Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > October > 15 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USThe deserving aside, should Gore run?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
On the Right, at least, the reaction to Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize was muted. The best of the lot was a The Wall Street Journal opinion piece that never mentions him. Instead, it touts the deserving candidates the committee by-passed to choose Gore. Here’s a flavor of the piece:
“In Olso Friday, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was not awarded to the Burmese monks whose defiance against, and brutalization at the hands of, the country’s military junta in recent weeks captured the attention of the Free World.
“The prize was also not awarded to Morgan Tsvangirai, Arthur Mutambara and other Zimbabwe opposition leaders who were arrested and in some cases beaten by police earlier this year while protesting peacefully against dictator Robert Mugabe.
“Or to Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest in Vietnam arrested this year and sentenced to eight years in prison for helping the pro-democracy group Block 8406.
“Or to Wajeha al-Huwaider and Fawzia al-Uyyouni, co-founders of the League of Demanders of Women’s Right to Drive Cars in Saudi Arabia, who are waging a modest struggle with grand ambitions to secure basic rights for women in that Muslim country.
“Or to Colombian President Àlvaro Uribe, who has fought tirelessly to end the violence wrought by left-wing terrorists and drug lords in his country….”
And on it goes.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who’s now thinking about a 2012 presidential race — he’ll be 69 then — said “it’s perfectly appropriate for Gore to win the Nobel Prize because it only goes to very left-wing people who are critical of America.”
When the committee overlooks the deserving to anoint Gore for an alarmist movie, the political nature of the prize does become obvious. Both Gore and Jimmy Carter, the 2002 recipient, should send thank-you notes to George W. Bush. As the New York Times noted,”Gore is the second Democratic Party politician from the United States to win the peace prize this decade.” Both are die-hard Bush critics.
The Times observed, too, that “the prestigious award ignited a new spark of interest in his plans both among Democrats and Republicans.” The AJC headline says the “Nobel win makes Gore a hot political property.”
Maybe. But why should Gore run for president? He can’t beat Hillary and even if he could a nation in the midst of an actual war is not ready for a Don Quxiote president. I’ll leave it to our left of center friends who congregate here to make the case for a Gore presidency. I’d remind them, however, that they’re not the Nobel Committee and while bashing Bush may be sufficient grounds for one prize, it’s not enough for the White House.
Comments
By Anonymous
October 15, 2007 8:34 AM | Link to this
True, expertise in a global-level threat to all civilization is not enough to qualify Gore to be president. (And Bush doesn’t even have THAT.)
Fortunately, Gore also has a ton of political, policy, military, and media experience as well as an outstanding record of service to this country.
The only snag is, he’s too good for the corporate-centrist machine the Democratic Party has become. He should run as a Green.
By jm
October 15, 2007 8:43 AM | Link to this
More revisionist history from the right wing. In 2002, Jimmy Carter had yet to become a critic of W the incompetent. In fact, like most americans post 9/11, he was very supportive.
As for disparaging the honor bestowed upon Al Gore, it is clear that those who do not like his message are intent on destorying the message. Standard procedure in american politics.
By jm
October 15, 2007 8:49 AM | Link to this
correction - destorying the messenger. caffiene has yet to kick in.
By jbmlaw
October 15, 2007 8:52 AM | Link to this
Good morning all. I, too, remain amused by the brilliant Saturday WSJ editorial. AlGore was champion of DuPont’s interest in the expiring Freon patents in the mid 1990s, and saved the earth from an ozone hole that could only be saved by requiring the entire world to switch to DuPont’s new refrigerant. As environmentologismist he has no equal, as he rejects even obvious sub-surface geological changes to magnify an assertion that global temperature changes can only be caused by human waste. Clearly the bagman for Chinese political contributions (remember the Buddhist temples of the 1990s) is a champion for peace – long before the Nobel committee recognized him, he proved he could deal with anyone’s cash. Who could be a better standard bearer for the party of big government?
By jbmlaw
October 15, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this
Good morning, jm, Nobel Committee Chairman Gunnar Berge explained that the selection of Carter “should be interpreted as a criticism of the line the current [Bush] administration has taken…” Like a petulant, ill-tempered child, Berge described the selection of Carter as “a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the United States.” A couple of committee members attempted to distance themselves from this interpretation, but according the BBC, Nobel Committee member, “Gunnar Staalsett said he fully supported the chairman’s remarks and agreed that the citation was indeed a criticism of Mr. Bush.”
By Rod
October 15, 2007 8:57 AM | Link to this
Being against Bush does help one’s stature around the world. The entire world (the only exception are blind Republicans) knows what an idiot Bush is and can recognize that he has destroyed our relations with other countries.
After 9/11, the US had sympathies from countries all over the world - this could have been used to a great advantage. However, Bush decided to p** off and alienate all of those countries so they now hate us more than ever.
GEORGE W. BUSH IS A DISGRACE.
By the way, the folks who didn’t earn the Nobel Prize did wonderful things - that only affected the present. Gore helped save our future.
By Shar
October 15, 2007 8:57 AM | Link to this
I don’t know whether or not Mr. Gore is the most deserving recipient of the Nobel Prize, any more than I know whether or not the three gentlemen whose award in economics was announced this morning were “the best” or if Doris Lessing should have been passed over in favor of, say, Philip Roth. But I would suggest that Mr. Wooten follow his own advice and remember that he is not the Nobel Committee either. It is a tad meretricious to list people whom he and the Wall Street Journal believe would have been worthier recipients and then admonish those who would support Mr. Gore with such a reminder. With the percent of the country deeply unhappy with President Bush’s performance up at 70%, “bashing Bush” is not so much a qualification for the Nobel Prize as it is a standard daily conversation. It would be far more helpful to the national debate if staunch supporters of the President, such as Mr. Wooten, would recognize, consider and try to influence those policies that will forever deny Mr. Bush consideration from the Nobel Committee instead of pretending his mistakes do not exist and “bashing” anyone who tries to make an alternative contribution or hold a differing opinion.
By TW
October 15, 2007 8:57 AM | Link to this
Nothing bashes Bush more than the present day silence from his once vocal knee pad brigade…maybe their mouths are full…
By Rod
October 15, 2007 9:03 AM | Link to this
jbmlaw - exactly where did you read that Berge stated Carter won the Nobel Prize simply because he criticized Bush? Cause at the time Carter won the Prize, he hadn’t been overly critical of Bush.
Are you making up quotes?
By Rule of Law
October 15, 2007 9:09 AM | Link to this
Wooten is not a revisionist. Jimmy Carter DID criticize W for choking on pretzels instead of peanuts once.
By Rule of Law
October 15, 2007 9:16 AM | Link to this
The Wall Street Journal was correct to point out that Gore invaded Iraq, swiftboated Kerry to the point that our troops got shellshocked, and mispronounced words so often they became acceptable usage.
By Redneck Convert
October 15, 2007 9:20 AM | Link to this
Well, I see another godly Republican has been caught diddling a little boy. I don’t know what it is about us that makes us go into such things. I guess it’s our wish to control everybody else’s life that makes us want to do You Know What with men in public bathrooms or diddle little boys or teenage pages. All I got to say is pretty soon the Republican leaders will be running out of targets for You Know What and going after the rest of us. I thought it was pretty much the end of the world when the Rev. Jim Bob Buice got caught nekkid with that nekkid boy and sent to prison by the cops, but it looks like I was wrong. Anyway, I’m thinking about wearing a steel cup around my rear end just in case I run into a Republican politican while I’m making deliverys.
This Nobel prize thing for Gore makes me real mad. They just want to get back at My President on account of the war and all. Anyway, My President is right. Even if there was global warming, which there ain’t, it would cost too much to fix and be a big burden on Private Innerprize. I say let the Free Market fix it all. Just as soon as NYC gos under water from the melting icebergs some guy will come up with a big fix that will make him a jillion dollars in profit. Besides, it wouldn’t hurt none to have a few million yankee libruls drownded. I know most of us godly Christians would pray for their souls or tell Satan to take it kind of easy on them.
