Our new Commander-in-Chief is quite a guy. You just gotta love his priorities. I just can’t believe people actually voted for this guy.
Where I'm likely to ramble on most anything.
Our new Commander-in-Chief is quite a guy. You just gotta love his priorities. I just can’t believe people actually voted for this guy.
Marshal Art's 
Thanks for your input, Jim. But I would have you remember one or two things:First, what “has credibility” with you is not a goal for me. Sorry to break that to ya.Secondly, since I didn’t vote for the him shows I have a far greater sense of the man than do you. Like most people of Illinois, I didn’t know a damn thing about him until he began to run for the US Senate and we were told to see him as something special by the Democratic Party. It was at that point that I began to find out about him, something 99% of those who voted for him never did and likely haven’t yet done, and through doing so found that he is unworthy of both my vote and the accolades with which suckers like yourself have showered him.
Feodor,”You’re just petty. And that’s character.”Neither is true. I am not petty, and pettiness isn’t character. Not good character anyway. Why you’d say something so stupid is beyond me. But I was prepared to let the matter stand as having pointed out yet another example of the cut of Barry’s jib, until his sheep stopped by to defend his snub of the MOH winners. But truly, at this point, it’s not so much about Barry as it is about his goofy supporters who can’t see the obvious. Hell, I’d rather be petty!
you’re ALL missing it, which is that you guys are totally poles apart, politically, in the first place!this is the INTERNET!none of us have any reason to be in agreement over this in the first place…this is natural and normalyou guys, collectively, represent very far-left and far-right perspectives, whether you realize that, or agree to it, or notface it, how many of you would break bread with one another, even allow one another in each other’s living rooms, in real life? be honest!we’re not half as original as we think we are….we’re just reprising arch and meathead, on “all in the family”!so let’s not be pussies about it all, with the fake indignation and the outrage…there wouldn’t be fifty-one comments, if there wasn’t merits to either side…
“It was at that point that I began to find out about him, something 99% of those who voted for him never did and likely haven’t yet done, and through doing so found that he is unworthy of both my vote and the accolades with which suckers like yourself have showered him…”were you, as an illinois native, aware of barky’s association with black supremacists like wright, pfleger, moss, and meeks, prior to it all becoming common knowledge?as a member of the ucc, was there widespread awareness within the denomination, as to the nature of trinity, in chicago? or, did this come as a complete surprise?
As a resident of Illinois, and a long-time admirer of Black Theology, Obama’s relationship with a church that embodied those teachings in its ministry and outreach would only have strengthened my conviction that this is the right guy for right now.Unlike you, hashfanatic, I see nothing wrong with it.Oh, and, I might just break bread with Marshall or anyone else here. See, in the real world, I don’t check a person’s politics before I sit down with him or her, because it really doesn’t matter all that much to me. Here, we’re having an argument – I’ll grant you that much – and no, we’ll not see eye to eye on the matter in question.So what? (I keep coming back to that little two-word phrase, don’t I?)
I began to find out about himAnd what did you find out about him that is fact and not from a chain email?
“As a resident of Illinois, and a long-time admirer of Black Theology, Obama’s relationship with a church that embodied those teachings in its ministry and outreach would only have strengthened my conviction that this is the right guy for right now..”well, i’ve heard other obots with similar viewsif it mattered, i’d say the reasons for this would be interesting, from a sociological or even psychological point of viewlet us know how that all works out for you”Unlike you, hashfanatic, I see nothing wrong with it…”i’m not surprised, although i’m not entirely sure if you actually believe that, or if you’re trying to be deliberately provocative”Oh, and, I might just break bread with Marshall or anyone else here…”well, that’s mighty white of you, no?”See, in the real world, I don’t check a person’s politics before I sit down with him or her, because it really doesn’t matter all that much to me…”bullshit, we all do, whether we admit to it or notwe check each other out, we watch each other’s responses, we key into different trigger mechanisms, we identify points of potential agreement or dissent, and we select our company, based on all of the above, but not necessarily contingent upon “like-mindedness”, or shared values, rather to achieve current or future, common or personal goals and objectives”Here, we’re having an argument – I’ll grant you that much – and no, we’ll not see eye to eye on the matter in question…”as men have, over the ages, nothing new to see here”So what? (I keep coming back to that little two-word phrase, don’t I?)…”yeah, but you’re the one who claims to have more than a passing infatuation with black supremacist culture, the writings and ravings of wright, etc., and claim to proud to hold the ghetto subculture that spawned them, in high esteemit would seem pretty obvious that, your political choice has been shaped more by the barkster’s color than any legitimate issue or particular position statement that concern americans, whether it’s real, or simply a defiant posture you’ve adopted, as “revenge”, for eight long years of bushso, to me it’s only natural that your next step will be to adopt the stone jungle morals, attitudes, and expressions of a thug culture that currently holds your favor…”so what” would seem a fitting rejoinder, however weakit’s not so surprising…as i’ve mentioned, i’ve heard many obots take up the same defensive postures, and express similar sentimentsin time, you may think differently
“And what did you find out about him that is fact and not from a chain email?…”why? is that where you get your news, and official information?after all, i haven’t seen any of the righties on this thread, forward us to the pez dispenser’s own campaign website, for critical thinking and spontaneous information, on an issue of open debate, LOL!
