Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2006 > October > 02 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USMake the call: Terrorists or criminals?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
For more than a decade — but most evidently and dramatically over the past five years — two distinct views have emerged as the defining difference in how we confront the evil that threatens.
It is, and has been since the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, a law enforcement problem, as then-President Bill Clinton defined it by words and deeds. Or it is, as President George W. Bush defines it with his words and deeds, a war on terrorism. Everything else, including last week’s debate in the U.S. House and Senate over legislation to establish military commissions, the rights of unlawful enemy combatants and the role of U.S. courts in intervening, flows from that key difference.
The difference roughly splits left and right, but on the legal issues raised last week a number of libertarians, who fall in between and who fear the power of Big Government to abuse the rights of its citizens, raised concerns about a failure to grant habeas corpus rights to foreign terrorists facing military tribunals.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) argued unsuccessfully that all persons held in U.S. custody, including noncitizens, should be granted the same rights as common thieves in this country. Three Republicans joined him and one Democrat, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, crossed over to oppose. The amendment failed, 51-48.
It initially appeared that three Senate Republicans — Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John Warner of Virginia and John McCain of Arizona — would muck it up. They seemed to provide cover to Democrats who on terrorism often sound like filmmaker Oliver Stone, who insisted at the San Sebastian International Film Festival on Thursday that the United States should fight terrorism “the same ways that the British fought the IRA or the Spanish government fought the Basques here” in Spain. In Stone’s view, and many on the left, “terrorism is a manageable action. It can be lived with.” He went off the deep end from there.
This hatred of Bush tempts most of the Democratic Party’s angry anti-war wing to make absurd statements and bad policy. The fear here was that Graham, Warner and McCain’s opposition on the tribunals, when combined with the understandable libertarian fear of Big Government and core Democratic opposition, would result in legislation that effectively destroyed their usefulness by subjecting everything from food to interrogation to endless litigation in federal courts. That would constitute mucking up the president’s bill and hamstringing this country’s efforts to prosecute terrorists.
In the end, however, Graham’s training as a military reserve legal officer proved valuable in drawing a real distinction between the laws of military conflict and those of domestic civil and criminal activity. As U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) noted afterward, “While this bill provides important rules of law procedures for illegal enemy combatants, it does not give them the same protections which we afford lawful enemy combatants or our own military personnel, and that is a critical distinction. That’s how it ought to be.”
That is a critical distinction and it is how it ought to be.
Without reinterpreting or defining the Geneva Conventions, which apply to nations and to their structured, uniformed military combatants — lawful combatants — the legislation takes a separate tact. It prohibits war crimes for the United States and defines prohibited interrogation techniques, but leaves to the president authority to approve other interrogation techniques that may be productive.
The bill draws a distinction between the rights of lawful combatants, unlawful combatants and U.S. citizens facing trial. The role of federal courts is clarified and limited. The rights of unlawful combatants facing military tribunals are cleared up. Congress, required by the U.S. Supreme Court to sanction the tribunals, has done its job, making clear that these are extensions of the battlefield, not U.S. criminal courts.
It is unfortunate that the nation cannot have an honest debate leading to either consensus or, absent that, a clear winner and loser on this critical question: Is the United States fighting a war on terrorism or an international criminal enterprise that has as its goal the arrest and prosecution in federal court of Osama bin Laden and others who can be found by evidence admissible in federal courts to have been hands-on responsible for specific acts?
We simply see the threats differently. Either the law enforcement view or the terrorism view has ultimately to prevail.
Permalink | Comments (245) | Post your comment | Categories: Column
Comments
By Th
October 2, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
How can you have an honest debate when you present a false choice? Battling terrorists will take both military action and police work. Police work will be preferable when possible because of its light touch with innocent civilians. Military action is preferable when speed of action or safety of our soldiers, CIA, etc. is too great to get close enough for an arrest.
The 9/11 hearings went round and round on the question of orders to the CIA regarding killing OBL. Clinton administration officials said the directive called for capturing OBL if possible and killing him if capture was not a good option. CIA officers said they were never given such a directive. The classified directive was given to the 9/11 Commission during the hearings, and after that, witnesses were stopped when they started to say they had not been given authorization to kill OBL. I guess the Clinton officials did issue the order, but it didn’t make it to the agents in the field.
Clearly paying an informant $25 million and bringing his family to the US after a pre-dawn raid on an apartment building was the preferable way to seize Sheik Mohammed over dropping a bomb on the building or an invasion and house to house search of the neighborhood.
The main disagreement I have with Wooten and others is how best to eliminate our threat from terrorists. I think we both agree that better security at home is a given. The question is how to keep people from becoming terrorists and get rid of those who already are. I would like to see the 14 super-terrorists recently transferred to Guantanamo tried in open court with Al-Jazerra broadcasting live. Kind of an international OJ trial. A billion people glued to their tv sets learning the American way of justice. They can contrast that with their home country’s justice system. We win by getting the vast majority of Muslims who have no beef with us to deny support to those who would do us harm. Look at the falling poll numbers for Al-Qaeda in Iraq when they started killing civilians instead of attacking Americans. Our major problem now in Iraq is we spend all our time trying to keep the Iraqis from killing each other. Our biggest problem with the terrorists is that they are everywhere and it takes all countries working together to find them and capture them. Our intelligence services, the FBI, immigration and airport security could have stopped 9/11 if they were all focussed and working together. The military could not when the highjackers were living all over the world including the US.
By getalife
October 2, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
time for the pervert,
Are you a member?
By Brian Curtis
October 2, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Terrorism is a law-enforcement issue, mainly because the only way to stop terrorist activity is with law-enforcement methods: investigation, intelligence-gathering, international coordination among police agencies, and so on.
You can’t fight terrorists with military action—as Iraq has overwhelmingly demonstrated.
By Th
October 2, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
Does Brent Scowcroft hate Bush? There are lots of people who disagree with the handling of war on terrorism that has nothing to do with our feelings about Bush. Are our legislators so stupid they can not write a bill giving detainees the opportunity to have their detention reviewed without opening the federal courts to absurd litigation?
By getalife
October 2, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Looking at the latest plot in England and 9/11 it is obviously a law enforcement issue. Intelligence agencies are the key to stopping the attacks.
The Supreme Court will send the torture bill back to Congress again because it is unconstitutional.
By Calling The Haters What They Are
October 2, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
racism –noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
Redneks?
Hater Trash?
By gop are pervert appeasers
October 2, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
“Republicans trusted a pedophile to protect your children from predators. Can you trust them to protect you from terrorism?”
By getalife
October 2, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
Just another cover up folks
Wake up, they do nothing then cover it up.
It is beyond me how Americans can vote for these people.
By candide
October 2, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
Hatred of Geo. Bush is the beginning of wisdom.
By CJ
October 2, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this
What gives Jim? We’re trying to have a conversation here. Couldn’t this post wait until tomorrow, so we can finish the conversation you started earlier this morning?
By WAR EAGLE
October 2, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this
He gop are: The country trusted a lying, woman cheating sex maniac to guard the country and the WTC got bombed, two embassies got bombed and our Navy ship got bombed and he did NOTHING except get his oil changed but an intern. Furthermore-the DEMOCRATS prevented his impeachment when he LIED UNDER OATH. Afterall it was just sex. Well, in this case-it was just words. Unless you are planning to bomb the Muslim terrorists off the planet, go back to hip hop world.
By Van
October 2, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this
While preventing terroristic acts fall into the realm of law enforcement, after the nation had been attacked, it moves out of law enforcement arena and into National Defence.
I can just see, the FBI knocking on a door in Kabul and executing a search warrent.
I would have to assume the looney left would rather us file charges against the Emperor of Japan for the attacks on the Naval Base at Pearl Harbor.
Calling the War on Terrorism a law enforcement activity is perhaps the dumbest thing I have ever heard of.
Anyone in combat against the US Military or its agents, lwaful combatants or not, should, according to the Geneva Convention, be held accountable under military law and Never civil rules of law.
By Van
October 2, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
candide,
Hate blinds oneself.
By candide
October 2, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this
Van, the gay christer, is at it again.
By gop are pervert enablers
October 2, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
…please enter the Chat Room with MAF54, Rush27, Hannity2, and 16yrold99…
MAF54: Hey, I’m wearing boxer shorts with little American Flags on them.
Rush27: You jackin’ it??? I’m wearing the same thing too!!!
Hannity2: This room is filled with Great Americans and Patriots!!!!!!!!!!!
By getalife
October 2, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
You should know Van.
By gop loves perverts
October 2, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this
Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself?
By getalife
October 2, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this
Why did the gop do this?
Pathetic.
By JK
October 2, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
Mr. Wooten, may God help our captured soldiers once the rest of the world realizes how far we have fallen off the fairness and human decency platform. Are you proud of yourself for your part in the trashing American core values? You really do care more about your party and your guy getting their way than about the troops, or that silly little thing we used to call “Right and Wrong.”
By Brian Curtis
October 2, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
JK: Thanks to the neocon philosophy, we’re moving away from questions of right and wrong, and over to “might makes right.”
Hopefully we’ll start to shift that balance in November.
By bloated liberalism
October 2, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
To aboslute morons who think Islamic terrorists are going to treat our soldiers with respect if we treat them with respect and don’t try to get information out of them: tell that to Nick Berg’s head.
By Th
October 2, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
The last I remember reading, the Japanese Emporer was surrounded by an army. We had to fight our way in to get him. We don’t have to fight our way into an apartment complex in Miami, so it is better handled as a police matter.
What recourse do the detainees have if the military refuses to do its job? We have held hundreds of people for 5 years and have only put 11 on trial. Who says these people were in combat against us? The military can’t put these people on trial because the only evidence we have against many of them are the confessions we beat out of them. Only 5% were captured by Americans. Who are the others? It is time for Congress to investigate and that will only happen when the Republicans are no longer in charge.
By Van
October 2, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this
JK,
Why do you not weep for the way they treat our soldiers and not whine about how we treat theirs?
By Van
October 2, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
Th,
As I said in an earlier post, preventing terrorism is a law enforcement problem. Going after the terrorists/combatants is a war zone is not.
By Van
October 2, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
candide,
How weak are you, one retort and you resort to name calling.
Now, I will response in like manner, did your friend with priviledges not kiss you this morning?
See, a semi-nasty repsonse and not one unkind word.
By JK
October 2, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
Why do you not weep for the way they treat our soldiers and not whine about how we treat theirs?
Van, What the frack are you talking about? Try to follow along, Sparky. Treating prisoners in US custody inhumanely only encourages the bad guys to treate OUR soldiers and citizens inhumanely. Do I have all the answers? Never claimed to. Do I worry about repercussions against Americans in peril? Yes I do.
Do not presume to know for whom I weep, old man. You know nothing of an ACTUAL human heart!
By Van
October 2, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
JK,
Slowly now, I have not heard any outrage about how the slime balls treat our military personnel, it seems the lefties are alright with the benevolent beheadings and executions without even a hearing.
It seems to be okay with the lefties when US servicemen and women are mutilated before or after they are killed.
What the lefties are in a snit about is how we treat those captured at Club Gitmo. They want them to get US citizen rights and priviliedges.
Since we are bound to the Geneva Convention by the Supreme Court, we can detain anyone captured until the hostilities are over.
So, once again, what is your beef?
By GodHatesTrash
October 2, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
While I myself have had sexual relations with thousands of consenting adult women from all the major races (while my prodigous appetite never seems to wane, my preferences do shift, sometimes black, somtimes white, occasionally even red and yellow) - my ancestry is 100% white European.
Yet I am accused of being racist toward mountain rednecks, who are largely white?
How silly of the redneck trash that makes such an accusation. Please point me to the scientific study that identifies Appalachians as a distinct race, otherwise, you should STFU you ignorant whiny liberal PC trash.
By JK
October 2, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
I have not heard any outrage about how the slime balls treat our military personnel
All the time, Van. Stop loss, extending tours indefinitely, squabbling over combat pay, cutting veteran’s benefits, not excluding Veterans from stricter bankruptcy bills even those who come back too maimed or wounded to provide for their families….
It seems to be okay with the lefties when US servicemen and women are mutilated before or after they are killed.
THAT IS A G-DD-MNED LIE, VAN. STOP LYING. Why would you have people believe that “lefties” rejoice in the harming of our troops? WHY? Are you SO insecure with the actual positions and actions of the incumbents you defend that you have to make up LIES? Here’s a tip, Sparky: Virtually all of us here are in agreement that the harming of American soldiers is a BAD thing. Hence, we are discussing the other points of the issue. Geez.
By GodHatesTrash
October 2, 2006 03:55 PM | Link to this
I am sick and tired of all the whiny liberal PC correct crowd that defend the degenerate culture of the American redneck.
Anyone with a brain in their head and an ounce of a decent education knows that redneck culture has more in common with ape culture than human society.
Stop defending trash.