Well, I got alot of beer to haul around, but I’ll be checking in oncet in a while to watch all the godly Republicans here bash Gore and the Nobel people. It will keep them from thinking about You Know What. Anyway, they needed to give the prize to Gen. Petraeus or somebody that knows how to make war. The generals and My President are the people that are doing the most to keep the peace by making war.
By Abomi Nation
October 15, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this
This just in…………
Senator Larry Craig (REPUBLICAN) has just been named the winner of the 2007 Pee’s Prize.
By Rule of Law
October 15, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this
Is the USA ready for a woman prez?
When you read the reports about how close Russia and the US came to an all out nookyooler exchange one can appreciate how PMS could have put the crisis over the top.
Apparently, Russia thought one of our training exercises was the real thing and were seconds from pushing the button when Reagan, alerted by spies, called for the exercises to end and pull back.
There were many such incidents and a woman could have made the difference may times if she were in the throes of pms.
I urge caution to all voters on both sides of the aisle. Hillary is qualified, but she is a woman, and no amount of facial hair, vocal badgering, or shoulder padding can change that.
Vote Guilliani in 08. If we occassionally want a woman to give the state of the union speech, he may just be in the mood.
Sounds like a win win to me.
Guilliani. For when the country wants a little spice. That’s nice.
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this
Dubya is determined that he will not be irrelevant even to the point of destruction. He is trying to rewrite his legacy at the expense of the well-being of the country. The Repubs and Dems are falling in line in support of this insane policy. When does the Congress impeach these criminals?
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 9:46 AM | Link to this
Good morning, jbmlaw. Last night I attempted to answer (metaphorically, and in all-caps!) your question about education.
Poor Mr. Wooten, he tries to bracket the Nobel issue and that’s instead the thing that gets the attention here. As to his actual question, Mr. Gore should not be President because he seems, in my unqualified but sincere opinion, to suffer from the rare malady Munchausen’s Syndrome. What’s more, notwithstanding the evanescent Nobel peace prize, the adulation Mr. Gore has been receiving of late probably exacerbates his psychotic confabulations, to which he’s been given for years running. I happen to like the man, and truly hope that Tipper could whisk him off to some quiet, safe place for a decade or two, so that they could just be happy in an unsaved world, and maybe watch streaming re-runs of “Love Story” on the Internet. (But don’t mind me; I also think that Jimmy Carter should be locked in the attic with the crazy aunt.)
By georgia 74
October 15, 2007 9:49 AM | Link to this
Jim’s just peeved because no Repug has even come close to winning the Nobel, I’d bet if Larry Craig or Henry Hyde, two moral degenerates, had won,his column would have been six pages long.
By jbmlaw
October 15, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this
Dear Rod @ 9:03, I understand search engines are an alien concept to leftists, but I cut and paste with the best of them. You will have no trouble finding the quotation I offered, as I remembered when it first came out on Drudge. We do not expect committed leftists to remain tied to the past.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 9:53 AM | Link to this
georgia 74, the first recipient of the Nobel Prize for Peace was President Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican. The prize recognized his negotiation of an end to the Russo-Japanese war. TR’s prize had to do with, of all things, peacemaking.
By Captain Freedom
October 15, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this
THE Captain is unconcerned about the Gore award, as he expects Scalia to reverse the decision and give the award to Bush. For the good of the nation, you know.
By Rule of Law
October 15, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this
A vatican priest, suspended for gay, claims he was doing research about homosexuals in the church. Sounds suspiciously like Peter Townsend’s child porn research.
Time 4 me to research food sex….
By jbmlaw
October 15, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this
Dear Glenn, I always thought our friend PoFo was the funniest writer on the blog, but in just a few days you are giving him a run for the money. You must have interned with P.J. O’Rourke.
By Captain Freedom
October 15, 2007 10:11 AM | Link to this
Wisconsin GOP Chairman Donald Fleischman has resigned his post, says a spokesperson, after being accused of enticement and fondling of an underage boy…The boy was found by police in Fleischman’s home on two occasions in late 2006 while being sought as a runaway from Ethan House, a home for at-risk youth. Now 17, he says he stayed with Fleischman at his house and a cabin, where he was provided with alcohol and cannabis, and regularly fondled.
Fleischman said he was trying to convince the boy to turn himself in as a runaway.
As with the undoubtedly innocent priest referenced by Rule of Law @ 9:58, this Godly man was simply attempting to provide aid and assistance to another human being. We are sure to discover that Sen Craig (R-Airport Stall) was merely trying to offer fellowship to an emotionally distressed undercover policeman.
Once the truth comes out, it will be clear that these men are not only NOT homosexual, but are rather victims of the HomoIslamist conspiracy to undermine Christian Godliness.
By Captain Freedom
October 15, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this
THE Captain returns to topic to concur with Mr Wooten that the Nobel Peace Prize has always been reserved for the most atheistic and communistic actors, people like Lech Walesa, Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Rabin, Frederick Willem de Klerk, Andrei Sakharov, Gen George Marshall, Teddy Roosevelt, and the almost certainly-not-a-war-criminal Henry Kissinger.
(However, the inclusion of the suspiciously compassionate-to-all-peoples Mother Theresa does lend weight to Mr Wooten’s contention that only namby-pamby do-gooders receive the Peace Prize.)
THE Captain would suggest, however, that Mr Wooten not waste his valuable soapbox discussing such trivialities, when he is needed to focus our attention on critical matters such as the quality of that Klinton woman’s laughter.
By Rod
October 15, 2007 10:26 AM | Link to this
So, jbmlaw at 9:51 - you admit you can’t find your “quote.” Now why don’t you admit Bush is a joke.
By Commander Guy
October 15, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this
Wow. I’ve always wondered who to go to when I get low on beer and weed. The answer is right here on the Blooten Wog — just find a GOP chairman and pretend to need “moral guidance”. At last, a never fail source of the good stuff.
I was so excited that I went to the Ga GOP website to contact the state chairman (figuring that the state chair would have better $hit than the county level dweebs). But then disappointment struck. The state chair is a chick, and I’m guessing she doesn’t need to provide the beer and weed to get any action (though from her picture it looks like she is in sore need of a high hard one).
Damn. My vacation plans are ruined. I may have to settle for a county chairman instead. Anyone have any suggestions or experience? I was thinking about Ralph Reed, who has always struck me as a particularly nasty closet twink, but quite frankly, that guy scares the bejeesus out of me. I’m just not into leather hoods and ball gags.
By JK
October 15, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this
Why does Mr. Wooten pretend to care whether Gore runs or not? Mr. Wooten will use his “column” to trash anyone and everyone who is not a Bush-slurping, we-can-do-no-wrong Republican blowhard. Facts, issues, and ethics have nothing to do with what Mr. Wooten will write about the election. Never have; never will.
By deegee
October 15, 2007 10:41 AM | Link to this
“But why should Gore run for president? He can’t beat Hillary and even if he could a nation in the midst of an actual war is not ready for a Don Quxiote president.”
This is disturbing on many levels. The punctuation and spelling errors are standard fare from JW. However, the notion that the American people are electing a wartime president is a bit absurd. Recent polling indicates that the war in Iraq is very important to approx. 66% of those polled. Government ethics and corruption out polls the war with 74%. Army recruitment is meeting but not exceeding goals despite lucrative signing bonuses. God bless the troops that are fighting the civil war in Iraq. Their lives are hanging in the balance of the “actual” war being waged between the RNC and the DNC.
By Rule of Law
October 15, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this
Deserving aside? Deservin’ gots nuthin’ to do with it…..BOOM! (the unforgiven)
By Truthifier
October 15, 2007 10:50 AM | Link to this
What a bunch of spoiled sports!! Mr. Gore won a high honor and should be congratulated. End of story.
By Southern Democrat
October 15, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this
I do not mean to put people on the spot, but in the spirit of using the marketplace of ideas to put down the rhetoric of racism and hatred, I am curious what my friends on the right think about Ann Coulter’s latest anti-Semetic comments.