There were 48 Medal of Honor recipients in attendance, who were undoubtedly disappointed by the Commander-in-Chief’s failure to show. I doubt disappointment was the emotion they were experiencing.”Let’s not be petty”Petty? Your statement speaks volumes.
Jim, It is likely that what I found out made it’s way to all the same places you mean to hold out as suspect. Bias does not imply untruth. But I looked at his record (such as it is) as a state senator in Illinois, I looked at how he got elected, I learned of his associations and I learned of his positions.
Geoffrey,Long time admirer of Cone’s Black Liberation Theology? In what way, like a comic book? Wow. That’s way too out there, even for you. I gotta let that one pass for now.
Look, this just proves the guy is a total sleaze ball muslim and probably an illegal alien besides.
Hash,I have a lot of friends that are liberals. My pastor is a liberal and he and I get on famously. None of these libs agree with me politically and I do my best to help them understand why they are so wrong. Believe me, it ain’t easy. Why? Because they’re libs and I’m not a licensed mental health professional. But they’re still my friends and I love them like I love all my friends. Even the biggest horse’s ass lib that comes here I consider a friend of a kind. I would have no problem meeting with any who post here and with whom I routinely debate (though at first at a neutral location with lots of people around). In fact, I think it would be a gas.And let me correct one other point: Though my opponents ARE meatheads, as evidenced by their liberal leanings, Bunker is a liberal construct and not anywhere near an accurate representation of what a conservative is.
I find it interesting that because Obama doesn’t show his face at a ball meant to honor a few good men and maybe a woman or two(?)that he is now a jackass sleazeball who worships Alla and born who the hell knows where.Yet….GW Bush ordered a pre-emptive war by lying to congress, which constitutes high crime and misdeamenor, subverted the constitution, suspended habeas corpus, illegally spied on me and you, had no regard for the rule of law, issued signing statements giving to himself legislative powers that belong to congress alone……And then let’s see…extraordinary rendition and torture.Have I missed anything? I probably have. There was so much abuse of power I can’t keep up with it all.And you guys get upset over a no show at a party in a building that has logistical and security problems?Sheesh.
Marty,Are you trying out tin-foil hats for yourself?”I find it interesting that because Obama doesn’t show…”Whoa! Sure, Barry’s a jackass sleaseball, but who mentioned anything about Allah or his place of birth? Was it Hash? I don’t always read every word he posts when he posts a really long one. Not until I have to.”Yet….GW Bush ordered a pre-emptive war by lying to congress,”No he didn’t.”which constitutes high crime and misdeamenor”Maybe only if it happened, which it didn’t.”subverted the constitution,”No he didn’t.”suspended habeas corpus”For non-citizens who were shooting at our troops. Sorta like what they did when they captured Nazi and Japanese soldiers during WWII.”illegally spied on me and you,”No he didn’t.”issued signing statements giving to himself legislative powers that belong to congress alone”He’s not close to the first prez to use signing statements. Which ones concern you?”extraordinary rendition and torture.”Boohoo. Violent murderers get a taste of their own medicine. You know what would have prevented that? Not being violent murderers. Easy. But really, until someone describes something that resembles torture, I remain unmoved by such claims, particularly as they involve people who hack off heads of bound prisoners, send their kids to blow themselves up, teach their kids that some people are only good for annihilation, and engage in real torture and evil.”Have I missed anything?”Yeah. The boat. The invasion was a good thing. Bush did what should have been done back in the 70s, and definitely the 90s. Coulda done it better, but that’s hindsight and he took his best shot.”There was so much abuse of power I can’t keep up with it all.”It’s hard to keep up with that which never happened.”And you guys get upset over a no show at a party in a building that has logistical and security problems?”No. I recognize the snub Barry made regarding the MOH winners so that he could party with Hollywood half-wits.Sheesh indeed.