By VOICE OF REASON
October 2, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
I see that many are not really interested in facts only name calling, verbally bashing others and making unfounded and unfair accusations. I am disappointed but not surprised by my Democratic brethren’s venom, more and more it seems to be the mantra of the Democratic Party…’deny, deflect and verbally destroy’ anyone and anything in your way, these people you so viciously attack, Republicans, are our fellow citizens the majority of them like ourselves are fine upstanding citizens who love and care for their families and their country. Only some of our ideas differ and there is nothing wrong with differing opinions, it is only those who say they hate you because you believe differently that are silly and dangerous. Its the extremists and bigots on BOTH sides that keep this Nation divided and I for one and sick and tired of them spewing their venom. Until we stand up to these extremists trouble makers and let them know they will not divide us then we will forever let them control our thoughts and feelings and the unfair bashing and verbal attacks will continue. No, I say no to you, Republican AND Democrat who are so immature, uneducated and so bent on destroying America that you resort to the rant and rave bully tactics of Nazi Germany.
By Middle America
October 2, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
My question to Jim Wooten is: Which method has resulted in the thwarting of potential terrorist attacks? My sense is it is the use of intelligence and good police work that has kept another attack from occurring on American soil. The London plane plot. Any number of domestic plots. The arrests of terrorists in Pakistan. None of these have been the result of some military action. What people like Wooten and the Bush administration fail to realize is that terrorists aren’t some army on the battlefield that can’t move around without being spotted. Terrorists live and move among the civilian population. That’s what makes intelligence and good police work the key component in foiling these plots. It also highlights the need to win the hearts and minds of people that the terrorists are hiding in and around. These people need to see a benefit to them for giving tips, and not just because Bush says so. As long as the moderate Islamic world views the US as unconcerned with their issues, they have no incentive to help us find terrorists. Intelligence and good police work. Not an army and bombs.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
October 2, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this
It was George Dumbya Bush that made 9/11 a war instead of a crime, elevating the status of the terrorists from criminals to soldiers.
When he calls common criminals soldiers, he not only raises their status, but lets us know what he really thinks about our soldiers too, since in a war a soldier is a soldier is a soldier.
JK, Van has his head way up his a—ss on this one, even farther than usual.
By Van
October 2, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this
JK,
The lefties seem to rejoice that it is going bad(when it isn’t) in Iraq.
It just seems strange to me, when people come back and say how great things are going in Iraq and then you here some empty headed democrat claim the opposite.
If the human turds in turbans were to treat our service people decently, then perhaps we might grant the detainees at Gitmo, an extra hour of free time on the pitch.
The constant drumbeat from the lefties has succeeded in fewer people enlisting, even though we are meeting our goals every month. Legislation has not been passed to authorize an increase in the number of active duty personnel the different branches can have.
If the lefties were to help the military instead of doing all it can to hinder the troops, I might have more sympathy for the pieces of human garbage we are fighting.
In this upcoming elections, who will you vote for - someone who will make it harder to win the war on terror or someone who will make it harder on the terrorist plotting to harm civilians.
By gop loves perverts
October 2, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
Here is the pervert with macaca
By Van
October 2, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this
Pope rednecks - Amerikkka’s Al Qaeda,
What do you call destroying two US embassies? How about attacking a military vessel?
Are these crimes or acts of war? Heck, even Bubba Clinton says he was ready to attack.
If they are crimes, then we have to set jurisdiction. In their countries were their actions crimes? Maybe not. After all, it is sactioned by some religious leaders as a justified jihad.
Regarding jurisdiction, how far does the US’s extend outside our borders? When Afganistan refused to turnover the planners of 9/11, was that it, was that all we could do? Ask nicely and then wait?
No, acts of war, embassy grounds are considered, by international treaties, as sovereign territory. So, according to you, if our country is attacked by outside forces, it is a matter for the police and not the military, it is a crime and not a matter of National Defence.
By Th
October 2, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this
Van; we agree then as to when it should be a military campaign and when a law enforcement effort. We do not know who these people are in our custody at Guantanamo. We are not cheering for disaster in Iraq, but we have no control over what the butchers do to our soldiers. Should we preface every post with a denunciation of the terrorists? We are not winning. “Stay the course” is slow motion defeat and Kissinger is the perfect advisor to lead the way. My far right wing relatives were grumbling about Iraq two years ago, so don’t talk defeatism with us. Tell your side to sign up. I’ll put the “lefties” up against your side any day as to who has done more for the troops from body armor to VA funding to demanding accountability for leadership errors.
By Joe L
October 2, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
So according to Van’s logic the U.S. is now at war with all white males since two of them bombed a federal building, clearly an act of war. Since I’m guessing that probably describes Van himself I’m thinking he’s in for a little more than normal cognitive dissonance. But it will pale to the torture he will experience when held without trial or accusation as an “enemy combatant”.
You can only be at war with a sovereign state. To think that the military can be used effectively except in the narrowest of cases against anything but a standing army is to ignore the numerous lessons of history (which neocons ignore or re-write to their own liking anyway).
By JK
October 2, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
Van, I can only speak for myself: My PRIMARY concern with abandoning the standards of the Geneva Convention is the safety of OUR soldiers. The overall morality or effectiveness of it is up for debate, but the constant claims by people like you that we don’t care about the troops is beyond stale; it’s RANCID. We ALL want to “help” the military. Defining how, to a consensus, is where we (as a people) get stuck. You do nothing to foster an understanding or consensus because you LIE about your fellow Americans. Stop LYING about our hearts and minds, and maybe someone will listen to your logic and reason, if you actually have any.
By Van
October 2, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this
Th,
You’er right, we do not know who they are, but the military does and that is why they are at Gitmo in the first place.
Regarding our fine folks in uniform, I wore mine back in the 60’s and 70’s. That is why I am so down on the lefties today - I saw your kind back then and I see the same sh*t today, the same behavior of the left and the same attitude of, if it gets too bad over there, we can force them to withdraw, just like the 70’s.
By Joe L
October 2, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
JK - I am the child of 20 year vet of the military and you will not find a more ardent supporter of our servicemen anywhere else. But I don’t think this bill will have any effect on the safety of our troops. It will however, degrade our principles and soil the ultimate sacrifice that millions of Americans have paid to protect those principles.
And it will diminish our standing in the world and our ability to win the ideological war that will determine who survives our current struggle.
And despite all of that on a personal level it makes us no better than those we would rightfully label as scum by resorting to tactics that are no better than theirs.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
October 2, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this
Van,
I watched a movie over the weekend involving Quantrell’s Raiders.
They were criminals, hiding under a rag of a flag. The told everyone they were soldiers. Even after the war ended, they kept up their crime wave, true to their nature.
Al Qaeda doesn’t even have a country as filthy as the CSA to claim. They are criminals.
By Joe L
October 2, 2006 05:02 PM | Link to this
Van - There is a HUGE difference between people who are left of center, people who are against a particular conflict, and people who are rabidly anti-military. Unfortunately you refuse to be intellectually honest and objective enough to separate that the last group is only about 5% of the first two groups.
There have already been many, many people released from Gitmo who were illegitimately detained and completely innocent. To think that the government or military can never make a mistake is blind loyalty and stupidity. Our system is designed to ensure that our actions are legitimate. In many cases detainees are nothing more than people rounded up by NON-U.S. forces for personal vendettas.
By Van
October 2, 2006 05:05 PM | Link to this
JK,
You have more concern about the enemy than you have for our troops.
If “safety of OUR soldiers” is you primary concern, the do something that will help them. When was the last time you sent letters of encouragement, helped put together care packages or supported your elected representatives in funding the war effort.
Have you donated to the USO, has you favorite hollywood liberal movie star done over and helped cheered up the troops? Where have you been.
Peaceniks = liberal = anti-war = anti-military = pond scum.
Good night, talk to you tomorrow.
By Th
October 2, 2006 05:20 PM | Link to this
Van, the military does not know who they areread the last three paragraphs. As the military lawyer who fought his superiors and took the Hamdan case to the Supreme Court said,”This is not about them; this is about us.” I’m sorry you still have such a chip on your shoulder about thirty years ago, but it was your leaders who let you down, not me. There seems to be this theory some people are holding onto like some kind of life saver that you really won in Vietnam, but liberals snatched victory away from you. Nixon ran in 1968 and 1972 on the platform of getting out of Vietnam. Bush has been given every dime and every soldier he has asked for and we are losing badly. Don’t try to lay his failure at my feet.
By Southern Democrat
October 2, 2006 05:26 PM | Link to this
I write this post with a tinge of anger. I am simply sick and tired of many members of the right (including posters on this blog) trying to place a monopoly on fear and hatred and use it to political advantage. Out of curiosity, Mr. Wooten, do you believe that the Department of Homeland Security should be eliminated as we are solely in a “war on terror”? Shouldn’t we rely on our Department of Defense to fight wars? So far all this Administration has done is ignore the Pentagon’s studies on how to fight the war in Iraq and how to stabilize both that nation and Afghanistan, opting instead to follow the policies laid out by President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove, and Secretary Rumsfeld who have a combined total of ZERO days of combat service. Mr. Wooten, as a combat veteran, does their continued emasculation of the Pentagon not drive you mad???
Also, Mr. Wooten’s question brings up an opportunity to turn the tables on the right for a little bit… I have heard my conservative friends say for years and years to Democrats, How will you pay for ____? Well, my conservative friends, how will YOU pay to fight two conflicts, have the largest bureaucracy in history, not raise taxes, and protect this nation? It’s not adding up.
My conservative friends continually laud our President for being a strong leader and say, “Aren’t we lucky that Gore didn’t win?”
I offer:
Would a strong leader not ask the country to sacrifice to fight terrorism, but instead tell them to “go about their daily lives”?
Would a strong leader allow North Korea and Iran to make a mockery of our ability to prevent the development of nuclear weapons?
Would a strong leader allow natural disasters to sap the life of an entire region and stand idly by, not understanding the scope of the situation?
Would a strong leader run roughshod over our Constitution, knowing that the right thing is not always the easiest thing, and that our Founding Fathers specifically limited the powers of government, knowing that the risk of abuse of liberty was better than the abuse of power?
The GOP has shown me NOTHING in the past 5 years that tells me they have a serious plan to make this country safer and are willing to ask the citizens of the U.S. to sacrifice to do so. Sadly, the Democrats have shown less than that.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this
By Hater Trash Bigot October 2, 2006 12:30 AM | Link to thisAJC is Filthy thinks I’m a racist because Georgia mountain folks are ugly idiots? “Mountain folk” is not a race, clown. The genetic deformities and abnormalities found in the Georgia mountain population are tragic and disgusting, but in no way should mountian folk be considered a separate race. In fact, there are a sizable number of mountain folks that have Native American and African genes.
Yep:
By Hater Trash Bigot October 2, 2006 03:44 PM While I myself have had sexual relations with thousands of consenting adult women from all the major races (while my prodigous appetite never seems to wane, my preferences do shift, sometimes black, somtimes white, occasionally even red and yellow) - my ancestry is 100% white European. Yet I am accused of being racist toward mountain rednecks, who are largely white?
Whatever:
rac‧ism- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
It’s just a fact, jack.
I guess the only way the liberal will see the error of their hate is when some Republican gets caught disparaging rednecks, then it will be an outrage within the pinko nation, with much wailing and gnashing of their gold crowned teeth.
By Mid-South Philosopher
October 3, 2006 08:10 AM | Link to this
Good morning, Jim,
The difficulty with this issue is that the President and the Congress have framed this conflict as a “War on Terror.” It is NOT!
It is a war on the “practitioners of Islamic Fanaticism,” in other words…the “Islamists, who use “terror” as a tactic.
That philosophical argument aside, I favor the legislation that the Congress enacted last week with the exception of one point. I do not believe the Congress or the President have the right to suspend Habeas Corpus under the current circumstances…even to unlawful combatants. To do that in the manner that this law endeavors, in my judgment will require a constitutional amendment. Ultimately, the Supreme Court will rule on this part of the legislation and we will learn if Roberts, Alito, Thomas, and Scalia are “constitutional originalists” or, as Ann Coulter would like, “conservative activists.”
Now, as for the war…our fundamental failure has been to NOT “punish” the “enablers.” We do not have the courage to exact a price from those that, while they are not actively engaged in the efforts against us, are providing aid and comfort to the enemy. Specifically, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria, and Iran fall into this group.
Of course, we are too weak, conventionally, to exact a price. Our conventional forces are stretched thinner now than at any time since just before the outbreak of the Korean War. That is both the fault of Democrats and Republicans.
We have a fundamental decision to make. Either we will reinstate the draft and build a conventional force of 2,000,000 combat troops, or we will commit to the use of “tactical” nuclear weapons in future battlefield scenarios.
Either choice is frightening.