By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
October 15, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this
Yet again - and as ever completely without any provocation the far left abortion bucket escapees are puking up their visceral hate and bile on here. The truly noxious illegal greaseball and w horish anglo hater heebeedeegee is preDICKtably sick and petty enuff to anally sneer at a rare typo by Senor Wooten. Clearly this putrid puke heebeedeegee is the intellectual equivalent - though clearly not even coming close to the personal hygeine level - of Quixote’s donkey.
Lance Korporal Syphilis is HUGE YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWN back at its psychotic depraved homo obsession courtesy of its rent boy persona Boy Scout Molestor Guy while its sullenly queeralicious more passive plebian persona inbred redneKKK disgustingly pukes up like a rabid obsessive compulsive AIDS ridden parrot its witless, way beyond mind numbingly boring - now EVEN UNFUNNIER THAN ABORTED FORESKIN’s imbecilic cringe making bollocks about its classic early Alzheimers fantasy beer lorry!!
The ONLY good lefty is a dead lefty … ALLAAAAAAARGH BE PRAISED!!
By DemDems4Ever
October 15, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this
jm and Rod
Jimmmy Carter began his attacks on George W. Bush in July of 2001 in an interview granted to Richard Hyatt of the Columbus Ledger-Inquirer.
The interview drew national attention as the first time a former President had been critical of the sitting President so early in his term.
Mr. Hyatt appeared on most of the news shows on the major news networks as a result of the story, so the idea Carter was a supporter of President Bush is nonsense.
By thomas
October 15, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this
AL Gore is the elected president. A coup happened right under our noses and nobody did anything and instead we swore in the goofball bush. Now, his wife has come closer to Jackie O than any first lady since 1963, and that’s a good reason to have bush as president, but the fact that we are stuck in baghdad, living on Sadr time, with the Kurdish blues again means that tipper would have been a better first lady. I dont know which one I’d rather make an infidel out of, tipper or laura.
life could be a dream. sha na na nah
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this
Lt. Gen. Rick Sanchez (Ret.) says that Dubya and the other criminals, if they were a part of the military, would have been relieved of duty and court-martial ed for dereliction of duty. I think his list includes Dubya, Cheyney, Rumsfeld and Condi.
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this
News reports indicate a joint Pentagon/FBI effort issued more than 400 National Security Letters. This is an end-run around subpeonas and warrants for spying against AMERICANS. Is this part Dubya’s effort to protect us? If so, who protects us from Dubya?
By gringo
October 15, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this
AL Gore is the elected president. A coup happened right under our noses and nobody did anything and instead we swore in the goofball bush.
Bird brain: three separate independent recounts in Florida (one by that vast far-right media institution known as ABC) confirmed that Bush would have won the re-election even if the recount was allowed to continue. Irrespective that the only counties that the Gore camp wanted recounted were in heavily Democrat voting districts like Palm Beach. Get over it!
Well you know what that means - we need to pull out of Iraq now. Can’t have any victories on Bush’s watch. By the way, that gets me thinking - three years from now if Hillary is in office and we have complete success in Iraq, are the Democrats going to take credit for it?
By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
October 15, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this
Jackieturd
where exactly did the embittered, fired for incompetent p!ss poor leadership Sanchez actually state that Bush was a “criminal”. U’r sad pathetic leftist lies show what a treasonous anal little arsewipe U are!!
When worthless abortion bucket escapees like U puke up outrageous lies like “I think” then its time for yet another court ordered lobotomy to try and rectify the damage from the last dozen or so.
In other words … STFU!!
By gringo
October 15, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this
Wupsie, I combined two posts. Again, the U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months. Yawp, time to pull out now.
By Jimmy Dean
October 15, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this
NYT: home grown terrorist supporter residing in basement of parents North Carolina home.
There is something profoundly wrong with this nation where Christmas symbols can be banned, yet radical Islamic enemy propogandists like this are allowed to proliferate and spread their hate of the very nation and people that’s allowing them to exist. No word yet from C.A.I.R.
By Captain Freedom
October 15, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this
Apropos of today’s assigned Wooten Topic, the Nobel Committee has ust provided more justification for Mr Wooten’s contention that the Nobel is nothing but a sop for Communislamoliberal Haters of Freedom.
Today brings news that three so-called “Americans” will share the prize in economics for their work in explaining “why markets sometimes do not work”.
This is commie symp propoganda at its worst. There is only one reason why any market might fail to work perfectly, and that is the result of governmental interference. No other explanation is possible, or allowed. The fact that these so-called “Americans” would attempt to undermine our faith in the Perfection of Capitalism proves that the Nobel committee is made up of nothing but liberals, Islamists, commies, pinkos, America haters, and stupid liberal loving liberal lovers.
By jm
October 15, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
DemDems4Ever@11:17 - you are reaching if you call that interview “an attack”, unless you call registering disappointment or being critical “an attack”.
By Captain Freedom
October 15, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this
THE Captain — as a man with a miltary moniker and many hours of watching the History Channel and playing Risk — wishes to offer his own expertise in re the case of the incompetent and treasonous General Sanchez.
THE Captain is saddened to discover just how many rossly incompetent high ranking officers have riddled the military these past few years. Yet each of the several dozens of retired generals who have spoken out against Our Leader and his Glorious Crusade prove themselves incompetent as soon as they speak against the infallibility of Our Leader. Small wonder we have not yet eradicated the Swarthy Hordes of Terrorists who threaten our way of life with a parade of burqa-clad Dusty’s and bearded raghead converts like time for the meth praying five times a day.
If only Our Leader could find military officers worthy of His Leadership. Sadly, I fear the Gen Petreus will eventually become one of the heretical ex-generals whose personal failures become fodder for the deranged Bush-haters of the left. But never fear…THE Captain and TFTM will be ready to pounce on that traitor as soon as he shows his true colors. It’s what we Keyboard Warriors do.
In closing, let THE Captain note that a President Tancredo would never have allowed the wetback Sanchez into the country in the first place, much less placed him in a position of responsibility where he could put his hatred of America into action.
Look for the Nobel Committee to honor the MoveOn/Soros-loving Sanchez with a special award any day now.
By thomas
October 15, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
Gore is our president by proxy. Nobody disputes that.
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this
@By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
If you dipstick a$$ could read, Sanchez did not say Bush was a criminal. It is a*******wipes like yourself that cause all of us to have diarrhea. You and your logic are the same as a Depend. Matter of fact you are your ilk are lower than whale gravy. Get you some Fabreze, brown eyes. I realize that your are an escaped mental patient that refuses to take your medication, but, you should have acquired basic reading and listening skills. Mr. Sanchez said that Dubya would be “relieve of duty and court-martialed if he were a member of the military.” Now, douche bag, go play in the traffic!
By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
October 15, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this
Lt. Gen. Rick Sanchez (Ret.) says that Dubya and the other criminals
The ageing magggot brained Bwarney Fwank sex toy Wackieturd pukes up this and then like an energiser abortion bucket escapee has the fooking cheek to try and anally LIE/moveyourbowels.org its way out of its pathetic deranged puke. U explicitly stated in that initial gibbering Bush hate that Sanchez stated that Bush et al i.e. “the other criminals” …
I fairly politely pointed out that Sanchez did NOT call Bush et al “criminals”.
So I SMASHED UR should have been aborted sick lying arse with consummate factual ease yet again Wackieturd!! Factually humiliating leper colony rejects like URself is too much fun!!
“douchebag?” … please bollockchops leave UR roly poly obese mammy out of this!!
By William Hunter
October 15, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this
Kerry is our president by proxy. Nobody disputes that.
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
@By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
You still have not learned to read. By Jackie
October 15, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this
Lt. Gen. Rick Sanchez (Ret.) says that Dubya and the other criminals, if they were a part of the military, would have been relieved of duty and court-martial ed for dereliction of duty. I think his list includes Dubya, Cheyney, Rumsfeld and Condi.
Here is the quote; PLEASE, PRACTICE YOUR COMPREHENSION SKILLS!!!!!! And, in my humble opinion, you are still lower than WHALE GRAVY!
By Bob
October 15, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this
Bush was never officially or legally elected, he was annointed by the holy order of the supreme court.
Nobody disputes that. We have a theocracy. Nobody disputes that.
