

Jeez, I fully understand your frustration, finch, I haven’t seen many people get slapped around like you have lately, but to attack the Washington Times based on ideology? Doesn’t that strike you as a rather weak defense of your position?

It isn’t like CBS produced fake documents or the NY Times plagarizes real news outlets, when has the Wash Times been exposed quite like your boys have been?

Are you keeping a secret from the rest of the world?

It’s pretty easy to dismiss your opponent off hand as illegitimate but to do it for every single solitary argument bar none? If you are so certain of their being a shill for North Korea, could not readily produce some evidence of these misdeeds? It shouldn’t be that big of a deal if they really are as bad as you were whining like a baby a little while ago.

Or do you bother with truth and honesty?

By Tadpole

June 19, 2006 05:36 PM | Link to this

Oh no RW, you misunderstand. While some of you find it an enjoyable hobby, I am not entertained by digging through weeks of posts in search of a word string to stuff down another’s throat. I am just happy to learn that your sense of ethics are not clouded by partisanship or labels. If I confused you with someone else here who makes excuses for any abuse of power or sleazy underhanded ploy perpetrated by the current administration, while vilifying those who point them out, I sincerely apologize.

By Daniel

June 19, 2006 05:54 PM | Link to this

Bush/Rove learned from Lee Atwater. Their only victums are America, her children and grandchildren. This too, will pass. This story will be told. “The most corrupt, deceitful, crooked pack of b*stards in American history”!

By @@

June 19, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this

Finch:

Due to a discussion I had recently regarding questionable voter tactics used by either/or <—-that’s party, I was compelled to do some online research. I have a whole slew of allegations made against the Democrats for ethical violations when it comes to influencing voters. Some of the sources are interviews with registrars, claims from media outlets, “unnamed sources” <—-I always appreciate that one, disgruntled voters.

I don’t post those allegations here because they are nothing more than allegations. Unfounded and without basis in fact.

Please don’t infer….

By golly, you’re right, @@!! Principles? Schimpicles. Ethhics? Smethics! By all means, avoid standing up for a greater good if it might cost you that tactical victory.

that I would sacrifice any of the above (emboldened) for the sake of victory. You see, I don’t need to win nor do I need affirmation. There is a lot of good in my life and I share that good by doing for others.

You are not the only person crying out in the wilderness for what you call justice.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 06:40 PM | Link to this

Tadpole,

If someone was doing anything as often as what you accused me of, it certainly shouldn’t take pouring through weeks of posts to find it and there should be no doubt about whether you had me confused with someone else.

By finch

June 19, 2006 06:51 PM | Link to this

…but to attack the Washington Times based on ideology?

I’m so glad I got your attention, Suck. I don’t attack the Moonie Times for it’s so called “ideology”. I condemn it for it’s transparent agenda and it’s mind numbing duplicity.

Oh yes.. it’s owner is a traitor. I mean, a REAL traitor. Sun Myung Moon makes Cindy Sheehan look like Betsy Ross.

The lies and prevarications of the Moonie Times are all out there. Google is your friend.

Let’s just say that I don’t trust a “newspaper” owned by a North Korean born cult leader linked to Kim Jong-Il’s nuclear weapons and ICBM programs. You know, those weapons systems that can hit the US that he’s about to test? (Nyahh nyahh Saddam!)

I can’t trust a newspaper ruled by an ex con who funnels donations by the hundreds of millions of $$s from his sheeple to fringe rightwing US shell companies.

The Moonie Times has never made a dime in 25 years. “Reverend” Moon isn’t funding it out of the goodness of his heart. He’s the Messiah! Better than Jesus! And he knows exactly what’s best for you, doesn’t he?

And haven’t you ever wondered, just for a millisecond, how someone who was convicted and served time in the US for a felony, who has never sought US citizenship, and who can’t even speak English, somehow retains a Green Card??

I actually cheer when you quote and link to the Moonie Times. There are far more reputable conservative organs to tap, but you continue to associate with a “news” paper that no self respecting fish would want to find himself. Credibility?? Exit, stage right!

Is it nice being a zombie? A BushBot? Oh sorry, you wouldn’t know. You’ve lost the ability to think independently.

By Luchovich is a funny guy

June 19, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this

I’m detecting a shift in the Zeitgeist.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 07:01 PM | Link to this

For anyone that doesn’t feel like wading through the verbiage, finch just said that he has zero evidence to back his charges, but you should believe it anyway just because he said it.

Does it strike anyone as odd that someone would make such staunch allegations and can’t even provide one example of it. That seems to be a theme here today.

By Haha, General Seeker Capitulated

June 19, 2006 07:23 PM | Link to this

He tried a diversionary tactic, spinning in circles like a true democrat. We’re not fooled.

One simple article that the Washington Times has falsified, that’s all we are asking.

It shouldn’t be a big deal if what you say isn’t a bald faced lie.

By finch

June 19, 2006 09:51 PM | Link to this

Finding lies in the Moonie Times is easy. There’s this very recent story. June 8, 2006 to be exact:

Democrats call Zarqawi killing a stunt

That’s the Moonie Times headline the day after the Zarq-man was iced. Go ahead, click. It’s still there.

Only NO Democrat in Congress called it a stunt. Not even close.

The Times’ headline and opening sentence clearly report that “Democrats” think the killing was a stunt, and it’s the stunt angle that made the story so hot. Yet the best the Times can do is print a cut-up quote from a single Democrat who doesn’t even say the killing was a stunt? Pathetic.

This is just one recent example of how the Moonie Times warps, distorts, and just plain lies. There are so many others, but I’d rather not waste my time and yours pasting together a megaspam post.

Bottom line? The Moonie Times doesn’t just shade the news. Heck, all media outlets do that, even as they try not to. But the Moonie Times intentionally presents blatant falsehoods as truth. This explains why almost no one inside the Beltway buys it, reads it, or trusts it.

And no one here should trust anyone who posts anything from the neocon’s Pravda on the Potomac.

By RW-(the original)

June 19, 2006 10:16 PM | Link to this

finch,

Not a match the board goes back.

So your proof that the Washington Times is an evil entity that is passing off blatant lies as news is that the HuffPo points out that maybe “this” didn’t mean killing Zarqawi. What the heck do you suppose he meant when he was asked about the Zarqmans demise and he said “this” is just Bush covering his a-ss?

If misleading headlines is a problem for you, I hate to think how subversive you think the AP is.

By Oh, Poor General Seeker

June 20, 2006 04:31 AM | Link to this

I found the offensive quote by Pete Stark, democrat, from the Washington Times:

“This is just to cover Bush’s [rear] so he doesn’t have to answer” for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat.

To shorten this into a headline the WaTimes labeled what Stark said, “cover Bush’s rear,” and called it a “stunt.”

And?

Here’s some “labeled” headlines from your news sources “American troops massacre civilians at Haditha.”

I win. The Washington Times has more credibility then CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, NY Times and the AJC all rolled up in one.

But it is Conservative, hence the little pinko baby whining.

Sucks, don’t it?

By Peggy Davis

June 20, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this

What kind of strange, hyper moral police state are we headed into? The increase in indecency fines is a disturbing trend. Underlying the theme of the Christian right is an even more powerful economic motive.