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this
Good morning, all. I think there was much wisdom in Th’s first post yesterday @ 11:41, although I reach some differing conclusions. I disagree with most of the polemic by my friend Southern Democrat @ 5:26.
Th is correct when arguing that we need both police and military solutions. I always believe the wisdom of the ages follows our Jewish brothers, and since 1948 the correct solution for Israel has been a mixture of police and military work. In all fairness to the Clintonistas, I was not smart enough to know we were in a war before 9/11, and there is no reason they should have been smart enough to know it either. I think nobody can intelligently disagree now that we are in a war, for freedom. The Islamists intend to take your precious civil liberties, and until you leftists grow a spine, you risk losing all.
Jim Wooten correctly analyzes the Congressional action, in that we now have an informed distinction among lawful combatants, unlawful combatants, and the American citizenry. The left’s continuing incapacity to grasp the difference staggers me. The notion that “how we treat them” will make some difference in how they treat our men is dumb; these are rabid animals we fight. Unlawful combatants do not merit protection under our Constitution. I would prefer to see them executed on capture, but more intelligent people than I believe there is sometimes information to obtain. I don’t know how to fight a war, so I yield to that informed judgment.
Immediately after the 9/11 attack, Bush – with masterful understatement – noted that this war would be unlike any other, and would last a long time. I continue to argue that this will be a multigenerational ideological war, similar to the war we won against the communist ideology.
Much as the Clintons pursued the early portion of the current war exclusively as a “police matter,” that war against communism began primarily as police work. You will recall that the leftists then had little appetite for honest police work then, and even today revile the most effective early domestic policemen, Nixon and McCarthy. I do not lack understanding of the leftists’ wish, “that we all just get along;” I simply believe the wish is untenable.
By Scooter
October 3, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this
The way I see it is a law enforcement problem is a short term solution and nation building is a longer term solution. If we incarcerate a terrorist it will simply invoke more kidnappings and proposed deals for the capture’s release.
The Middle East has sat in a state of poverty, despair and hopelessness that was largely created by their rulers, with a little help from the colonizing Europeans. The rulers have successfully diverted all the blame onto the Jews and the West. While I don’t like the way Israel’s location seems to block “Palestine” from access to the Mediterranean, do we really think that if Israel was not in the Middle East they would progress to happiness and contentment? I think not. To establish a representative government that is limited in its powers should allow free people to create their own success and happiness while placing the blame where it belongs. This would be a long term strategy to quell the creation of terrorists, unfortunately we Americans and our politics do not lend ourselves to long term solutions.
By Jim Wooten
October 3, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this
Morning Philosopher, jbmlaw and all. Another day of interviewing political candidates awaits. It’s up to the cooler heads here to keep conversation from spinning out of control again today.
By Brian Curtis
October 3, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this
Van, the reason you don’t see a ton of American criticisms of “what the bad guys are doing” is because we have no control over what THEY do.
The only forces we can control are our own. The only rules we can set are the ones WE follow… and those are based on our nation’s values, regardless of what others do.
Read that again: regardless of what others do. We’re not playing the relativism game here. America simply refuses to engage in torture, for example, even though our enemies do far worse. We don’t lock people up without evidence, charges, or counsel, even though our enemies do far worse. It literally Does Not Matter how bad our enemies are, or what tactics they use. What matters is how we conduct ourselves.
That’s what values means. And how sad is it that we’ve reached the point that America needs to be reminded of that?
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this
Scooter @ 8:44 intelligently touches on a great question: can any democracy ever sustain a long-term strategy, on anything? Certainly at least half of the United States has no appetite for any war that lasts longer than two months. Political ADD may yet be the end of our culture.
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
Brian @ 9:09, you err in part - prisoners of war have never been entitled to due process. I appreciate your emphasis on morality, however, and generally agree. Other than preservation of this beacon of freedom, nothing is more important.
By Van
October 3, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this
Brian Curtis,
The problem is, no matter how we act, they will act the same.
We can either be wussies or instill a strong sense of fear in the prisoners. Take your pick.
By Brian Curtis
October 3, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this
JBM: Thank you. That’s why you’ll never see me making the “practicality” arguments of “we need to be nice so our enemies will be nice to us” or “we can all get along.”
Actually, I’ve never seen ANYone make those arguments. My stance is that America has a set of values controlling what our government (and military) will and will not do, period. And whether our enemies do the same or far worse matters not in the least.
By peter
October 3, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this
Dear Jim…….your Cooler heads comment seems funny………..
As per ususal, you have tried to split Americans………Right or Left…..
There was one guy who wrote about the “Strong President”, and his real lack of leadership, and he also mentioned the Democrates don’t really have a plan, and I agree with him on that topic as well…..
Why are all your debates stemming from a place of bashing one political side from the another?
Can’t your topics be presented in a way that thoughtful folks can discuss your subject, without making it another way to split Americans?
Can come up with a topic, or start a discussion to UNITE Americans…….are we not all in this together?
No man or woman is better than the one sitting next to them, but if America is to survive, it seems we will need to work together.
By Redneck Convert
October 3, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
I say we bring back the draft and put about 5 million men in the military. I woulda joined myself, but they gave a written test and dropping out of school in the 5th grade hurt me on it. I never could get the hang of the multiplying tables. Besides, my pile-on cyst was acting up at the time.
Course, that don’t mean others can’t go. My guess is Time for the Truth, Realist, and Markus would look real good in a uniform. I’d love to see a DI slap Time and Markus silly for mouthing off real nasty. And Van could go back in. They would probly have something even Barbara could do, like cleaning barracks and cooking.
With a real big army, we can bust into houses all over this country and arrest the libruls that are traiters to the US of A. Who cares about these rights that the libruls talk about? I’ll take living over rights any day. If I ain’t alive, I can’t go to Billy Bob’s or the bowling alley to do my patriotic duty.
I’m getting real tired of us rednecks getting slammed on this blog. We outnumber other groups in the Republican party. I’ll remember being called trash when me and the missus goes to vote for Sonny next month.
Well, I’m off on vacation. Me and the missus is going to Panama City. I got ten cases of beer in the truck, and I reckon it will all fit in the tent when we put it up. That is, if the missus slims down a little. She’s still gobbling down the food on account of being upset from the mention of Mark Taylor the other night. Got the beer from my own beer truck. It’s rotgut stuff like Heineken and Guinness, but at least it’s free. You can’t always have Pabst and Shlitz.
By the way, I heard this Foley fellow is really OK. He just wanted to fool with the pages a little on account of he got mixed up. He got misled by Clinton. It’s all Clinton’s fault. Remember that. Whatever goes wrong for the Republicans, it’s Clinton’s fault.
See you in a week or so.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this
Is this how you want to fight terrorism?
Talk about cut and run terrorist appeaser.
Shees.
By peter
October 3, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
Brian Curtis, you remark about the US not locking up people without evidence is totally false……….
I have a best buddy from college in Connecticut, his sister married an Italian guy 20 plus years ago, they owned a house in Branford, and he owned a restaurant in West Haven, they have two kids together.
He was in Itally visting family when 911 happened, he came back, was arrested and spent over 3 months in jail before they let him out…..he was not a terriorist.
By Van
October 3, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
Mid-South Philosopher, Re: your 08:10 AM
I would agree with you about Habeas Corpus, if this was trweated like a law enforcement problem. If law enforcement breaks up a terror cell before they commit a terroristic act, then you are right, Habeas Corpus would allow them to be fully notified of what crime they are being held on.
Capturing a person, in combat, firing at your people, knows damn well why he was captured, he goofed up and picked a bad fight - he is not charged with a crime, but he is a prisoner of war, or for being an unlawful combatant, and can be detained until the hostilities are over.
By Jim Wooten's Biggest Fan
October 3, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
Bush talks about a grand ideological struggle, in which the goal is to protect the American People. He should just protect his pages from his own senators.
The only productive thing Bush has done in the middle east is to promote Musharaff’s new book at a press conference last week.
Fact: Osama Bin Laden demanded that Bush cut-and-run from Saudi Arabia. Bush cut-and-ran. Bush is a very obedient boy. Osama must have said, “Simon (and Shuster) says….”
By getalife
October 3, 2006 09:42 AM | Link to this
The accountability for the pervert Foley will get the ball rolling in the right direction.
There will be a record breaking number of politicians going to prison and the Dems should win in a landslide.
Make no mistake, the gop are bad people and even worse Americans.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
Brian is correct
I hope the Supreme Court does its job again and send this garbage back to Congress.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
By Redneck Convert October 3, 2006 09:36 AM I say we bring back the draft and put about 5 million men in the military. I woulda joined myself, but they gave a written test and dropping out of school in the 5th grade hurt me on it. I never could get the hang of the multiplying tables.
You may want to look into this, genius, but I’m pretty sure the Atlanta City schools are the ones dragging down Georgia SAT scores.
By Interested Observer
October 3, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
Jim:
An interesting thought experiment, but I think you’re starting from the wrong angle. Your question posits that a policy for fighting terrorism should be judged on its intentions rather than its results. I think we should ask, rather, what is a more effective way of fighting terrorism? (Acknowledging that, to a certain degree, terrorism will always be with us).
For the United States to declare what Bush has termed a “global war on terrorism,” what does that mean? Are we obligated to fight terrorist groups in parts of the world that have no agenda against us or present no threat to us?
I guess it depends on how you judge the results of the past five years vs. the policies of previous years, and to what you ascribe the motivations of groups like al Qaeda. Do they hate us simply because we’re Americans and because of our values, or are we hated because of our policies in the Middle East (supporting repressive, corrupt dictatorships in Saudi Arabia and other countries)?
Judging our success against fighting terrorism is a tricky thing. We shouldn’t put too much stock in the fact that we haven’t been attacked in five years; al Qaeda operates on a very different timetable than we do, and the next attack could be at any time. And, to your point, while we didn’t pursue terrorism in the 90s with the vigor and decisive action Bush is pursuing it today, we also had an escalation in our commitment to our military presence in the Middle East (from 1991 on) and became more dependent on Middle Eastern sources of oil.
So I guess it’s just too early to tell how successful the policies of the past 5 years have been, and whether they will generate the results I think we could all agree are desirable — defeating terrorism and making our homeland safe.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
Lets get one thing straight rednekkks NAMBLA/goddepisesyankeetrash and the other constant multi ids from this very sick freakshow is actually not “a racist” but it is undeniably “a bigot”.
Its unremitting putrid bile against white southerners is classic KKK like knuckle dragging bigotry.
By Dusty
October 3, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this
Peter,
Your thoughts are well meant I’m sure. But this is a blog for political debate. Have you ever heard of a debate with only one side? I believe that is called a sermon or something similar. Jim is trying to ferret out thoughts from both sides of the political arena. Got any new ideas?
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this
Looks like the pro-incest, pro-lazy, pro-bestiality, pro-STD, pro-bastard, pro-welfare, pro-inbreeding, pro-alcholism, pro-meth, pro-filth whiny PC liberals are after me gain for pointing out the obvious.
Somebody take out the trash.
By Michael
October 3, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this
Attacking Iraq to end terrorism was on par with bombing Italy to wipe out the Mafia. Terrorists are orginized criminals and use the same techniques on the civilians around them to keep them from talking to police. Currently, the only effective examples that have worked against them have all been law enforcement.
By Brian Curtis
October 3, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this
Peter: I know it’s false. That’s why the group currently running things are anti-American at their core, and it’s why they need to be voted out ASAP.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this
By GodHatesTrash October 3, 2006 10:04 AM Looks like the pro-incest, pro-lazy, pro-bestiality, pro-STD, pro-bastard, pro-welfare, pro-inbreeding, pro-alcholism, pro-meth, pro-filth whiny PC liberals are after me gain for pointing out the obvious. Somebody take out the trash.
Looks like some bigot is upset about us pointing out the obvious, too.
Racism has been used to justify social discrimination, racial segregation and violence, including genocide.
No better than the KKK, no better than Hitler, scumbag.
Revile in your own filth.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
Sick Willie lied through its sexual predator teeth in that Fox interview. Sick Willie glibly talked tough about “killing” bin laden but had NO legal right to do so at that point he was refering to. Sick Willie lied about needing the CIA and others to ‘certify’ bin laden was responsible for other attacks before he could do anything - another pathetic sexual predator lie. Butch Reno’s Dept of Injustice had actually already indicted bin laden so sick Willie could have moved against bin laden when he was “offered him in Sudan” without any further legal niceties needed. Sick Willie tried to have it both ways through the usual method of outrageous lies.
Sick Willie is one of the vilest corrupt perverted Americans ever to hold office. He lied about DICK Clarke - CLarke wasn’t “demoted” at all - he simply didn’t get the promotion he was looking for in the newly formed DHS and then became yet another sullen embittered Bush hater. Sick Willie claimed there was a comprehensive plan for dealingw ith bin laden/terrorism? Where the hell is it??? It was ILLEGALLY stolen by the bulbous inadequate coward Sandy Burglar stuffed down his trousers. So the wrold wouldn’t see just how inadequate and pathetic the sick Willie era so called plan was!!