Nobody disputes nuthin’
By deegee
October 15, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this
The silence is deafening on the latest Coultergeist outburst. Is she irrelevant, or is she saying publicly what the Christian conservatives say privately?
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this
I dispute everything, Bob. I dispute you. I dispute your disputation.
By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
October 15, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this
WACKIEturd …
where was this poisonous treasonous filth culled from - moveyourbowels.org??
Sanchez did NOT call Bush et al “criminals” … nor did he call Bush “Dubya”. I saw the excerpts from his comments and I did NOT hear BUsh is a “criminal”. I saw this discussed on cable news.
Whether U wrote this bollocks or some lefty scumbucket did is NOT the point.
Your should have been aborted maggot brained dumbarse is INCAPABLE of even providing an actual literal quote of what Sanchez said!!
Sanchez is just another embittered failed general fooking nuisance who was fired for incompetence and now the warped leftist vermin have suddenly desperately latched onto him like little rabid yap dogs because he NOW is anti-BUsh. Yet he clearly wasn’t anti-Bush when he was running the show in Iraq with full authority to pursue what he saw fit to do!!
now, very generously - I’m t y p i n g v e r y s l o w l y so U can read my immediate demand - G F Y
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 1:08 PM | Link to this
@By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
“douchebag?” … please bollockchops leave UR roly poly obese mammy out of this!!
I choose to add your mammy and your punk daddy to this conversation. It appears that you were found on the side of the road because no one wanted to be bothered with a brothel lookout! WHALE GRAVY!
By rarringt
October 15, 2007 1:16 PM | Link to this
Good afternoon all,
Jim Wooten’s column today appears to be a classic case of what Paul Krugman characterizes as Gore Derangement Syndrome.
In short, it is the condition of irrational hatred for Al Gore because, despite all spin and spite, the man keeps on being right.
George H. Bush derided Gore for being the “ozone man,” shortly after the three chemists who discovered the hole in the ozone (and the reasons why) received the Nobel Prize.
Gore’s existence presents a stark reminder of the gross mistake conservatives made in backing and voting for George Bush.
Twice.
And nobody likes to be reminded of their mistakes.
Wooten characterizes Gore as a Don Quixote candidate, but fails to concede that most of the issue confronting the next administration will be leftovers from Bush & Co.
Gore has experience as a successful Senator, eight years as Vice President in an administration that was superior to this in every quantifiable way, is respected the world over (WootenWorld notwithstanding), and is an in-demand soon-to-be Nobel Laureate.
We could do worse for a commander in chief. Actually, we have done worse, given Bush’s beyond dismal performance.
But the real issue with Gore, once again, is not that he’s such a bright guy. That’s been clear for decades.
The real problem is that WootenWorlders saw a prince standing next to a pig, and decided the pig would make a better president. And that stupidity is being thrown back at them from every direction.
If I was a conservative, and (like don quixote) had to face my reflection in the mirror of reality, I’d probably be upset as well.
By Van
October 15, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this
Bob,
I just cringe when someone shows how ignorant they are in public. I guess you are too stupid to google the two supreme court decisions regarding the 2000 Florida debacle.
The vote was 7-2 to overturn the Florida Supreme courts radical decision to ignore the Voting Laws in Florida. The 5-4 decision was on what to do about the recounts, whether to continue them or not. BTW, the New York Times even said Bush won Florida in 2000.
Please before you show your hind end in public, do a little research.
By jbmlaw
October 15, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this
Dear Southern @ 10:56, thanks for the opportunity to mention the falsely reported “anti-Semitic” remarks of Ann Coulter. Unlike the numerous leftists who intentionally slam Jewish people, I recalled that Ann had an unswerving support and respect for Israel. Since the actual words are never quoted by leftists anywhere, and I could not find them anywhere, I listened to Michael Medved – Jewish intellectual, at least by moonbat standards - address the “issue” on his radio show last week. He pretty much dismissed the kerfuffle as a leftist false reporting. Apparently Ann approvingly noted there was a “respectful, Christian” crowd at a Republican convention. As Mr. Medved noted, she was almost certainly using the term as a synonym for “decent” and not as an exclusionary term. The moonbat misunderstanding is certainly imaginable, as they always use religious terms as epithets.
Dear Rod @ 10:26, I thought I was just yanking your chain when I accused you of not being smart enough to use a search engine; I’m sorry, I did not really know. There are about 5,000 sites with the same language. To make life easier for you, http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/10/11/nobel.iraq/index.html
Dear Truthifier @ 10:50, the same day that the silly Gore award was announced, there was a meaningful announcement too. Perhaps you and Jackie the Leftist Patriot will join us in celebrating the service of Michael Murphy, a true American patriot.
By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
October 15, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this
wackieturd
UR lame lily livered effete simpering abuse is like being savaged by a dead sheep … see Dennis Healey commenting on Sir Geoffrey Howe back in the days of Baroness Thatcher’s GLORIOUS government in the Palace of Westminster.
I suggest you immediately follow up your anal whale gravy obsession and jump into a large Atlanta Aquarium tank filled with horrid aggressive marine creatures that will eat U and then disgustedly spit U out!! Better still go windsurfing John 3 small bandaids and I’m outta here Kerry style up the upper reaches of the Amazon. Here nice wittle giant anaconda!!
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this
Now all bob was saying is that nobody disputes the fact that bush was not elected, and I dont dispute that fact, bush was not elected, he was annointed by the supreme court.
Now what rarrington is saying is htat country played a hunch about bush, an unlucky guess, sometimes a hunch pays off, sometimes it doesn’t, the country was just unlucky, it played a hunch. Isn’t that what you were trying to say, harrington?
By getalife
October 15, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this
Dearest deegee,
Good, honest God-fearing Christians aren’t laughing with you, they’re laughing at you. Coulter rules.
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this
Wrong getalife, christians are laughing at satan, because satan makes us do naughty things with our bodytoys.
By rarringt
October 15, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this
Jill,
I’ll agree, that perhaps the first time some folks were operating on a hunch. After all, the Clinton administration had left the country in good shape. The economy was up, unemployment was down, prosperity was being felt all the way through the working class, we were operating at a surplus, FTAs were being passed, and it seemed as though a caretaker president would be all that was needed.
And for folks that choose presidents based on who they most would like to have a beer with, Bush seemed a reasonable choice.
Even I asked at the end of the election dispute how bad one man could really make things in the country and the rest of the world.
How naive I was.
But in 2004, it was a different story. Iraq. Debt. Scandal. Rollback of civil liberties. Iraq again.
And instead of asking the tough questions, conservatives opted for love-ins at heavily screened “town hall meetings,” and focused more on values than performance.
The country went out of it’s way to be “unlucky.” We chose this path, knowing our leader wasn’t much of one. And now, conservatives seem to be suprised how, following this path, we somehow got lost, as if by accident.
By Shar
October 15, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this
Dear jbmlaw@1:20 - Ms. Coulter went well beyond mentioning a “respectful, Christian crowd” at the Republican National Convention. She said that New York during the RNC matched her conception of heaven, where everyone was “happy, joyful Republican” and said that Christians were “perfected Jews.” When pressed by the host of the program, she said that she was not anti-Semitic, but that Christians held the belief that Jews were in fact Christians in need of being perfected. The Fox News transcript of the exchange is here http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301216,00.html
By getalife
October 15, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this
by rarringt Good afternoon all
take that back you nasty horrid beastly black racist bigot you!!!
By Captain Freedom
October 15, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this
THE Captain wishes to join jbmlaw in his support of the lovely and demure Miss Coulter. Surely her stalwart support for Israel as a staunch geopolitical ally of Our Nation — and her rock solid belief that they should bomb the camel jockeys with regular frequency — should be sufficient to defuse any charge or anti-Semitism. But since our Islamoloving leftie libs insist on tarring the delightful Miss C with their own anti-neocon sins, THE Captain wishes to clarify her true intention.