Apropos of Marshall Art’s latest comment, and his insistence that (a) I never provide links to support the things I say; and (b) the US has not, does not, and will never torture, I thought I would provide a link to an interview with a military prosecutor who says, among other things, that the torture of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay prison has really screwed up the ability to actually prosecute any of the prisoners there for anything.From British author and journalist Andy Worthington, comes the following details:”On January 13, in a declaration submitted to a Washington D.C. District Court in the case of Guantánamo prisoner Mohamed Jawad, Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld, a former prosecutor in the Military Commission trial system, delivered perhaps the most blistering attack on the US military’s detention program by a former member of the Pentagon’s team to date.Speaking of the man he was once tasked to prosecute, Vandeveld said prisoner Mohamed Jawad’s continued detention is “something beyond a travesty,” and urged that Jawad be released given a “lack of any credible evidence.”Some of this information was revealed in September 2008, after Vandeveld (who has served in Bosnia, Africa, Iraq and Afghanistan in the years since the 9/11 attacks, and has received several military awards) resigned as a prosecutor, complaining that “potentially exculpatory evidence” had “not been provided” to Jawad’s defense team, and that his accidental discovery of information relating to Jawad’s abuse helped convert him from a “true believer to someone who felt truly deceived.”However, other information has never before been revealed in public, and Vandeveld’s declaration, in a habeas corpus review triggered by a Supreme Court ruling last June, constitutes the most sustained criticism of the Bush administration’s flagship trial system for terror suspects since Col. Morris Davis, the Commissions’ former chief prosecutor, resigned in October 2007. Davis explained that he had done so because of the politicization of the trial system, attempts to endorse the use of evidence obtained through torture, and the refusal of Pentagon chief counsel William J. Haynes II to accept that any planned trials could end in acquittals.”Of course, he’s probably lying, right? And, I bet he’s one of the rare liberals in the military, too.
Geoffrey, torture has been re-defined to the point where college phrat initiation would be grievous crimes against humanity. The reason for that was to stir up the useful idiots into a frenzy. You’re basically a tool that is easy used.If no one else will say it then I will. “Black [liberation] Theology” is a joke. None of that is relevant to the post. What is reverent is the fact that Obama probably didn’t attend the MOH Ball because he didn’t sell the network rights to that ball and was not contractually obligated to be there. To say it another way, Pay to Play A fine Illinois tradition.
“None of that is relevant to this post”. True enough. Except, of course, Marshall took it upon himself to criticize Marty for calling out the various crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush Administration, claiming that no such things existed. He has, in the past, claimed that the US never tortured anyone.I took it upon myself to provide one little bit of evidence to the contrary.As for “phrat” hazing being torture, I went to Alfred University, the site of the first nationally publicized hazing death, a young man who died of alcohol poisoning while pledging the fraternity Klan Alpine. So, yeah, sometimes fraternity hazing can, indeed, be torture.It would be nice if you knew something of which you were talking about before you opened your mouth.As for Black Liberation theology being a joke, I would like to know which books concerning it – J. Deotis Roberts, James Cone, Josiah Young, among other authors – you have read. If you can name more than one and give a substantive criticism on the text in question, I will take your view seriously. Otherwise, not so much.