Sick Willie oversaw a massive reduction in military spending and militray capability. Sick Willie neutered the CIA and other agencies by the “wall” preventing mutual cooperation.
Sick Willie utterly failed America and is far more responsible for 9/11 than any other single politician.
ANSWER THIS QUESTION DEMONCRATS!!
Why is it that its only pinko liberal run cities that are “sanctuary” cities for illegal immigrants?
One of the 19 towel head hijackers was nicked for speeding just 2 days before the attacks but was let go because the plod were ordered BY THEIR PINKO POLITICAL MASTERS not to pursue immigration violations.
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
Dear Michael @ 10:08, al-Zarqawi could not be reached for comment.
By peter
October 3, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this
Dusty…….thank you for not beating me up for my comments……..
I think the subects/ debates are good in general, but why can’t the questions be reworded, to ask……..
“How can we as Americans with political differences, come to work together, to solve what ever issues you want to debate?”
It seems Jim likes to take his “right wing attitude”, first a derogitary remark about the other side, then ask the question.
For instance, he would make a comment…..the “other side” would like to see the “President Fail”…….well as Americans, his failure is “OURS” as a country, failing both parties, and independents as well………
So I see fighting words, and words of spliting the landscape, as compared to words of unity that leeds to dicussion without the name calling, and harrasment of the “other side” just because the do have an opinion!
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this
Uneducated redneck morons evidently think “redneck” is a race. Once again, you whiny liberal PC scumbags, show me the scientific text where “redneck” is a racial category. Until then - shut your pieholes.
A degenerate culture is NOT a race. I find it ironic that many of you whiny PC liberals advocate the murder of Mohammedans you are scared of what you perceive to be their degenerate culture and violent anti-social beliefs, when we have serious problems closer to home that we refuse to deal with at all. Thousands of decent Americans are murdered each year by drunken or angry rednecks, and the numbers only get worse each year.
Stupid trash.
By Michael
October 3, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
Dear Michael @ 10:08, al-Zarqawi could not be reached for comment.
Note the word “effective” in the original post. Killing al-Zarqawi accomplished what in the great scheme of stopping terrorism? Well, I will admit it made me feel better to know he was dead. But all in all… not a thing changed. Another guy stepped up, their operations continued and they consider him a martyr to the cause.
Consider also that he was found based on techniques used in law enforcement.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
Reality check.
The gop can’t protect the pages from their own perverts.
How in the world do you think they can protect you from terrorism?
Get real folks. They can’t be trusted. Period.
By JK
October 3, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
Van, Re: your repeated slander of me at 5:05 yesterday: I took out my Bronze Star last night. (Heroic or Meritorious Achievement, in case you’ve never seen one up close) Its value is far more to me than any diamond or gold in the drawer. The man whose conduct on the battle field earned the medal, and who later “conferred” it upon me, never doubted my loyalty, love, respect, or patriotism. Because you served in a time that cracked the hearts and minds of so many, and becaue HE would instruct me to do so, I FORGIVE YOU.
Btw, my care packages ROCK!
By Van
October 3, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
getalife,
What happened to the Democratic tolerance for Gays and their lifestyle? After all pedophilia is just another alternative lifestyle?
Should we remove all gays from Congress because they might be closet pedophiles?
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this
Luckovich’s cartoon today points out the unholy convergence between the GOP and redneck “family values”.
Rednecks are invariably perverts. Witness Clinton and Monica, and Dumbya and Gannon/Guckert and Rove, Lynn Cheney, etc. etc.
Trash.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
By GodHatesTrash October 3, 2006 10:33 AM Uneducated redneck morons evidently think “redneck” is a race. Once again, you whiny liberal PC scumbags, show me the scientific text where “redneck” is a racial category. Until then - shut your pieholes.
Hitler threw homosexual and mentally retarded Germans into the oven, just the same as you would do.
Bigot.
Racist.
Revile in your own filth.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
Yep, they knew 9/11 was coming
Van, Once again, don’t trust them. Period.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this
Nice try Van
It is the cover up stupid!
Hasturd must go.
By Van
October 3, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
JK,
Your forgiveness is touching, but do we both agree then that our troops need our support. Not critizism, not half-hearted support, but our full support.
By Jim Wooten's Biggest Fan
October 3, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
Point of order: Now where can you two debaters go from here?
See how you have blocked yourselves off into a corner?
The only move you have left is name calling escalation until you both agree that you’re both equivalent morons. (Gee, we’ve never seen that before)
Try, as Jim Wooten has pleaded, to tone it down.
Here’s a writing tip: Always delete your first draft. All of it. I dont care how many pulitzer prize worthy sentences you think you might lose, just get rid of it. Then write another draft. Delete that too.
Then go stick your head in the toilet.
By Van
October 3, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
getalife,
When I look at all the democrats that rallied around Bubba Clinton and Barney Frank, and all the Republicans that haven’t rallied around Foley - I guess the conclusion was clear.
A democrat in a scandle is supported and a republican is left to face his/hers responsibilities alone.
By Brian Curtis
October 3, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Van: Depends on what the scandal is, now doesn’t it? Having an affair isn’t a crime; molesting little boys is.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
feminazi JK … why the overnight obsession with Van and this topic? Clearly it must have been grinding away at you!!
Why the seemingly very anal, emotive defence of something on a cyber forum that really is of NO consequence to anyone else?
Clearly you have some very troubling misandrist and self esteem issues that need resolving!!
By getalife
October 3, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this
Van,
The troops need more help and honest, competent leadership.
Once again, the gop supports perverts not the troops.
Frist supports the taliban and you support Frist.
You are a pervert, terrorist appeaser.
Pathetic, shameful unAmerican.
By Jim Wooten's Biggest Fan
October 3, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
Rosie O’donald on “the View” today was talking about the Amish Schoolhouse murders, and dissing the NRA. The conservative, but pretty talking head sitting next to her, said, “What if the teachers had brought guns that day too?”
Rosie asked, “are you proposing that we arm the teachers?”
The pretty blonde said, “I’m not saying arm the teachers…”
YES YOU ARE!! THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID YOU DIZZY DUMB BLONDE!!!!!!
This is a capsule of the right’s dialogue since 911. They say one thing and then immediately spin it in the opposite direction making Americans so dizzy, we dont know where the truth is.
Impeach Bush.
By Dusty
October 3, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
Well, Peter
I don’t know whether I agree with you or not. Your idea of thoughtful debate is commendable. I try for it myself sometimes. But you see what happens? Hardly anyone pays attention to good thought here. And Jim knows that. He has to throw in a little excitement (revenge) or whatever to get the interest going.
I realize that I am preaching against my own standards. Sometimes I quit posting because the bitterness is habit forming. (See Rednecks if you don’t believe it.)
Anyway, keep aiming for the right things and no hate. I’ll try to do the same. (But don’t look at Luckovich’s cartoons or you will lose all your good intentions.)
By Janine
October 3, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
VAN As much as I would like to see this Foley thing go away,I don’t think we can seriously compare the gravity of the Clinton or Frank offenses with this one. Whenever a child is involved , we move into a totally different arena.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this
brainless curtis is despicably intellectually dishonest YET again
sick willie did far more than “just have an affair” - he engaged in oral sex/sexual harassment of women in the oval office - pathologically lied about it - tried to cover it up by coaching witnesses, lied on oath to a grand jury and repeatedly to the American people and so on. bwarnbey fwank was helping with the pimping a homosexual sex ring out of tax payer funded premises, then there was also that other Mass homosexual who had sex with a page boy and was only “censured” and this leftist poof refused to resign, unlike Foley!
brianless curtis’ pathetic twisting of the facts is as ever hugely amusing.
By Captain Freedom
October 3, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this
Van wrote Should we remove all gays from Congress because they might be closet pedophiles?
Van, as always, is really onto something here. But in his weakeness, he does not go far enough.
We should, like the Satanic Catholics, require a vow of celibacy of our public servants. Even the strongest heterosexual male can be tempted by urges that might be seen by some as unusual, or even perverted. So, we also need to ban all practicing heterosexuals from politics, too, as evidenced by the uncontrolled lust of the Clenis and his saphhic bride.
(We all know that heterosexual females are of no cencern, as they usually need to be bribed or cajoled into sex anyway. At least that is the Captain’s experience.)
Anything less leaves our nation at risk of descending into a soddomite’s vision of bliss. So, we Republicans need to get out in front of this and declare our vow of celibacy so all this snark about the Grand Old Pedophile party can by spanked into submission.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
typical despicable liberal hypocrisy over Foley unveiled
By harold
October 3, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
harolds says osamba just needs back on the cia payroll like during the reagan years when afghanistan was fighting USSR and bin laden was paid U.S. CIA agent. then he be happy again and not blowing s** up. its because we turned on him that he got angry. make nice nice and terrorism go away. oh except iraq too late. criminal? definitely. teh USA takes cirminal actions and breeds resentment and eventully terraism. ye reap what ye sow (john 6:13)
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
Dear Michael @ 10:37, certainly you define anything as meaningless until, as Jim posited last week, “the death of the last terrorist.” You can castigate the military for using even those techniques employed by police departments to minimize their accomplishments. But you seemingly willingly overlook who is doing the heavy lifting. Don’t do that. Your patronizing attitude gives us (conservatives) all the bash-room we need to accuse you of undermining the war; don’t make it easy for us. Laud the medal winners, cheer when bad guys die, and we will not be able to accuse you of non-support.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
L Cpl Syphilis slithers out once more from its leftist sexual predator enabling cesspool.
The always flaccid spined L Cpl is so pathetic that even the black hookers on Metropolitan Ave as he still eagerly calls it always give him an automatic refund - out of both pity and contempt!!
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
Dear Brian @ 11:21, you believe that perjury in a civil suit is not a crime. Leftism at work, what is the meaning of “is?”
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
it seems Harold has been drinking at least as much as Foley has and urgently needs a medicare funded ticket into the same rehab unit!!
By JK
October 3, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this
Here’s my idea for better supporting the troops: (1) Raise taxes on the wealthy by 70% or more “during wartime.” (2) Use the money to ACTUALLY support troops in a manner they deserve, and their families when they become disabled or deceased. No more half-a*******ed, empty promises and bureaucratic stalling.
In a short time, the citizens who actually have power and influcence ($$) will demand that their paid-for Congressmen and Senators DO something about the ongoing quagmire, fire the civilian mismanagement, and enact a feasible plan to RESOLVE and END the conflict, so that our soldiers can stop dying and come home to protect us here, and re-group for the next conflict.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
The gop does nothing then tries to cover it up
They do steal our money rather well.
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Why all the fuss about Foley? His behavior is very typical for a redneck.
At least Foley had the decency not to reproduce.
Rednecks breed like flies, normally.
By Van
October 3, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
Janine,
You’re right, running a gay bordelo out of your apartment does not equal sending explict emails and IM’s to a page.
When former Chicago Democratic Congressman Mel Reynolds was convicted of having sex with an underage campaign volunteer, what did he get? A presidental pardon and a job on Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH Coalition. But then again that was 2002 and the President was Bubba.
A President, having an affair with an employee, pardons a congressman having a fling with an employee and gets a job from a guy that had an affair with an employee.
When Rep. Gerry Studds got caught with his eye on a page, the two of them held a joint news conference and were treated as Democratic royalty, of course that was back in 1983.
Congressmen Dan Crane and Gerry Studds has similar problems, Crane had a fling with a female page and lost his seat, Studds dalied with a male page and got re-elected.
By Markus
October 3, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
I have no idea what’s got the liberals so riled up over Foley. Foley deserves castration for what he attempted to do. Throw his @ss in jail even. Yet, sex scandal after sex scandal from the party of the jackass is totally forgiven.
Selective memory, that’s what liberals have. Assachussetts democrat congressman Garry Studds (what a fitting name for a flaming liberal) had a fling with a 17-year old, and even went so far as to take him overseas somewhere to have a little pickle-polishing. No outrage from the democrats.
Besides, aren’t these the same jackasses that chastize conservatives all the time about being against gay marrige and being bigots? Aren’t these the same pansies who sit by silently and say nothing when the ACLU speaks up for NAMBLA’s right to exist? Aren’t these the same laundry stealers who made it very public that the Boy Scouts Of America was an “intolerant” radical right group because they refused openly gay scout leaders into the organization? Aren’t these the same jackasses on THIS forum who use homosexual references to attempt to insult conservatives? What the HELL side of the issue are these liboloons on? DISGUSTING hypocrisy. Only when a Republican is in focus is it bad to be gay.. and good to use gay references as insults.
Most hypocritically funny comment of the day from our resident freakshow, gitmolife the jackass leftwing link bandit from hell:
“You are a pervert, terrorist appeaser.”