Truly, Sister Coulter merely displayed her Pure Christian charity for her friends in the Christ-killing community with her stated wish that they might be saved from their incomplete understanding of God’s love. Her wish that the defect inherent in the Juden community is proof positive of the Evangelical’s love and forgiveness of the betrayers of Our Lord, even wishing them to join Our Community before a just and merciful Lord roasts them over an open pit of fire for all eternity. Because though their betrayals and heresies and false worship have justly condemned our friends the Jews to suffer endless damnation, Sister Coulter wishes them to see the error of their ways and the perfect infallibility of her own belief.
Thanks to jbm for pointing out what she really means. THE Captain is honored to assist.
By Shar
October 15, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
rarringt@1:34: Much of what you state went through my head as well,and I was similarly disgusted by the Republican campaign tactics in 2004. However, the Democrats were also at fault, by trying to finesse the lingering Clinton malaise with their own caretaker candidate in 2000, and the uninspiring nomination and campaign of John Kerry in 2004. Had the Democrats had an energetic, centrist candidate in either of those elections, I believe that the outcomes would have been very different. If in fact Hillary Clinton is nominated in 2008 to run against a centrist Republican like Guiliani, I think we will see a trifecta.
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
I think what harrington is saying now is that in 2004, the country replayed the hunch, an unlucky guess, and even though the country knew that sometimes a hunch pays off and sometimes it doesn’t, they were willing to at least try to be lucky, and play another hunch, is that what you’re trying to say, harrington?
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this
Shar, the 2004 election was stolen in ohio again by the GOP RNC poll pirates. And nobody disputed it.
If we had simply disputed more, then we’d be in total control of both houses and the white house and the supreme court and we could maintain our stranglehold on the local level by snitching on water cheats on the right.
and nobody disputes that.
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 1:57 PM | Link to this
@jbmlaw
You know that you did not go to Wally Mart to pick up the batteries for your blinking nose, clown!!!! Secondly, you claim to be of Jewish faith, yet, you defend the anit-Semitic remarks of Ann Coulter. Then you say that you use “logic” to deal with situations. Your circle logic is not broken.
By rarringt
October 15, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this
Shar,
Actually, I think Hillary has presented herself as fairly centrist.
Consider: she’s panned as being a far left liberal due to her efforts at passing universal health care back in ‘93. That was almost 15 years ago.
In the meantime, she helped guide Bill to one of the highest approval ratings, despite an impeachment, in the past four decades.
She’s positioned herself in the senate as a reasonable, collegial, effective and bipartisan leader. Most of the legislation that has born her name on it has been passed through the senate.
Although I disagreed with her, she voted to authorize Bush with authority for the war. She’s supported funding ever since.
Take her performance, and substitute her last name with, say, “Frist.” Conservatives wouldn’t have anywhere near the issues they have with her.
Hillary is profoundly effective and (election politics nothwithstanding) respected on both sides of the aisle, and understands the beast that is the republican election machine, and that’s what scares conservatives the most.
She’s not going to play nice, or back down, or know her place. Actually, in her mind, her “place” is at the desk in the Oval Office.
Jill, I don’t know if I’m not being clear with you, and I’m not trying to be rude, but I thought my posts were fairly straightforward.
It’s not about a hunch. It’s about poor judgment, and being allowed to be manipulated by fear and a false premise. Bush scared conservatives into the voting booths, alluding that only by throwing troops and cash into the middle east would you be safe at home.
He also got conservatives to believe that a decorated veteran and public servant with a honorable family was somehow absent in values, and that that “shortcoming” nullified any criticism about Bush’s dismal performance during his first term.
In short, you (you meaning the electorate) got had. But what’s worse is, you know you were being manipulated, and let him get away with it, and now are trying to pass it off as an honest mistake.
It wasn’t. We got the government we deserved, and our children’s children (in case you haven’t seen the GAO estimates lately) will be paying for the sins of their fathers.
By Shar
October 15, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this
Jill Benson@1:54 - If the Democrats had nominated a candidate who was capable of rousing public support and running an effective campaign, it wouldn’t have come down to counting votes in either Ohio or Florida. Disputing through the courts is not the answer, as is fails the legitimacy test (see Bush 2000) for the losing side. Only winning decisively, with a candidate who convinces voters that s/he is actually a good choice rather than the better of two evils, is the “undisputed” answer. I, for one, would be very glad to vote for a presidential candidate without holding my nose. That luxury has been denied me for quite some time.
By Genghis Khan
October 15, 2007 2:12 PM | Link to this
“He [Bush] also got conservatives to believe that a decorated veteran and public servant with a honorable family was somehow absent in values….”
To whom are you referring? I thought John Kerry was the Democrat nominee.
By jbmlaw
October 15, 2007 2:13 PM | Link to this
Dear Shar @ 1:38, thanks for the additional information. Leftists usually hide the ball, and try to magnify the boogey man with only leftist epithets. Back on point, I also believe that Christians are perfected Jews. We don’t judge Jewish people badly, rather we see them as children of the same God. It would be as if you described Kucinich as a perfected Democrat, or one of the northeast Republican senators as a perfected Republican. That does not disparage the other side, although it admittedly is like cheering for your side at a basketball game. I believe our Jewish brothers are our best friends in the Middle East, and are perhaps the only thing standing between the Islamists and nuclear weapons. I cannot imagine how anyone could perceive those views as opposing, nor to the main point, why anyone takes that language as disparagement of the sons of Jacob.
By jbmlaw
October 15, 2007 2:17 PM | Link to this
Poor Jackie @ 1:57, I have always claimed to be a Methodist, albeit one with profound respect for our Jewish brethren. And you disappoint me, I thought surely there would be one leftist out there to celebrate the service of Michael Murphy. (Southern Democrat will, but he is really a centrist. And Shar is not that far left of him, so I believe she would.) Where is Debbie Do Right? She will prove me wrong, she will celebrate Lt. Michael Murphy.
By rarringt
October 15, 2007 2:19 PM | Link to this
The RNC isn’t interested in getting more votes so much as in manipulating elections. They don’t need 200 million votes.
In 2000, they only needed one, Katherine Harris. Forget chads and butterfly ballots. Thousands of blacks were turned away from the voting locations because they had been improperly purged from the voter rolls. The reason? Harris had them on the “felon list,” when in fact they were not and were perfectly eligible to vote.
It goes on. WootenWisdom #1: If you can’t win an election, steal one.
By rarringt
October 15, 2007 2:23 PM | Link to this
Khan,
Just because you didn’t like his politics does not justify berating the man, or obfuscating the truth. He’s been serving this country since the 60’s, and is a good man with a decent family. Deal with it.
When I attack Bush, it’s in the capacity of his job performance. I’ve never gone after his wife or kids, who seem like fine folk.
A personal attack is just symptomatic of what ails a party that thinks they have some sort of monopoly on “values.”
Hmph.
By Jack is Back
October 15, 2007 2:25 PM | Link to this
Jack Here: Day 1, Hour 12: Thanks to the efforts of super secret agent Lonewolf, Jack now knows the Super Secret Idenity of the Al Cutie Supreme Leader in America, none other than Alwin Albert Gore himself! Yes, all this Global Warming nonsense has just been a cover for Al Cuties real goal: The take over of the Ovalish Office in 2009 by their very own Super Secret Supreme Leader, Alwin. Jack must get a super secret message his top level contact, Hilarious the Clown - not that that fool will know what to do, but at least Jacks a* will be covered - CYA rules in Super Secret Guv work, ya know. Jack Out
By jbmlaw
October 15, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this
Dear Shar, thanks for the transcript. Now I have no doubt that I am on Ann’s side. Her words are reasonable, and reflect nothing more than what we call the Great Commission. The interviewer erred in his perception, and misquoted Ann’s words. She is on solid ground.
By Translator
October 15, 2007 2:34 PM | Link to this
Leftists usually hide the ball, and try to magnify the boogey man with only leftist epithets.
Translation: Mommy never taught me to chew with my mouth closed, so now garbage comes out when I’m trying to make a point, which I don’t have, but I have to be heard anyway, and by the way, I just pooped my pampers.
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this
Cant you two just admit that you played a hunch, an unlucky guess, even though sometimes a hunch pays off, sometimes it doesnt’, you were just unlucky, you played a hunch.