“Even the biggest horse’s ass lib that comes here I consider a friend of a kind. I would have no problem meeting with any who post here and with whom I routinely debate (though at first at a neutral location with lots of people around). In fact, I think it would be a gas…”we’ll see how you feel, in six monthsthen, if you wanna have an open-air picnic with the ones who worship the parents of the children are selling crack in our schools…well, hell, i’ll even send over some chicken and grape soda, LOL!i may be a christian, just not that good of a one…familiarity breeds contempt, IMHOand you couldn’t be more wrong about Bunker…he was actually an excellent representation of an inner-city white “conservative”, of the TIME…trust me, i grew up in that world, just a somewhat crappier part of town, LOL…the word “conservative” is thrown around way too lightly, too big of a net…things were much different, back then…the republicans had better representatives than now, not the hunters, jindals, thompsons, steeles…even my old nemesis of mind, ronnie, would be shocked and appalled at the “conservatives” of today…the most unrealistic character on aitf was gloria, sally struthers was horribly miscast, and jean stapleton played the lovable edith a little too ditzyon the other hand, mike evans as lionel and vincent gardenia as frank next door aced it every time…:)
here’s the thing about torture…besides being illegal and morally wrong, it doesn’t even yield anything that is constructivethe torturee simply lies, to get the torture to stop, and our operatives have to run all over town, chasing bsit also endangers the lives of our agents and operatives, although the neocons consider them totally expendable, i.e. plamebesides, i’d rather be killed by some random bomb blast, then saved by torturethat’s how convinced i am, that most of the varied “terror” threats we hear of, are simply invented to keep us in a spirit of feari’m not interested in living in a spirit of fear, i have too much to do, being one of those “bitters”, clinging to God, guns, and all
“Sure, Barry’s a jackass sleaseball, but who mentioned anything about Allah or his place of birth?”AnonymousYet….GW Bush ordered a pre-emptive war by lying to congress,”No he didn’t.”Yes he didsubverted the constitution,”No he didn’t.”I think he did with a little help from the democrats.suspended habeas corpus”For non-citizens who were shooting at our troops. Sorta like what they did when they captured Nazi and Japanese soldiers during WWII.”You think it’s find and dandy. I think it is a betrayal.illegally spied on me and you,”No he didn’t.”Yes he did.issued signing statements giving to himself legislative powers that belong to congress alone”He’s not close to the first prez to use signing statements. Which ones concern you?”This one.
Geoffrey,Thanks for the link. Now that wasn’t so hard, was it? What is hard is trying to show how it supports your case.I watched the video from the chick’s inteview with the former prosecutor. Beginning with this, I find that the dude offered little but accusations, most of which I find of little concern. What we’re dealing with at Gitmo might indeed be less than organized, but, considering that so many have been released, to say that there might be a few who have yet to be means nothing. The case the dude uses as an example, about the kid accused of tossing a grenade at US troops, leaves many questions. One of the first things that came to mind was if this particular prosecutor was dealing with the reality of the situation. He sounded as if he had a hard time with a situation that doesn’t match Matlock or Perry Mason. I could be wrong, but I don’t think the standards are the same for trying people in those situations, trials that shouldn’t even be taking place, in my opinion. He speaks of abuse, without describing any of what he calls abuse. Basically, the only charge he can really make is that they aren’t as organized as they should be. There is also an assumption that what he thinks is evidence that would exonerate the kid, when that doesn’t mean it is so.As to the Worthington bit, (I read the one from the link at Video Cafe) it is rife with curious comments and phrases such as what follows:”…his masters–in the Pentagon and in the office of the Vice President–who have no interest in extablishing a fair or just process at Buantanamoreferring to Aussie PM John Howard as “one of the few stout allies” which would be more credible if the total number of allies was provided. There are still more than most people realize.”ferociously biased Vice President”Saying that Col. Davis laid out his case “with admirable clarity”And mentioned, but didn’t delve into Davis resigning after being placed in the chain of command under someone with whom he had problems.(emphasis above was mine)These little pieces suggest quite a bias in the author Worthington that I don’t believe Geoffrey would tolerate if displayed in pieces critical of those he supports. In addition, it also speaks of torture without defining it, it speaksof Davis insisting he won’t use evidence obtained by torture, without defining it, and speaks of another, I believe a guy named Haynes in a negative light for his refusal to outlaw enhanced interrogation techniques without defining or describing them. What we are left with is a lot of hooey because the process lacks perfection. Is that a bad thing? Of course. But as many have been released from Gitmo after having been through the process, it seems a bit much to suggest something Satanic and worthy of closing down just because gitches still occur. Rather than calling the admin and military sons of Satan, far better would be to tighten things up and continue on. Take note, Geoffrey. Just as I insist I do, I read the links, commented it’s worthiness, and explained why I feel as I do. So the big question is, “why should I take the word of Davis, (or Worthington or the guy in the video) over the Bush people?