Now that’s too funny. All this pants thief did last week was post all day about “torture” and treatment of terrorist detainees. All this wallet lifter ever does is complain about racially profiling muslims. And this democrockerey liberal has the nipples to call a conservative a terrorist appeaser? The sickness of liberalism, more prevailent than ever.
“Vote Democratic. Terrorism is manageable and can be lived with.”
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
Rednecks breed like flies, normally.
so that’s where you came from rednekkks??
next time we’ll buy some extra strong fly killer …huge smirk
By Dusty
October 3, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this
Oh no, Captain Freedom is back.
This one tries the same old wolf in a sheep’s clothing ploy. But a donkey trying to dress like an elephant simply doesn’t work.
Declare your own vow of celibacy. Preach to your own crowd of donkeys. As far as ethics and morality, they made a mess of it in the White House.
The current mess you are trying to refer to is not in the White House. It is in Congress and the guilty party is no longer present. Republicans do not tolerate such behavior.
As ‘tis said “Get rid of the log in your own eye before you point out one in the eye of another.”
By Van
October 3, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
Janine,
BTW, I do not support or approve of what Foley did, and I am not useing others behavior to justify, I am just pointing out the differences between a democrat scandle and a republican scandle.
By Eric Blair
October 3, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
Conservative groups are now demanding Hastert’s resignation.
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
This Foley scandal merely serves to give more comfort to our enemies. They are killing and dying for 72 virgins in Heaven - Foley would kill just to watch a 14 year-old boy masturbate.
Butt pyramids, underwear on the head, and now this. The Mohammedans probably think all they are taking on is a bunch of wankers at an English boarding school.
Rednecks undermine American security. Trash.
By Markus
October 3, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
Speaking of criminals, there was a nice shooting ending story out of Ponce De Loen Ave.: another punk gets to test being room temperature, permanently. Yep, last week it was a Jamaican punk cop-killer that got about 40 holes pumped in him by our fine officers down in Lakeland, FL. This morning some punk thought he could jack someone’s Tahoe and wound up swiss cheesed too. What a great two success stories in two weeks. Keep it up officers! We don’t need judges and juries. Just waste these useless to society punks when you can.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
By Hater Trash October 3, 2006 11:56 AM Why all the fuss about Foley? His behavior is very typical for a redneck. At least Foley had the decency not to reproduce. Rednecks breed like flies, normally.
Ain’t it funny how all the pinkos in this blog talk all this garbage about Republicans being haters that can’t get along, the whole time they sit in here wallowing in their own filth?
Pot To Kettle?
Bigot.
Racist.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
By GodHatesTrash October 3, 2006 12:07 PM Butt pyramids, underwear on the head, and now this. The Mohammedans probably think all they are taking on is a bunch of wankers at an English boarding school. Rednecks undermine American security. Trash.
Just like all the other hating bigots through history, stupid as a pile of crap:
Killed with Zarqawi: His 16-year-old wife and his 18-month-old baby son I wonder how long they had been married.
Bigot.
Racist.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this
The sickness of liberalism, more prevailent than ever.
Macaca,
Typical coward running his ignorant mouth.
Its the gang of perverts stupid!*
Keep posting though, you help my argument like never before.
Good job macaca.
By harold
October 3, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
harold could drink foley under the table but harold aint gonna to end up liking little boys from it
By harold
October 3, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
harold says, say, wasn’t foley leading the charge to have classrooms installed with webcams?
By CJ
October 3, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this
Brian Curtis @9:09. This comment was so great that I wanted to post it again.
“…you don’t see a ton of American criticisms of “what the bad guys are doing” is because we have no control over what THEY do.
The only forces we can control are our own. The only rules we can set are the ones WE follow… and those are based on our nation’s values, regardless of what others do.
Read that again: regardless of what others do. We’re not playing the relativism game here. America simply refuses to engage in torture, for example, even though our enemies do far worse. We don’t lock people up without evidence, charges, or counsel, even though our enemies do far worse. It literally Does Not Matter how bad our enemies are, or what tactics they use. What matters is how we conduct ourselves.
That’s what values means. And how sad is it that we’ve reached the point that America needs to be reminded of that?”
Suitable for framing Brian!!!
Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden don’t represent us; President Bush does. If our President doesn’t properly espouse and apply our values when working for us, we’re obligated to speak up. Obligated.
By Eric Blair
October 3, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Hastert screwed deeply by conservative boner.“>http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001675.php)
By Markus
October 3, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Media having multiple orgasms over Woodwards new book. Radio news snippets, news talk shows, newspapers: they can’t contain themselves. Yet, when conservative books are released, not a mention in site, even when it hits #1 on the New York Slimes bestseller list. Nah, no media bias at all.
By peter
October 3, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Dusty, you are so very right on with your comments about thoughtful debate here……..
Name calling is the norm…. and typically when someone makes insiteful comments, they then have to add along derogitory remarks about someone who is in disagreement.
People can’t you see this is just a microcosim of what is going on within our own political system?
The congress and the house.
Both sides are slinging the crap……and who is winning???? Neither!!!!!!!!
The entire country is ending up the looser!
So Jim, who is going to lead the debate that argues in a civilized manner?
Why can’t “this forum” be that start?
With education and tollerance let’s pull the country together, so we are able to have the best life available for ALL!
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this
harold could drink foley under the table
be careful for what you wish for harold!!
By Janine
October 3, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
So VAN Are you more distrubed that Republicans are not standing by their man, or about Dems swarming at the smell of blood?
By Markus
October 3, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
Gitmolife-
If you think you are making two sh*ts worth of a difference being on this blog with your constant pull-string parrot bullsnot with bullsnot neopink links, you are even more jacked out than I thought. No, YOU keep it up, liberal neomarxist pig.
By Austin Powers
October 3, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
Dirty fat Hasturd runs after pages screaming,”get in my belly!”
By Chazman
October 3, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
GOP - Gathering Of Pedophiles
By getalife
October 3, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this
I will macaca.
Reality sux for you , don’t it?
By Captain Freedom
October 3, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this
Dusty,
I have no need to vow celibacy…Mrs. Freedom has removed all need.
As to wolf in elephants donkey whatever, you, dear lady with the descriptive name, do not hold the key to the Big Tent that is the Republican Party. We come in all stripes, from those with bitter and parched hoo-hah like yourself, to the faux Brit of Mr. Troof, the the spittle-inflected hatred of the foreign-named Markus.
As to whether or not we tolerate the misguided amongst our flock, we clearly have more compassion for our straying lambs than any other group.
The Foley case is a perfect example: our compassionate leaders have given poor Rep Foley at least a year, and maybe many more, to find his Right Way with God and turn from the path of perdition. And our compassionate leaders would have continued to give this poor man more time to heal himself had not the MEDIA persecuted this poor man for no other crime than being a ‘good friend’ to the taut young pages.
No, aptly named Dusty, persecution is for our enemies, whether they wear headrags, have brown skin, or are Democrats. We have compassion for our own, though you, with your nasty tone to me, seem to not remember the First Commandment of St. Reagan — never criticize a Republican. Even the kraut-named Markus calls for savaging Rep. Foley, which is clearly against St. Ronnie’s Word. No, unless and until he switches parties, he deserves our support and compassion.
Even if this means savaging the reputations of the tempting young studs of the page corps. Let them stand warned.
By Van
October 3, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
Janine,
Wake up
By Van
October 3, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
Janine,
BTW, I do not support or approve of what Foley did, and I am not using others behavior to justify his, I am just pointing out the differences between a democrat scandel and a republican scandel.
Janime,
Democrats reward their scandels and the republicans get rid of the bad guys involved in the scandel.
BTW, who had the IM’s and why were they not brought forward sooner, were they witholding evidence? Smells like a Democrat October suprise - more dirty politics from those that know it best.
By Captain Freedom
October 3, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
The Captain thinks it would be fun to attach an EKG machine to Markus while he posts and stream the results over the web. I would of course need to upgrade my video card to handle the gyrations of the chart, but I think it would be grand entertainment, on a par with watching our Glorious Confederate Heroes come to life during the Stone Mountain laser show.
A web cam would be fun too, to see the many shades of purple his face generates. Good times.
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this
Once again the PC whiner crowd attacks me. Evidently, the pro-incest, pro-lazy, pro-bestiality, pro-STD, pro-bastard, pro-welfare, pro-inbreeding, pro-alcholism, pro-meth, pro-murder, pro-rape, pro-dirt, anti-soap, anti-dentistry, anti-education whiners are also pro-Foley and pro-sex deviant.
Rednecks undermine American security at home and abroad, even though many of them never leave their trailer parks. Their lifestyles and the lifestyles of their degenerate leadership are an embarassment to decent folk everywhere.
By JK
October 3, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
Does anyone wonder if maybe the Republicans leaked the Foley scandal to get Woodward and his informative book off the front page? Just curious.
By Michael Silly Savage
October 3, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
This Foley stuff has aroused my … anger.
I’d like to get hold of those pages that tricked Representative Foley and pound the real truth out of them.
By @@
October 3, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
Jim: This is really not a difficult question. If someone is an anti-war activist, more than likely they’ll go with law-enforcement within the borders of their own country. Saves lives and money for the short term, but fails to address the impending threat.
Taking into consideration that terrorists are a “paramilitary” group extending beyond their countries of origin and implementing attacks on global targets, makes them an organized military effort without ties to a soverieign nation. They’re not entitled to laws of war.
The very fact that they are sanctioned and financially supported by other countries (Iran & Syria) from outside their borders of operation, makes them an enemy that can attack from many albeit one ideaological point.
How are the countries where they hold bases of operation dealing with the problem? Are they dealing with terrorists or criminals? The more damage they cause there, the more likely the citizens within their own countries will see them as terrorists. Upon that realization, you can bet they won’t be worried about moral equivalency when dishing out punishment. It’s too close to home and the impact is too painful to their people.
Does America have a high threshhold for pain inflicted without provocation? I would hope not.
The attack on 9/11 was no minor accident warranting a band-aid. A strong antibiotic is necessary.
By Dusty
October 3, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
Dear Lost Captain Freedom,
Still trying for the same old song and dance. You a Republican, old wolf in a sheep’s clothing? No way.
And what is this nuance with my posting name? Because I love southern Arizona and the dusty Senoran Desert is sorta suspicious to you?
Oh well. If you think Republicans are supporting Foley, you are out in extreme left field. Not one of you can think straight out there. Keep beating your little drum. You, Captain, are a member of the “Cut’n’Run Crew” full time.
By Van
October 3, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this
As a lesson in how it should be, Newt Gingrich wanted both men(Dan Crane and Gerry Studds - see previous post) expelled from Congress, In 1983, the Democrats in charge of Congress let them slide with a mere censure.
One was a democrat, Studds, and he got reelected, Crane the Republican lost his next election.
Truth is, Democrats are okay with messing with underage boys, while the republicans are not. It is that simple.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
Mark A. Foley was born in MA in 1954. His family took him to Florida at the age of 3, where he has domiciled ever since.
Had Foley, a Catholic, stayed in Massachusetts, perhaps he would have become one of the great pedophile priests of the Diocese of Boston, and even worn the Red Hat.
But the redneck gods had a different fate in store for Foley in the red state of Florida, where the rednecks embraced him as one of their own, and he went off to their bidding and do like they do, too, IMing teenage boys about their choice of clothing and possible play dates in the future…
After rehab, perhaps the priesthood for Foley, or youth minister with a large non-denominational congregation.
Christian, of course.
By Dusty
October 3, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
No Captain Freedom,
It would be more fun to attach a Lying Machine to you. It would go beserk registering all the lies you pour out.
Markus hits you where it hurts. The pure purple configurations of Democrats over an ousted congressman is the biggest effort they have ever made to fool the American people.
Nobody believes that Republicans support perverts. Yet the Democrats gush on. They are overdoing a false premise and don’t even know it. Americans are too smart to fall for such idiocy.
By JK
October 3, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
Truth is, Democrats are okay with messing around between consenting adults, (It’s good for our leader to have a clear head…) while the Republicans are not. It is that simple.
By Brian Curtis
October 3, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this
Van: And yet—a member of which party was the one messing with underage boys in this week’s news? Was it a Democrat? No, I don’t think it was.
This is some really desperate spin you’re offering, but I’ve gotta hand it to you—it’s better than the lame gay-bashing that most right-wing pundits are trying to employ on this embarrassment.
By Chazman
October 3, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this
GOP - Guilty Of Pedophilia
By harold
October 3, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this
Amish school killer dreamed of molesting
he was congressional material!
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this
Well-argued, @@ @ 1:02.
Dear JK @ 1:15 and Brian @ 1:22, I think you both selectively ignore the Gerry Studds (i.e., Democrat) precedent. What say ye?