Isn’t that more to your point?
And isn’t it true that the supreme court committed treason by annointing bush in 200, , and that ohio 2004 also was a defacto coup against the properly elected government of the usa, and that the saudis were the ones who got us involved in Iraq via Cheney who is the face of the saudis?
There’s trillions in war, and the saudis knew it. Halliburton is saudi. Cheney is saudi.
Saudi is saudi.
now I came by this info by playing a hunch, a lucky guess. Sometimes a hunch pays off, sometimes it doesn’t. I was just lucky. I played a hunch.
By Jack is Back
October 15, 2007 2:37 PM | Link to this
Hillary Clinton aka Hilarious the Clown is a JOKE.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this
**jbmlaw”, I heard Coulter’s interview and just thought it was another example of Coulter’s rather enjoyable Political Tourette’s problem. It wasn’t really a gaff, just Coulter being Coulter, bless her. Deutsch was trying to make her defensive of her Christian devotion, and instead of being a proper apologist she did her provocateur controversialist sophomoric cocky smartass thing, like a masculine Gore Vidal. She sed something about how Christianity is just “perfected Judaism”, which is a dumb thing to say for a whole host of reasons, but I think it’s nothing more than just a dumb thing to say. Ann being Ann.
Captain, last night I read Sanchez’ entire remarks, and boy howdy did he ever light into the press. He seems to resent the press for making him look like an underperformer when he was in Iraq, and to resent the Administration (esp. our military admin. in-country) for making him look bad, by comparison, now. So I think I understand his motives for lighting into the two factions, and well one can only scratch one’s…head and wonder why ever the press would ignore the first half of his speech. At least Sanchez took off the uniform before he criticized his erstwhile colleagues and C-in-C. Just before his fatal accident, Gen. Patton wrote in his (forbidden) journal that he would have to resign his beloved commission so that, as a civilian, he could properly criticize Ike’s obvious political ambitions. “I’ve come to see that Ike’s incapable of a disinterested decision,” his old friend Patton wrote. Evidently Sanchez is similarly incapable of a disinterested assessment of the press or the military.
By Curious Observer
October 15, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this
Paul Krugman is absolutely right about the mouth-frothing wingnut response to Gore—or, in fact, to any other Democrat who begins to show some traction with the public. Joe Klein, 10-15-2007.
Mouth-frothing is precisely the term to be used for the utterings of the knuckle-draggers who now want to denigrate the Nobel Peace Prize because it was awarded to someone not of their party.
I suppose we should be grateful that Albert Einstein was not the recipient of such an award in his lifetime. Otherwise, we would have been treated to a lot of Republican sneering asserting the dubiousness of his theory of relativity, and Einstein most certainly would have been accused of political heresy for having approached FDR on behalf of other physicists who urged more research on nuclear weapons.
Keep sneering, wingnuts. In a few more years, school children will be taught about your scientific backwardness, much as children in my school years were taught the foolishness of prosecuting someone merely for teaching the theory of evolution.
By Shar
October 15, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this
Dear jbmlaw - You are quite correct, I would, and do, honor the service and sacrifice of all of America’s military as they try desperately to make something positive from an ill-concieved, ill-planned adventure. Lt. Murphy’s ultimate sacrifice, coming through courage, faith and duty, is particularly worthy of respect and gratitude. Not so Ms. Coulter, whose remarks suggest a denigration of the faith of others that I find unacceptable and arrogant. I must disagree with your interpretation that her words are reasonable and “on solid ground.” I find the most pernicious element of any religion is the insistence that its followers are “right” (or, for Ms. Coulter, “perfected”) and that all others are, at best, misled or, at worst, infidels needing to be smited in the name of the chosen Lord. I don’t think that Christians are any more “perfected” than Jews, Confucians, Muslims or believers in the Cheyenne Peyote Cult. I also take strong offense to a suggestion that a perfect world would be comprised exclusively of “happy Christian Republicans”, as I know many conflicted atheist Libertarians who make this world a better place - in which group I would include my husband, for one. Casually denigrating my fellow Americans, whether I agree with them or not, does not sit well with me, and Ms. Coulter’s utter willingness to offend and marginalize others in her relentless pursuit of an extra ten minutes of fame is despicable.
By Jack
October 15, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this
I see someone hooked an 844lbs. shark. Never saw a lawyer that big.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this
CO, do you think it’s useful to draw a distinction between “evironmentalism” and, say, “evironmental science” or “environmental awareness”? Is it useful to distinguish “Darwinism” from “Darwinian Theory”? I see value in both distinctions. As for the Nobel peace prize (and the lit. prize too), they long ago degenerated into political devices. The Scandinavians are not coy about it, so why should we be? Back in the day when schoolchildren were supposed to be taught the theory of evolution, Henry Kissinger of all people received the Peace Prize while, as it turns out, he was scheming illegally to bomb great swaths of Southeast Asia. As for the lit. prize, do you really think that Toni Morrison belongs in the same pantheon with Faulkner and Asturias and Steinbeck and Yeats and Solzhenitsyn? A lot of us gave up a long time ago on all but the Nobels for chemistry and physics, both of which obviously are resistent to ideological cooptation, Stockholm-style.
By Southern Democrat
October 15, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this
Jbmlaw, I would respectfully point you to YouTube or another source to view Coulter’s response. Though I find the cold transcript frightening in and of itself, the video was even more troubling to me. This person is dangerous and does not represent Christianity in the least.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 3:19 PM | Link to this
whatisit, what are you on about, with your reference to a constitutional right to education? Are you from the UN? Are you serious about wanting a definition of “education”? Sounds like you really can use one.
By Dusty
October 15, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this
Poor ol’ Curious Observer@2:38,
still wailing and bailing water for lefty libs. Oh, says CO, Republicans don’t like Gore getting the Peace Prize because he was not of their party. Maybe.
But it seems Gore is not a scientist either. Not a meteorologist, not a hydrologist, not an environmentalist, not a geologist. Just a plain old politician missing the limelight. So he wrote a book and said the earth is falling apart like “hell in a handbasket” and it is YOUR fault.
All the libs applauded. A DEMOCRAT won something!!! The scientists applauded also and then added “Do I get grant money now?”
Next year, Dr. Seuss will get the Nobel for writing “Green Eggs and Ham” which brought peace to juvenile readers all over the world. Another fitting and suitable winner for the noble Nobel.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this
Dusty, I wholeheartedly second your nonimation of Dr. Seuss. I was happy when UC San Diego named their beautiful library for Ted Geisel. But then they saw it as a whimsical gesture to a whimsical author. Al Gore is a whimiscal author. Why, then, did he not win the literature prize, since he’s never been known for peacemaking?
By Truthifier
October 15, 2007 3:36 PM | Link to this
Since I can say nothing to change any already established viewpoints here, I’d just like to share an anecdote. While in Washington, DC in the weeks after the 2000 election, I was surprised to find a group of Republican protesters standing outside the Vice Presidential residence chanting “Get out of Cheney’s house!” — the chants, obviously, were intended for then Vice President Gore. The whole situation was unbecoming and really told me a lot about what the “true believers” of the GOP are like. Spoiled, demanding, and arrogant bullies. Mr. Gore moved out and Mr. Cheney moved in. We all know the rest of the story.
Should Mr. Gore run for 2008? I think he would prove to be one of the nation’s great presidents, but unfortunately, I also think his moment has passed. He is doing some really wonderful and important work in educating people on the looming dangers of climate change and should probably stick to that and use his Nobel for the greater good.
And for those of you who insist that there is no such thing as global climate change — let us know in 4 months when Lake Lanier is bone dry if you still think the environment is not in danger.
By Jack
October 15, 2007 3:45 PM | Link to this
Clinton & Gore showed their class when they trashed the whitehouse before they left. Fine people they are.
By RCH
October 15, 2007 3:51 PM | Link to this
rarringt
Eventhough I have been very busy, I just couldn’t stand by and listen to this garbage.
She’s positioned herself in the senate as a reasonable, collegial, effective and bipartisan leader. Most of the legislation that has born her name on it has been passed through the senate.
Mrs. Clinton has not authered any major legeislation whatsoever!
Although I disagreed with her, she voted to authorize Bush with authority for the war. She’s supported funding ever since.
Mrs. Clinton has twice voted against supplemental funding for the troops.
Actually, I think Hillary has presented herself as fairly centrist
I guess baby bonds, contributions to 401K’s and “Connect America” are the thoughts are the mainstream working American taxpayer. You wish!
By Truthifier
October 15, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this
Jack, the story about the Clinton administration “trashing” the White House was proven to be FALSE, but I’m sure you know that already.
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this
Glenn, Patton wanted us to continue the war against the soviets and kick their butts back to moscow where they belonged. We couldn’t have handled the soviets. Ike knew it would have been supreme folly. The russians gave up 100K men to capture berlin. They were willing to shell their own troops just to wipe out nazis. We couldn’t have won, we would have bled ourselves dry, and for what?
Then Truman had his Macarthur. Mac wanted us to nuke the chinese into surrending their communism. More supreme folly. For what? Because we’re better? Why? Only a lunatic would want nukular war with china.
Now Bush is Patton and Macarthur rolled up into one commander in chief, and of course The supreme fool for invading Iraq, (unless some victory is pulled out of nowhere by some miracle, but, since there’s not even a way to define “victory”, it seems unlikely).
By Anonymous
October 15, 2007 3:55 PM | Link to this
Apparently, peace has become a politically biased concept. Sane people are for it, and the Bush backers are against it.
By Southern Democrat
October 15, 2007 4:00 PM | Link to this
Dusty,
I assume you expressed this level of outrage at the hubris of the Nobel committee when Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize?
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 4:14 PM | Link to this
@jbmlaw
They way you carried on about neo-cons and those who believe that they have all the answers led me to believe that you were of the Jewish faith. I apologize for “assuming.” However, I do not apologize for the remarks of Ann Coulter. She and Rush say things to provoke their followers. They disseminate half-truths and innuendo with those who believe in their pronouncements consider these miscreants to be truthful.
By Jack
October 15, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this
Yeah. and I’m Abe Lincoln.
By Captain Freedom
October 15, 2007 4:27 PM | Link to this
THE Captain objects to whoever nicked Dusty’s handle @ 3:24. While the post is redolent of Dusty’s singular approach to dimwittery, the impostor makes the mistake of selecting the known Socialist comsymp Geisel as her children’s book author of choice. The real Dusty would have chosen someone like Siegfried Engelmann, a widely admired belle lettrist read by Real Americans like Our Leader.
Will the real Dusty please step forward to thank THE Captain for his chivlary?
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 4:29 PM | Link to this
Jill, thanks for the points on military history. Working back from the present… As for victory, the U.S. won the war in Iraq, unsurprisingly, with record speed. It may yet lose the occupation — which likewise would be unsurprising — but I personally doubt it. Patton and MacArthur were similar in their love for the Army, their self-absorption and their patrician upbringing. MacArthur was the finest student W. Pt. ever had, while Patton, a dyslexic, squeaked by. They both served under Pershing, of course, and both knew Ike in his formative years, Patton as a friend and Mac as an SOB of a boss. Similarity ends there, as far as I can tell. The circumstances of their respective last days of command are so different. Patton was eccentric and violent, but not crazy. He really did relish going head-to-head against comparable forces — something every commander is taught to avoid — whereas MacArthur had a lifelong dread of doing so (indeed, when finally he did do so, he lost his head utterly.) Patton was a genius of spatial tactics, MacArthur of temporal ones. Mac didn’t go to war with China; they went to war with the U.S.-led U.N. forces, and Mac wanted to use our best advantage, nukes, against their best advantage, hordes. He actually had a horror of the effects of modern warfare, esp. of nukes. Nontheless, nukes in ‘45 had done more than Al Gore’s ever done to bring about peace, and Mac figured they’d work again. (Three or four years later the French wanted to borrow some of ours to use in Vietnam.) The fact that Mac was expressly and repeatedly forbidden to do so is the point. His megalomania finally caught up with him, and his insubordination was unconstitutional, unmilitary and quite insane. Patton doesn’t deserve to be painted with that brush. He’d loved Ike for many years, and simply didn’t have the political acuity to understand why Eisenhower would temporize while Europe was being raped by the USSR. He seems to have been the last to get the word that the U.S. and Britain (also Gen. DeGaulle) intended to continue the war by other means.
By getalife
October 15, 2007 4:31 PM | Link to this
Al Gore has driven the wingnuts crazy.
Well, crazier than they normally are.
Good times.
Bwa.
By Captain Freedom
October 15, 2007 4:38 PM | Link to this
Oh dear. THE Captain has been busy defending the honor (whatever might be left of it) of the Lovely and Demure Miss Coulter and the Direly Dessicated Dusty. Alas, THE Captain should have been paying attention to another of the great lights of Godly Conservative not-men people. I refer of course to Our Lady of Forced Internment, Michelle Malkin.
It seems that while my attention was diverted, the Godly Michelle has been sacked from her position on the Bill O’Reilly gabfest by the Islamoliberals at Fox News. No longer will we be afforded the benefit of her in-depth factual reporting and sober analysis and commentary.
THE Captain has not verified the reason for Michelle’s unfair dismissal. Rumors abound, but THE Captain refuses to believe that Michelle would have balked at lathering the Great O’Reilly’s felafel as a condition of continued employment, as she certainly understands the need for not-men to be subservient to Godly Men of True Belief. Some other, more sinister forces must be at work here. I suspect the Klintons.
Fortunately, Michelle My Belle still has her own blog, where she posts compelling insights and trenchant satire, proving once again that We of True Belief are Smarter and Funnier than anyone else anywhere.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw, you’re a sensible enough person. Would you please do the honors of letting these leftists in on what a neocon is, and how one differs from a conservative? I’d like to see the look on their blogs when they learn that Podhoretz and Moynihan and Kirkpatrick, Democrats all, coined the term to describe themselves, and to differentiate themselves from orthodox Goldwater conservatives of the Buckley and Reagan stripe.
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 4:43 PM | Link to this
Seinfeld’s on Oprah with his Bee Movie. That lucky skunk has been trying to sell this movie for two years. Oprah said that she cant swat bees anymore after seeing the Bee movie. I remember when Oprah did a whole hour on the movie, “Babe”, where she said she cried when the little baby pig said, “I want my momma”. Anyone sick yet?
Cartoons. Hooey. this movie cant be any good, they’re trying too hard to sell it.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 4:46 PM | Link to this
Captain, O my Captain, you and I are coreligionists in the Church of Michelle.
By jm
October 15, 2007 4:51 PM | Link to this
Dusty@3:24- which book are you referring to? He has written more than one.
By BS Aplenty
October 15, 2007 5:01 PM | Link to this
Gore’s political season has come and gone - go hug a tree, Al.
Strange thing those Nobel Prizes - Einstein received his for work explaining the photoelectric effect not Special or General Relativity for which he is well known - go figure.
I now respectfully suggest that we develop a prize for best blog “literature?” The blog literary areas for consideration are:
1) Best Blog Insight into a Meaningless Political Issue, 2) Best Rhetorical Bitch Slap of another Blogger, 3) Best Blog Humor at the expense of another Blogger’s self-esteem, 4) Biggest Blog suckup to the Blog Master & my favourite 5) Best Blog pickup attempt without benefit of visual ID.
Who needs the Nobel Prize?
By DemDems4Ever
October 15, 2007 5:31 PM | Link to this
jm
More revisionist history from the right wing. In 2002, Jimmy Carter had yet to become a critic of W the incompetent. In fact, like most americans post 9/11, he was very supportive.
the above is a direct quote from your post @8:43 this morning.
you are reaching if you call that interview “an attack”, unless you call registering disappointment or being critical “an attack”.
The interview made NATIONAL news as a first by a former President so I am not reaching but apparently according to a looney leftist such as you, MSNBC, Fox, and the major networks were “reaching”.
Just like a Clintonsta, jm, you parse and run from your own words. The only “revisionist” is YOU.