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
By harold
October 3, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this
Amish school killer dreamed of molesting
he was congressional material!
you pathetic pooftah TURD harold!!
making sick jokes about child molesting and yesterday’s brutal murder of several innocent young school girls is ALL we expect from demoNcrat leftist Bush hating nancy boy shirtlifter maggots like yourself!!
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this
more eco wacko CNN lies exposed
By JK
October 3, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw, What say I? STAY AWAY FROM THE KIDS, no matter what party you represent, that’s what I say! I certainly don’t condone the same actions in a Democrat, nor a cover-up that allows it to continue.
That being said, why is the standard Republican response to their own crimes, “Well, some Democrat did it x years ago!” As a mom, I can tell you that’s no kind of freaking excuse. Does that work in court, Lawyer Man?
By harold
October 3, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
Shirtlifter?
So you admit Foley is a child molester? all harold had heard about was some ill advised e-mails. What else are you Republicans hiding up your sleeves? (or trouser as the case may be)
You’re not going to fall for the banana in the tailpipe? It should be more natural, brother. It should flow out, like this - “Look, man, I ain’t fallin’ for no banana in my tailpipe!” See, that’s more natural for us. You been hanging out with this dude too long.
By Curious Observer
October 3, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this
I get the impression that Troof is very angry at you, Harold. And since he doesn’t have a rational answer, he is resorting to his usual vituperation.
By harold
October 3, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
anyhow regarding “terrorists or criminals” harold will take the terrorists. the terrorists harm far fewer americans than do the criminals
By Oscar Wilde
October 3, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this
hmmm..hmmm.. Troof so, angry
don’t ruin my mental image.
By for the children
October 3, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this
For the children, please vote Dem!
By harold
October 3, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
Harold says to file it in your wank bank!
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
Harold, every English school boy has his shirtlifted all the time, by teachers, uncles, daddies, etc. Pay no mind to tftt/tommy - this Foley thing has given him flashbacks.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this
More sick IM’s from Foley:
Of course, w does not want accountability for Hasturd.
Pathetic President.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
Here you go pope
By Chazman
October 3, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
Hey Time for the Crap……way to put Harold in his place. After all, you’ve ALWAYS upheld the highest standard for all to follow in this blog, (as evidence by you calling another person a turd in your response). Not to mention maggots. Way to go. Keep up the classy posts. And remember, if you disagree with someone - you don’t have to put up with it. Just call them a maggot.
By Van
October 3, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this
Brian Curtis,
The party has no bearing, Foley resigned his office.
My point was to show the difference between how the parties handled scandels in their membership.
It is painfully obvious that democrats see nothing wrong in Foley’s activities, and more about - hey - he is a republican.
By harold
October 3, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Harold do not want accountability from W for Hastert! That would obviously mean invading Iran and that would not be good for anybody.
By harold
October 3, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
here is a link just for troof
http://www.foxnews.com/foleyreport.pdf/
By Chazman
October 3, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
New IM’s just released show Foley had cyber sex with a teen (under 18) while he was waiting to vote. Can you say long prison term? Oh, I forgot. It wasn’t his fault. After all, he’s an alcoholic. You know that alcohol makes everyone want to have sex with young boys.
By Translator
October 3, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
In other words, everything is ALWAYS the Democrats’ fault, unless the Republicans do something wrong, and then it’s the Democrats’ fault for noticing. BLAME THE DEMOCRATS!
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
Dear JK @ 1:42, I am grateful that you apply your standards consistently. Frankly I did expect that of you, and I respect you for that. (And I acknowledge that Studds’s rape of the young male intern, ultimately tolerated by Democrat leadership, is old news, whereas Foley’s salacious IMs are the hot news. A Democrat rapist is perhaps less novel than pornographic IMs by a Republican, but that is the nature of the parties.) By cover-up, I assume you mean the Democrat whitewash of the Democrat rape, not the Republican resignation forced by the Republican leadership. There is a difference, and I appreciate that fact that you noticed. As to your valid legal question, unfortunately there is strong respect for even stupid precedent, so I suspect the Democrat precedent will hold. We need some conservative activist judges, to clean up the mess left by decades of Democrats.
Now, Harold @ 1:48, that is not a valid comparison, at least, not until we start chopping off the heads of the terrorists we capture.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
Harold, get, thanks for the links - great!!!
Still LOL.
By Van
October 3, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
Chazman,
Isn’t that what Patrick Kennedy said?
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Riding around at lunch today I was listening to Lush Rimblahh. S/he was having a huge hissy fit, as tftt/tommy would say, defending Foley…
Someone should send a Spanish speaking reporter down to the Dominican and see if they cand find out what went on with Lush’s Viagra prescriotion - I bet there are some young island boys who would have an interesting story to tell… that is, if you think pedophilia makes for an interesting story.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
If Dumbya and Dick die, then Hastert is President.
The sick and terrible thing is it would be a huge improvement.
By Van
October 3, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
getalife, I mean getabrain.
Haster does not have accountability to the President. The House and Senate set their own rules and punishments. If he was accountable to the President, then we would have a separation of powers problem.
Try reading something beside the comic books
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
to ALL the child molestor enabling liberal VERMIN …
how telling that none of you leftist *SCUM actually condemn the sickster Cobb County queer harold for making vile jokes about Foley and the murdered Amish schoolgirls.*
clearly the wasting mental sickness that is liberalism simply allows such depraved behaviour by mentally sick liberals - and vastly worse - such as hotel room rape by Sick Willie, drunken cowardly DUI manslaughter by Kennedy, complete acceptance of child molesting by Studds, gleeful defence of evil child rapists and killers in NAMBLA and homosexual pimp enablers like Bwarney Fwank and so on.
liberalism is a sick malevolent moral cancer that needs eradicating from decent society.
Foley came from Mass - clearly there is something there in the water and gene pool that allows depraved homosexuals to fester. One naturally assumes, given its sick unending obsession with paedophilia, that rednekkks NAMBLA is a disgraced defrocked paedophile Mass priest!!
Crapman is obviously choking on its own hypocritical stench of liberal crap … I sensibly called the sickster queer harold a “turd” when it made shameless, glib depraved jokes about yesterdays murder of innocent Amish schoolgirls.
you are a quivering pile of mutant afterbirth scum crapman and I proffer a simple but honest conservative spit in your face for such despicable lies and dishonesty!!
Damn this is fun - simply mirroring back goddespisesyankeetrash/rednekkksNAMBLA posts is kind of cool!!
NOT ONE REPUBLICAN DEFENDS or excuses ANYTHING FOLEY DID!!
But homosexual child molestors are welcomed in your leftist party of hate!!
I see the treasonous coward maggotbrain is still ignoring deMoNcrat homosexual leftist child molestors from Mass!!
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
to ALL the child molestor enabling liberal VERMIN …
how telling that none of you leftist *SCUM actually condemn the sickster Cobb County queer harold for making vile jokes about Foley and the murdered Amish schoolgirls.*
clearly the wasting mental sickness that is liberalism simply allows such depraved behaviour by mentally sick liberals - and vastly worse - such as hotel room rape by Sick Willie, drunken cowardly DUI manslaughter by Kennedy, complete acceptance of child molesting by Studds, gleeful defence of evil child rapists and killers in NAMBLA and homosexual pimp enablers like Bwarney Fwank and so on.
liberalism is a sick malevolent moral cancer that needs eradicating from decent society.
Foley came from Mass - clearly there is something there in the water and gene pool that allows depraved homosexuals to fester. One naturally assumes, given its sick unending obsession with paedophilia, that rednekkks NAMBLA is a disgraced defrocked paedophile Mass priest!!
Crapman is obviously choking on its own hypocritical stench of liberal crap … I sensibly called the sickster queer harold a “turd” when it made shameless, glib depraved jokes about yesterdays murder of innocent Amish schoolgirls.
you are a quivering pile of mutant afterbirth scum crapman and I proffer a simple but honest conservative spit in your face for such despicable lies and dishonesty!!
Damn this is fun - simply mirroring back goddespisesyankeetrash/rednekkksNAMBLA posts is kind of cool!!
NOT ONE REPUBLICAN DEFENDS or excuses ANYTHING FOLEY DID!!
But homosexual child molestors are welcomed in your leftist party of hate!!
I see the treasonous coward maggotbrain is still ignoring deMoNcrat homosexual leftist child molestors from Mass!!
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
very limited apologies for the last post … it shouldn’t have posted twice -
I’ve no idea how that happened - that was not my intent and I was editing it down a little bit but I was laughing so hard that I inadvertently clicked on “post” …
By getalife
October 3, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
Read this Van
Your party has destroyed our country and yet you still support them.
Pathetic.
By Joe L
October 3, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
“If he was accountable to the President, then we would have a separation of powers problem.”
Ha, ha, ha….The best laugh I have had in a while. If you truly believe in separation of powers you have to vote out the Repubs, because they certainly don’t. They believe in having a power monopoly over all aspects of government and a de facto tyranny.
By harold
October 3, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
man you know its bad when a policical party starts dredging up thing that are 10+ year old!
now troof, nobody made fun of the school girls who got killed. that would be in very bad taste this early after the tragedy. even columbine jokes are barely ok at this point and only after a couple drinks
harold only said the guy who was allegedy involved in the school girls’ deaths could have become a congressman instead. that qualification of his has nothing to do with the girls
and espeaking of NAMBLA is Foley not the poster boy? well, their poster man? you might want to drop that one for a while!!!
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
This Foley thing - notice that tftt/tommy is having a hissy fit too -
There’s nothing like a silly English drama queen throwing a hissy fit.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
By Hater Trash October 3, 2006 12:52 PM Rednecks undermine American security at home and abroad, even though many of them never leave their trailer parks. Their lifestyles and the lifestyles of their degenerate leadership are an embarassment (embarrassment, you dumba-ss illiterate) to decent folk everywhere.
I’m not sure if the trailer park lifestyle really bothered Bill Clinton all that much, seeing how his sex life was made up of women from there that he had to rape to get any.
He must not have enjoyed all the stupid tosspot Yankee women following him around with their mouths wide open, must be the struggle that he was after.
You and Billy think alike, Hater Trash, all that meat and so little time, eh? If you were only king like Bubba, you too could have raped all that “trash.”
Bigot.
Racist.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
just a smattering of the vileness of a few leftists posts from this blog!!!
funny how the party of hate just keeps on hating!!
If Dumbya and Dick die, then Hastert is President.
The sick and terrible thing is it would be a huge improvement
Harold, every English school boy has his shirtlifted all the time, by teachers, uncles, daddies, etc. Pay no mind to tftt/tommy - this Foley thing has given him flashbacks.
Of course, w does not want accountability for Hasturd.
GOP - Guilty Of Pedophilia
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
By harold
October 3, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this
Amish school killer dreamed of molesting
he was congressional material!
Had Foley, a Catholic, stayed in Massachusetts, perhaps he would have become one of the great pedophile priests of the Diocese of Boston, and even worn the Red Hat.
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this
Looks like the pro-incest, pro-lazy, pro-bestiality, pro-STD, pro-bastard, pro-welfare, pro-inbreeding, pro-alcholism, pro-meth, pro-filth whiny PC liberals are after me gain for pointing out the obvious.
We should, like the Satanic Catholics, require a vow of celibacy of our public servants. Even the strongest heterosexual male can be tempted by urges that might be seen by some as unusual, or even perverted. So, we also need to ban all practicing heterosexuals from politics, too, as evidenced by the uncontrolled lust of the Clenis and his saphhic bride.
(We all know that heterosexual females are of no cencern, as they usually need to be bribed or cajoled into sex anyway. At least that is the Captain’s experience.)
Anything less leaves our nation at risk of descending into a soddomite’s vision of bliss. So, we Republicans need to get out in front of this and declare our vow of celibacy so all this snark about the Grand Old Pedophile party can by spanked into submission.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka’s Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Riding around at lunch today I was listening to Lush Rimblahh. S/he was having a huge hissy fit, as tftt/tommy would say, defending Foley…
Someone should send a Spanish speaking reporter down to the Dominican and see if they cand find out what went on with Lush’s Viagra prescriotion - I bet there are some young island boys who would have an interesting story to tell… that is, if you think pedophilia makes for an interesting story.
Anyone with a brain in their head and an ounce of a decent education knows that redneck culture has more in common with ape culture than human society.
Why all the fuss about Foley? His behavior is very typical for a redneck.
At least Foley had the decency not to reproduce.
Rednecks breed like flies, normally.
Once again the PC whiner crowd attacks me. Evidently, the pro-incest, pro-lazy, pro-bestiality, pro-STD, pro-bastard, pro-welfare, pro-inbreeding, pro-alcholism, pro-meth, pro-murder, pro-rape, pro-dirt, anti-soap, anti-dentistry, anti-education whiners are also pro-Foley and pro-sex deviant.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this
LIAR harold — you lie like a Clinton … you blatantly made fun of the schoolgirls who were murdered yesterday !!!
rednecksNAMBLA shovels its usual bigoted filth on here all day long and then when a little bit is handed back its smug hypocrisy oozes out as predictably as a kennedy entering rehab after getting caught yet again utterly incapable behind the wheel with little outcry in the leftist media
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
The pro-incest, pro-lazy, pro-bestiality, pro-STD, pro-bastard, pro-welfare, pro-inbreeding, pro-alcholism, pro-meth, pro-murder, pro-rape, pro-dirt, anti-soap, anti-dentistry, anti-education, pro-Foley and pro-sex deviant whiners are quieter this afternoon.
This trash undermines national security with their defense of perverts like Foley and Hastert. Shameless stupid trash.
They’ll be back, stupider and trashier than ever. Now that they’ve sexually assaulted your children your pets will be next.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this
now troof, nobody made fun of the school girls who got killed. that would be in very bad taste this early after the tragedy. even columbine jokes are barely ok at this point and only after a couple drinks
harold you’re despicable … you made the implicit sick link with a glib joke and now are squirming and backing off from it … priceless.
By harold
October 3, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
Well harold is normally drunk by this time o fday so maybe he did make fun of them. harrold says sorry
By Van
October 3, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
Joe L,
Your ignorance is showing, try the Constitution. Some where around Article 1, Section 5 should spell it out, it is in plain english so even a Georgia High School graduate can read and understand.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
Better watch out, GodHates, looks like Andi and tftt/tommy are gonna whine and cry until they get you tossed out of here!
That’d be salad tossed.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this
Now that they’ve sexually assaulted your children your pets will be next.
too late rednekkks - you already did both!!
just use one ID NAMBLA … we all know its you!!
By Van
October 3, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
GodHatesTrash,
Hey, butt head, Hastert is a pervert now? I guess that makes Barney Franks happy, another butt buddy for the Democrate from Mass.
I guess Mass. is the home of the Rump Rangers also.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this
I would like to take this time to address the ones disgusted with the gang of perverts and welcome them to vote Dem for their children.
Thank you for your support.
By harold
October 3, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
harold says that dog will bite you
By Van
October 3, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
getalife,
You’re right, we should all vote against the party of perversion and disgrace - lets clean the House and Senate of all perverts.
Vote Republican.
By Neil Boortz
October 3, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this
I’ve said it today on my show and I’ll say it here. I encourage all my conservative listeners and friends to vote libertarian this election. This way the Dems get the house and they will reminf this nation just how pro taz and government they are and it will be a wake up call to the Repubs who have abandoned true conservatism. They are a party of perverts, cry babies, and race baiters…I thought those were the Dems!
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka’s Al Qaeda I Better watch out, GodHates, looks like Andi and tftt/tommy are gonna whine and cry until they get you tossed out of here!
you sad chickenhawk wanker NAMBLA … its highly unlikely there are two sickos on the same blog who post almost identical content (if not material). cowering yellowbellied cyber vermin like you are all the same - you hide away trying to deflect attention from your bigoted mental illness by using multi-ids as we’ve seen endlessly!
waterboarding is too good for the likes of you!!
By Realist
October 3, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this
TFTT, Its the very reason I have stopped coming around as much. I make a joke about Mexicans, and Im the worst kind of vile creature on the planet, but the likes of Harold and pope rednecks make fun of the brutal slaughter of innocent children and not a word from the likes of Dana, JK, getalife, curious observer, chazman, liberal, pretty much the entire hypocrit crew of slimey democrats that come here day to day.
How posters here can stand up for an illegal mexican and show outrage to me for making fun of one, but stand by silently while some in here make fun of the killing of american children is beyond me. I think its proof that the left is truly destroying the fabric of America.
By Neil Boortz
October 3, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this
Realist,
Great observation.
By Van
October 3, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this
Realist,
That is the difference, they do not disagree with Harold and pope rednecks, they not only agree with them but encourge them by not saying a word.
By JK
October 3, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
Realist, I miss your swaggering boast. I do recall standing up for the spinach you maligned. As to the killing of children in school, let me state that I am still too horrified to process it. Although the point was made: Pedophiles, not angry kids, did the last two. Ain’t nothin’ funny about that.
By harold
October 3, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this
so miss rice cant remember her breefing on the terrorists? probalby because she wasnt listening!
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this
Realist
Absolutely … the stench of the moral fascism of the pinko maggots on here is unbelievable. They sneer long and loud at anyone who digs at or pokes fun at their holy cows - (that’s not an oblique reference to feminazi JK). But the second someone points out their love of and endless excuses for homosexual perverts they screech like stuck hate pigs.
Foley is a despicable individual - but he at least resigned immediately the media had the story. Their demoNcrat queer child molestor was merely censured and stayed on in the house for several years afterwards as if nothing had really happened. no campoaign in Mass to get him out - as happened to GOP politicians in their home states.
this is why the left are so reviled and despised by normal folks and its why I am so contemptuous of so many of them.
Michael Savage is right - liberalism really is a mental disorder!! just reading the posts on here shows you that day after day after day after day!!
the nake calling is fun for a while - but some of them never get beyond it - so I just hand it back - and then they sneer endlessly at me for that!! but with NO attempt to sneer at or stop their lefty abusers who are actually far worse than any of us conservatives on here!
By getalife
October 3, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this
They are a party of perverts, cry babies, and race baiters…I thought those were the Dems!
No Neil, that is Realist.
Whaaaaa!
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this
let me state that I am still too horrified to process it
just more empty lies love!!
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this
my apologies …
that should have read just more SELF ABSORBED empty lies
By getalife
October 3, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this
time for the pervert,
Whaaaaa, quit your whining.
Whiny wingnuts.
Shees.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
Point me to the post where I made fun of the “brutal slaughter of innocent children” Realisp, and I’ll be glad to apologize. But you can’t, you silly little whiner.
We know why you don’t come ‘round so much Realisp - you get called on your cowardly chickenhawkness.
Start posting from Falluja and I’ll back off, you 32-year old physically fit Bush-loving coward.
In fact, I’ll wear a Realisp bracelet and send you a care package every month. And get a big yellow ribbon for my Audi.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
By Hater Trash October 3, 2006 03:43 PM The pro-incest, pro-lazy, pro-bestiality, pro-STD, pro-bastard, pro-welfare, pro-inbreeding, pro-alcholism, pro-meth, pro-murder, pro-rape, pro-dirt, anti-soap, anti-dentistry, anti-education, pro-Foley and pro-sex deviant whiners are quieter this afternoon. This trash undermines national security with their defense of perverts like Foley and Hastert. Shameless stupid trash. They’ll be back, stupider and trashier than ever. Now that they’ve sexually assaulted your children your pets will be next.
Is it ignorance that afflicts this freak?
Jealousy?
Some say that Hitler had a little tiny penis and that WW2 could have been avoided if some Jewish chick hadn’t laughed when she saw it.
Are we talking something similar here?
Maybe this hater trash was born without a penis and is raging about it at the only fair game left in the United States.
He can’t join the KKK and hate on the blacks like his mommy did, the pinkos will kick his scrawny a**.
He’s too scared to attack anybody but rednecks.
He’s a little chicken**.
And a bigot.
By Neil Boortz
October 3, 2006 04:38 PM | Link to this
All I know is that white men are angrier than ever. This is a direct result of this current administration. Party of pedophiles, closet gays, and religious fanatics. I thought that was the Dems, too?! What the hell!
By JK
October 3, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this
Stay away from my children, Troof, you sick, Godless, F—-. Clearly you don’t have any, and for that, planet earth and the human race thank you.
By Realist
October 3, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
JK, It societys approval and acceptance of “consenting adult behavior” that is creating these pedophiles and deviants you speak of. I know you are big on supporting individual rights of “consenting adults”. Im afraid it comes with a price and that price is being paid by our children. Homosexual and other deviant behaviors are not victimless acts, and as I said, the children are paying for it as we tolerate more and more and more and the boundaries keep getting pushed farther and farther out.
By getalife
October 3, 2006 04:44 PM | Link to this
32 year old chickenhawk?
My god, realcoward, no wonder you cut and ran.
Back under your bed now coward.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
you nasty deranged man hating MISANDRIST trollop feminazi JK!!
I’m not interested in your children!! No one on here is!!
“godless” HA HA HA HA - you’re really a nutter now lovey!!
You are just a very sick woman who is so embittered by its one bad experience with a man that you lose all perspective and post unhinged bollocks like this.
I actually pity you - but enjoy goading you - purely because of what you post!!
By Jim Wooten's Biggest Fan
October 3, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this
Does Islamic Dogma necessarily instigate Arab Jingoism?
Is the born-again infidel is so abhorrent to the muslim hoards that they are distilling an army of terrorists against the west?
Or is this just more preelection campaing spin to frighten redstaters into voting in November.
There is a dangerous shift in the spin about Iraq. The right always portrays the left as naive patsies who dont understand that the global jihad is indeed the new final crusade.
From that indefensible position, it’s not far to a civil war against the four million muslims here in the USA.
All this to keep child molesters in office to vote for queermarked pork legislation for special foreign interests including the Saudis who might support OBL????
Impeach Bush.
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this
*Is it ignorance that afflicts this freak?
Jealousy?
Some say that Hitler had a little tiny penis and that WW2 could have been avoided if some Jewish chick hadn’t laughed when she saw it.
Are we talking something similar here?
Maybe this hater trash was born without a penis and is raging about it at the only fair game left in the United States.
He can’t join the KKK and hate on the blacks like his mommy did, the pinkos will kick his scrawny a**.
He’s too scared to attack anybody but rednecks.
He’s a little chicken**.
And a bigot*.
All you have to do is tell the truth about these pro-incest pro-deviant pro-dirt dumb-as-dirt rednecks and they whine and moan and lie about you, and then they want to measure your member. Sick sick sick.
Sick trash.
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
Poor “Neil” Boortz cannot even spell his own name.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this
All you have to do is tell the truth about these pro-incest pro-deviant pro-dirt dumb-as-dirt rednecks and they whine and moan and lie about you, and then they want to measure your member. Sick sick sick.
well done rednekkks - another cyber gem - you must be very proud!!
By JK
October 3, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this
Realist, please explain to me how consenting adult behavior turns people into abusers of children. I always thought it was the repression of consenting adult behavior that made people snap or sneak off like cowards to abuse someone weaker.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 05:06 PM | Link to this
maybe tomorrow the lefties will leave the Foley story alone, stop their gloating and we can get back to some semblance of a real discussion on here.
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this
By Hater Trash October 3, 2006 04:48 PM All you have to do is tell the truth about these pro-incest pro-deviant pro-dirt dumb-as-dirt rednecks and they whine and moan and lie about you, and then they want to measure your member. Sick sick sick.
O.K. so it is ignorance, you could tell Hitler wasn’t that smart either, he screwed with his Russian “trash” neighbors and they overran Germany.
Someday too this dimwit illiterate will get stomped by a bunch of good old boys and his mouth will be broken and unable to spew any more filth out.
Karma.
For the bigot.
By JK
October 3, 2006 05:08 PM | Link to this
Sorry… another question for Big R: children are paying for it as we tolerate more and more and more and the boundaries keep getting pushed farther and farther out.
If this were true, then how do you explain the centuries of pedophelia within the Catholic Church? What has tighter boundaries and lower tolerance for individual thought than the Catholic Church, yet they are the “Big Daddy” of child molesters, are they not?
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 3, 2006 05:12 PM | Link to this
JK, Realisp has much more experience with deviant consenting adult behavior than anyone that posts here - after all, s/he is a prominent member of Kappa Kappa Kappa Alpha Order, a cesspool of kinkiness.
Of course, the people that enter such an organization already have a strong propensity for deviance…
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 05:13 PM | Link to this
Look at this illiterate trying to use scripting *, like some kind of spastic:
By Hater Trash
October 3, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this
*Is it ignorance that afflicts this freak?
Jealousy?
Some say that Hitler had a little tiny penis and that WW2 could have been avoided if some Jewish chick hadn’t laughed when she saw it.
Are we talking something similar here?
Maybe this hater trash was born without a penis and is raging about it at the only fair game left in the United States.
He can’t join the KKK and hate on the blacks like his mommy did, the pinkos will kick his scrawny a**.
He’s too scared to attack anybody but rednecks.
He’s a little chicken**.
And a bigot*.
He really is an ignorant little dimwit, a vicious idiot.
And bigot.
By Realist
October 3, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this
Well sad to tell you JK but sex related crimes are way up, not down. Nobody would argue that society was much more supressed through the 60’s. So if your arguement is true, why are these type crimes getting worse and worse instead of better?
By jbmlaw
October 3, 2006 05:16 PM | Link to this
JK @ 5:08, you could add all of the pedophiles in the history of the catholic church, and they would be less than the number of pedophiles hanging around Little Five Corners on any given weekend.
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 05:17 PM | Link to this
One of the pro-incest pro-dirt pro-deviant rednecks here wants to waterboard me, another one wants to wolfpack me.