By peeping tom humiliates itself again
October 15, 2007 5:38 PM | Link to this
the sickster peeping tom’s despicable deranged rabid dishonesty elicits huge sniggering amongst clear thinking educated patriotic folks. it is NOT the alSore’s party affiliation that is the cause of such sensible, pragmatic revulsion at its worthless blatantly pandering Nobel award. it’s the alSore’s hysterical lies and Manson like obsessiveness over the non-existent global whining cult that so many carbon footprint hypocritical leftist scum are lining up like political moonies to puke up in public. may they all be forced at the point of DeNiro’s/Pacino’s mafioso guns to drink a gallon of Prius battery acid on some yoof bollocks show on MoronicTeeVee!!!
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 5:41 PM | Link to this
Hands down it’s Analchord for all blog nobel prizes.
And everyone agrees and knows it because you morons are still hacking analchord.
unbelievable.
By jm
October 15, 2007 5:45 PM | Link to this
DemDems4Ever - who brought clinton into this? spin, spin and spin some more.
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 5:50 PM | Link to this
Dr Phil has declared “If I did it” a confession by OJ, based on the shift in word choices he uses when he starts describing the actual crime.
Psychorama.
By AmVet
October 15, 2007 5:52 PM | Link to this
Good afternoon all.
To the apologists in general but particularly to my counselor friend jbmlaw, I must say that your support for Ms. Coulter’s comments are very, very disturbing.
In spite of her constant nervous laughter, it is not a joke that she says the country, no the entire world, would be better off if everyone was a Christian.
She has made this point before so playing it off as a “gaffe” as someone here did earlier is simply disingenuous.
In spite of her claims to the contrary, she is an intolerant religious bigot, on a gigantic scale, pure and simple.
Don’t be so afraid to speak out against intolerance and religious hatred when you see it my Republican friends.
Even when it comes from one of your favorite media darlings.
By Rerun
October 15, 2007 5:52 PM | Link to this
Oct 14 02:06 PM US/Eastern Top US Democrats Sunday brushed off Turkish fury and vowed to press ahead with an Armenian “genocide” bill, insisting that bloodshed today demanded a righting of past wrongs.
There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind now, well, anyone with his/her head out of the @ss, that the Democrocks are heavily vested in America’s failure in the war against radical Islamic terrorism.
If Turkey halts assisting us in the near future, take it to the polls and get these pos’s out of Washington and make damn sure they never get back in there. At least for the next two decades or until we eradicate the problem that menaces this entire planet, which ever comes first.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 5:54 PM | Link to this
OJ clearly is a Trojan. Were he a Bruin he’d have entitled the book Had I Done It.
By Quoter
October 15, 2007 5:58 PM | Link to this
Today’s Ann Coulter quote:
By Jill Benson
October 15, 2007 6:00 PM | Link to this
Good one! (glen)
Rerun, turkey wants to go all fiddy-cent on the kurds and commit genocide again, with our help, they can do it.
This was one of the reasons NOT to invade Iraq. Turkey’s been waiting for this for a long time. They think some folks just need good clean killin’ sometimes, and there aint no cuttin’ back.
We can win the Iraq War and the Kurds could still get slaughtered. You want to invade Turkey? You’re a lunatic hack who would french kiss rush limbaugh’s weenie just cause he’s so redstate.
alles sprechen
By Jackie
October 15, 2007 6:01 PM | Link to this
@By time to liquidate all treasonous leftist filth
I did not see your 1:03 post. I will wait for your comments tomorrow. I am sure you and I will be able to make some determinations about your statements.
By DemDems4Ever
October 15, 2007 6:01 PM | Link to this
jm@5:45
The metaphorical “blue dress” nailed you just as the actual dress nailed the Clintonistas who called Monica Lewinsky every imaginable name until the stain.
You were wrong on your Carter quote, the facts say so without equivocation, and you do not have the courage to admit you write but do not think, or even have any facts to support your drivel.
Carter was, and is, a partisan hack who very nearly destroyed the American economy and you accuse me of spin.
He was CRITICAL not SUPPORTIVE as you claimed @ 8:43 this am. Too much for a blind left looney like you to understand?
By They Way
October 15, 2007 6:03 PM | Link to this
“Don’t be so afraid to speak out against intolerance and religious hatred when you see it my Republican friends.”
That’s an interesting comment. The only religion in this nation that’s completely okay to bash, make a mockery out of with “art”, and make references that it’s as dangerous to this nation as terrorism (Rosie) is Christianity.
Look in the mirror, Democrats.
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 6:04 PM | Link to this
Rerun, that’s exactly right, and I think it’s an historic event, truly important. I’m more than ever ashamed to have spent years of my life working for Democratic politicians. The ones I worked for, and the ones on the Hill now, have voted against the Armenian genocide resolutions consistently for years. Now that they see a way to aid and abet our enemies by alienating a strategic ally at the expense of men and women now in the field, they’ve decided that the Armenians were right all along. The vote records, of last week of of years past, will bear witness to this turpitude. I think I even agree with Orwell’s climactic line: “The party seeks power for its own sake.”
By deegee
October 15, 2007 6:05 PM | Link to this
Would it be too much to ask of the perfected Ann Coulter to close her legs when sitting down in a miniskirt that comes up to her toochas?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smSQ9y-N30E
By Glenn Gilbert
October 15, 2007 6:19 PM | Link to this
AmVet, fair enough. But I was merely saying that it was just Coulter being a jerk, “like a masculine Gore Vidal”. If she’s really an anti-Semite then she can go to The Other Place. George Carlin’s spent 35 years mocking the Catholic Church, which I happen to love, and still I’ve always found him hilarious. And Carlin means it, whereas Coulter was just being lame. Still, if her dumb remarks actually hurt anyone — if, say, the JDL wants gentiles to join in some kind of censure — then I reckon I’ll join in clocking her for it. Hope this isn’t too lackaday, but it’s a rough-and-tumble chattering agora, our country, and Jews are perfected Christians where humor is concerned.
By jm
October 15, 2007 10:56 PM | Link to this
DemsDems4Ever - you really must get over this obsession you have with things Clinton, it isn’t healthy.
As for those attacks by Jimmy Carter in the Columbus Ledger, here is an example of one: “I have the greatest personal respect for President George W. Bush, and also understand the difficulties and challenges of a new president who is struggling to prevail in dealing with a divided Congress and with a wide array of foreign leaders. I know that he is dedicated to protecting America’s best interests and our nation’s moral values. Soon after his inauguration, I went to Washington to offer my services in any way that would be helpful to him. President Bush and I have always had a good personal relationship, and I wish him well.”
Brutal.
By DemDems4Ever
October 16, 2007 8:24 AM | Link to this
jm
Your allegaation @8:43 yesterday was proven FALSE.
In fact every word you posted yesterday in defense of your 8:43 is false.
Then you post @10:56 last night with a quote from Carter nine days after the interview in which Carter attempts to spin his own words, yet you would lead a reader to believe the quote was a part of the original interview.
Are you really Lanny Davis, the mousy little Clinton lawyer who went on all the talk shows referring to Lewinsky as a liar and a conservative operative trying to damage Clinton? Then the blue dress and Lanny Davis became just like you jm - another left looney proven to be a liar and pseudo-spin doctor.
You are a FAKE, a CHARLATAN and should be banned from ever using a blog for your repeated falsehoods and attempts to spin the worst president (small p intended) ever of these United States.
I suggest you read the July 20, 2001 article and the many reviews you find on the internet. Each one proves my original point - “you are nothing but a left loon”.
By Charles
October 16, 2007 9:15 AM | Link to this
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!
Al Gore the Moonbat
By jm
October 16, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this
DemDems4Ever - you really need to seek counseling for your obsession with things Clinton. As for my quote yesterday “post 9/11 he was very supportive” I stand by it.
As for worst president, I think w the incompetent will surpass carter.
By DemDems4Ever
October 16, 2007 4:34 PM | Link to this
jm@ 9:43
You clearly do not think or comprehend - you are a left loony through and through.
Of course you stand by your statement, you are doing that which all fools ultimately do and try to defend your lies.