Man to “man”, these chimps are nothing. So they travel in packs, like hyenas…
Trash.
By Realist
October 3, 2006 05:23 PM | Link to this
you freaks of nature arent even worth arguing with.
Jim, you really need to get IP address blocking or filtering installed, and get rid of some of these lunatics.
have a good night.
By JK
October 3, 2006 05:23 PM | Link to this
Realist, good point, but how do you know whether fewer sex crimes actually occurred, or whether fewer were reported and more were hidden due to the shame factor? I’m thinking there have always been sex crimes, but only lately have there been counselors and prosecutors to say, “It’s not your fault.”
By Calling The Racists What They Really Are
October 3, 2006 05:29 PM | Link to this
By Hater Trash October 3, 2006 05:17 PM One of the pro-incest pro-dirt pro-deviant rednecks here wants to waterboard me, another one wants to wolfpack me. Man to “man”, these chimps are nothing. So they travel in packs, like hyenas…
Spoken by some punkas-s spreading hate from the safety of a political blog.
Chicken**.
Bigot.
By Joe L
October 3, 2006 05:30 PM | Link to this
Van - There are none so blind as those that won’t see. First, the REPUBLICAN President has already said he can preempt the Constitution at any time during “wartime” (which we are not in by the way). Second, their is no separation of power when Congressmen toe the party line and have a loyalty to their party before their people and their position. And when said parties seek to stack the legislation with political lackeys who will merely toe the party line.
Obviously you are only intelligent (or blithely ignorant) enough to understand politics at the level they teach 7th graders and not realize the true complexities of the real world.
By Captain Freedom
October 3, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this
For once, Truth says something worth considering:
“maybe tomorrow the lefties will leave the Foley story alone, stop their gloating and we can get back to some semblance of a real discussion on here.”
Leaving aside the fact that such lefty rags as the Wash Times and WSJ have been on this story like a drunk congressman on a 16-year old, it is high time we returned this board to a more sober consideration of the issues that really matter in this election.
Issues like:
how Condi Rice really did do everything possible to thwart 9/11 (any suggestion to the contrary only emboldens the terrorists to try again)
how Karl Rove and Jack Abramoff really did not know each other all that well.
how the war against Pigmented Terror is being won through the Clausewitzian genius of Donald Rumsfeld
how George Bush IS TOO a dynamic and capable leader who is in no way plagued by a barely suppressed Oedipal rage and is certainly NOT a quivering dry drunk who can barely make it through a day without thinking of the sweet oblivion promised by his old pal Jack Daniels
Yes, let’s take a look at all of this, shall we, without the silly name calling. If, that is, Truth can quit laughing at his own pitiful jokes and schoolyard invective.
By JK
October 3, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw @ 5:16: OBJECTION. Assuming facts not in evidence. How would you begin to count? You can’t.
By time for the truth
October 3, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this
at least L Cpl Syphilis has finally dropped its execrable pretence of not being a far left Bush hater!! …huge liberal hating smirk
That pathetic school playground lie was as laugahble as rednekkks’ compulsive, utterly mendacious insistence on how it never uses multiple ids.
By Van
October 3, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this
Joe L,
I guess you are wrong again.
Name one right granted by the founding documents, that he has taken.
While I admit, that both parties have bent, twisted and ignored the Constitution, I am still an avid believer in those sacred documents.
The rules have been laid out and should be followed.
By Jim Wooten's Biggest Fan
October 3, 2006 06:07 PM | Link to this
Impeach Bush Today and avoid the november rush.
By Dusty
October 3, 2006 06:07 PM | Link to this
Captain Freedom,
Yes, let’s have a true discussion for a change. You can stop all your undercover act of stirring the pot and just tell the truth.
For instance, Condi Rice is a woman of integrity, foresight and also charm. Now you’re trying to insinuate something else. Could it be that she was there and you were not and she made the best choice at the time? You don’t know. You just insinuate.
Karl Rove is under no suspicion by the legal eagles. They looked but nothing would stick. So forget the implication you suggested.
Rumsfeld is not admired by some and hated by others. The president has a close view of him and likes him. I heard a general on TV who was in many meetings with Rumsfeld and Bush. He, too, supports Rumsfeld and pointed out the fallacies in many complaints about the Sec. of Defense, ‘specially about the number of troops in Iraq.
George Bush has no Oedipus rage. I believe Oedipus had a complex about this mother, not his father. And if you are trying to say that George Bush is a drunk, that is a kick in the pants for no reason. Bush said he had problems with alcohol when he was young and he did something about it. He stopped. The man is leading our country and meeting world leaders almost every day and you want to imply that he is drunk? What is YOUR problem?
Well, lying and stirring up propaganda is one of yours. Why don’t you try the straight forward truth for a change?
By CJ
October 3, 2006 06:09 PM | Link to this
Truth Man — How you doin’ buddy.
Listen, I wanted to weigh in on your Barney Frank v. Mark Foley comments. I think the experience of these two men really does define conservatives and liberals.
Barney, a liberal, paid a living wage for his sex with an adult professional. Foley, a conservative, attempted to use child labor to provide the same services for the price of a microwave meal.
Why are conservatives so greedy when it comes to money? If Foley hadn’t been so damn cheap, he’d still be banging. It’s a shame really.
By GodHatesTrash
October 3, 2006 10:11 PM | Link to this
The most despicable jokes on this blog are the pro-incest, pro-pervert, pro-dirt, pro-bestiality redneck chickenhawk clowns that regularly populate their insane hatemongering filth on many of the AJC blogs.
Trash.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 4, 2006 01:19 AM | Link to this
Silly tftt/tommy - calling me “utterly mendacious” because he thinks I use multiple IDs on Wooten’s blog.
Is multiple ID use a felony, tftt/tommy? Is anyone harmed or scarred for life by multiple ID use, you you silly dumbass? If not, STFU you loudmouthed Foley-lover.
By Brian Curtis
October 4, 2006 08:04 AM | Link to this
Hmm… and which party was claiming to be all outraged about an affair between consenting adults, while proudly declaring themselves the Party of Family Values?
Dang this pesky ol’ memory of mine!
By Camus
October 4, 2006 08:45 AM | Link to this
Wow, the Truth-avoider and the parched Dusty certainly are fahrt smuckers…they have seen through the ruse of that nefarious Captain Freedom, something that no one before them had managed. All this time, everyone here thought him to be one of you, so thanks so much for clearing that up. What a relief.
Why, that dastard seems to be poking fun at you. Mocking your most cherished blind followings. Why might that be, one might ask?
Is it perhaps because TFTT is a simple-minded parrot who can do nothing more than attempt a weak emulation of his heroes Lush R**** and Bill ‘Give It to Me or you’re Fired’ O’Reilly? An alleged man whose ‘skill’ at invective and repartee rises to level of a 7 year old who has learned some euphemisms for poopy and dilly dink, TFTT offers huge smirks as though they educate or intimidate, when in fact they serve only to embarass him, no matter which of the dozen AJC blogs he trolls daily.
Or perhaps it is because these two represent the nadir of American civilization, the triumph of blinkered superstition over educated discourse and analysis. A position of smug intolerance that allows no contradicting evidence to seep into the narrow sieve of brain that remains, their reasoning functions reduced to binary sparks in the reptilian brainstem. Predictable and programmed machines, unworthy of the label homo sapien.
Or is it their undying personality cult of the Great Presidente, or their mindless nattering of ‘liberal bad, Bush good’? The kinds of people who wet their pants at the spectre of terrorism and would willingly surrender their Constitutional freedoms to an all-powerful Daddy figure, who think themselves SERIOUS PEOPLE because they watch Fox and display Support the Troops magnets on their SUV…fine patriots, abiding in their last refuge.
These are people who have earned derision and scorn, because these are the people who have capitulated to Terror, who have turned a police enforcement matter (thought we’d forgotten your question Jim?) into a rationale for destroying the values and culture that have made the United States a beacon of hope around the world. People who can seriously discuss how much torture is acceptable, perhaps even in the hours after Sunday services while they receive their talking points from the nattering heads of the panel programs.
You are mocked because you are, despite your pretensions, deeply UN-serious people, people who mime empty gestures as you sleep-walk your way into the future. You deserve the scorn, and then some.
By Dusty
October 4, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this
Well, Camus,
I thought you died with the plague. Maybe you did. Your last post sounds like the dying words or a fading Democrat.
But we are duly impressed with the sheer length of your outrage. Better save a little bit of it. Another subject has been posted and Getalife is going to get ahead of you if you don’t hurry. Got your insults ready? OK..Get set….GOOOO..
By Camus
October 4, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this
Dusty,
My intention is not to insult, that is more TFTT’s game. But if the truth about your overarching moral and intellectual bankruptcy hurts your feelings, I really don’t care a damn. People like you are ruining this country as you cheer this President along as he wipes his arse with the Constitution.
I have plenty of outrage as I watch cheerleaders like yourself urge our Great Nation over the precipice into decline. But be aware…my scorn for the Democratic Party is no less intense. For with a few rare exceptions, they are as worthless a collection of following toadies as any bereft empire could ask for. But compared to the thieves and perverts and torture-mongers who currently control all the levers of power, they might just be an improvement. They certainly could not do a poorer job than the current gang of pimps and robbers.
By time for the truth
October 4, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
Too FUNNY … Too FUNNY
the leftist vermin is now whining, bleating and crying like cornered desperate finger wagging sociopathic white trash Clintons do when the truth is finally being ventilated about their lies, corruption, sleaze and incompetence.
As for the brain dead Camus’ deranged empty personalised lies aimed at lil ol me - just look at the Niagara Falls like gushing abuse that ALL the leftist vermin on here perpetrated yesterday and virtually every day!!
“a dozen ajc blogs daily???” HA HA HA HA - invariably its just this one, plus yesterday one short post on the Potter control freak religious nutter blog.
Such vile leftist lies and unending pinko hypocrisy is freaking hilarious - Allah be praised.
You know you’ve really gotten to these scum when they bleat and screech like stuck leftist hate pigs!!
By Dusty
October 4, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Oh Camus, sad despondent,
You are but a bit of entertainment for me.
You did mention that you do not like Republicans OR Democrats. Well, there’s always the Communist Party. They don’t have many members here but they’d love you.
If that doesn’t work, grab an innertube and paddle south. The climate in Cuba is nice and might cheer you a bit. Work in the cane fields will also get you into good shape. Have fun!!
By Camus
October 4, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
TFTT writes: “You know you’ve really gotten to these scum when they bleat and screech like stuck leftist hate pigs!!”
Dusty scribbles: “If that doesn’t work, grab an innertube and paddle south. The climate in Cuba is nice…”
Ah, the sad fallbacks of the Conservative debater…projection and love-it-or-leave-it. Glad you are entertained by our exchange. Alas, my contact with you leaves me saddened and needing to bathe.
By Dusty
October 4, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
Camus,
I didn’t realize you were debating. I thought you were complaining. Oh well, if it gets you to bathe, it has all been worthwhile. Scub a dub, now.
By time for the truth
October 4, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
rednekkks NAMBLA Camus is as predicktable as a castrated Pavlov’s dog!!
By Camus
October 4, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this
The conversation with Dusty and TFTT reminds me of the old maxim:
“Never argue with a pig. You’ll just get dirty, and the pig’ll like it.”
They have admitted to enjoying the exchange. I admit to enjoying my shower after the fact.
By philly connection
October 5, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
This latest legislation is not about granting habeas corpus (or any other rights) to foreign terrorists. It’s about NOT granting those rights to American citizens who have been accused of terrorism. It’s just another safeguard to prevent govt. abuse. TRUE republicans should understand that.
By Philly Connection
October 5, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
oh yeah- WAR EAGLE, you’re an idiot. read a book.
By Michael
October 5, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
jbmlaw @ 11:43 AM
Personally, considering that the Roman’s facd terrorists in their day I rather doubt anyone is going to see “the death of the last terrorist.” Its a pleasant thought. Just not realistic. An I don’t castigate the military for using law enforcement methods, I compliment them and point out that is where they have been sucessful. As Jim said this is an argument about terrorists being treated as a military problem or a law enforcment problem. What I’m pointing out is that they have more in common with orginized crime than an army. An that in most cases law enforcment methods of informants, investigation, stopping money flow etc do far more damage to them than blowing up a house with a chaingun. Thats not the military’s issue thats the politicians.. you have tools.. which one are you going to use? An before you say, Yes there is a place for military force as directed by a law enforcment type lead.. SWAT is an example of using military methods against criminals. Military operations againstt the drug cartels another. I’ve been military and I have been a cop.. been a republican and conservative since I was 18 and I’m 48 now. An looking at this as a matter of what works, whats practical etc.. the War on Terror has more in common with the War on Drugs. AQ shares more commonalities with a drug cartel or the old Mafia.