More for Geoffrey.”He has, in the past, claimed that the US never tortured anyone.”I have in the past claimed that no one has provided evidence of torture, but only techniques they wish to classify as torture that I find to be not so torturous. Thus, no torture has been done. Not as policy or mandate.”I took it upon myself to provide one little bit of evidence to the contrary.”Yet, no torture was described that I saw in your “evidence”.”So, yeah, sometimes fraternity hazing can, indeed, be torture.”If you’re into using alarmist rhetoric to describe hazing to which the victim willingly sujected himself. Generally, real torture victims do not volunteer.I’ve read some of Cone. To say it’s a joke is to be kind.
“here’s the thing about torture…besides being illegal and morally wrong, it doesn’t even yield anything that is constructive”Many people say this as if it’s true, without actually having first hand knoweldge. Personally, I don’t buy it and I doubt torture is used for fishing expeditions. That is, the interrogators already know the subject has the info they seek, so they’d have a good idea of what is a lie and what is not when the subject talks. More importantly, however, this would mean, if true, that waterboarding isn’t torture, but a valid interrogation tool, since it yielded actionable info from Kalid Sheik Mohammed.”it also endangers the lives of our agents and operatives,”In what way?”besides, i’d rather be killed by some random bomb blast, then saved by torture”Feel free to die anytime you like. I’m for saving my fellow Americans and other innocent civilians by whatever means necessary. So the first opportunity that some scumbag takes hostages or tries to, I expect you to offer yourself to free others.”that’s how convinced i am, that most of the varied “terror” threats we hear of, are simply invented to keep us in a spirit of fear”Like the one that people like you think Bush ignored before 9/11?”i’m not interested in living in a spirit of fear,”Good for you, you brave boy. Accepting reality and preparing for it is not living in fear, but is being practical, sensical and what we do simply by having a military and a police force. It’s called “being responsible”.
Marty,Responses to your links, one by one:1) False statements do not a lie make. I’ve been through this with Geoffrey as he attempted to prove that Bush lied. Just as then, your link fails to support this charge. Bush responsibly acted on intel available. To look back and say that intel was not accurate, so therefor Bush lied, is to have one’s tin-foil hat strapped on too tightly. Others, many others, saw the same intel, some were other countries seeing similar stuff. All this link shows is that, as we already know, the intel was imperfect and in accurate. In addition, such intel provided only some of the incentive for invasion, but not all of it. Invading was a great idea who’s time had come. Without having done so, events would have made the false intel prophetic.2) The Fourth Amendment speaks to “unreasonable” search and seisure. But it does not define “unreasonable”. I insist and support the notion that the type of foe we faced made Bush’s actions far from unreasonable. It made them mandatory for a president to secure the safety of his people. God bless him.3) So you’re saying we betrayed the Nazi and Japanese prisoners during WWII? Bush’s suspension of habeus, or rather his belief that it didn’t extend to the scumbags we were fighting, was far more narrow a suspension than was Lincoln’s or FDR’s regarding the Japanese internment people. I would feel betrayed if he DIDN’T take extra steps in dealing with these most heinous savages.4) First of all, damn you for making me watch Olberman for 11 minutes. It was unnecessary since Tice said nothing. And considering the nasty nature of the media towards Bush, and the willingness of some members to expose strategies of the admin’s war on terror, extra suspicion of that group of people is justified. But until Tice explains the manner in which the media was watched, one can’t determine if there’s any real problem. As far as the overall surveilance, it is my understanding that criteria would bring about more scrutiny, but worthless info, such as what toppings on the pizza you’re ordering, would be jettisoned as useless. There is no reason to suspect the Bush admin had any malevolent intent in any of their anti-terror activities and strategies. So to say they were spying on you and me is ludicrous.5) All signing statements accomplish the same goal of leaving open a door for special circumstances. In the war on terror, I’m totally fine with the possibility that if a particular scenario warrants it, absolutely any interrogation technique is good to go. There is a goofy implication by Bush haters that anyone would torture a prisoner when it isn’t required or appropriate.
Marshall said:I’m for saving my fellow Americans and other innocent civilians by whatever means necessary.This is, of course, the terrorists’ argument, too.
It seems to me that even the most hardened leftist should be able to agree that the preservation of innocent human life isn’t the highest priority of jihadist terrorists.They strap bombs to their own children, to walk into crowds of civilians and kill other people’s children.To say that terrorists are using whatever means necessary to preserve innocent life is as repulsive as to say that “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” when jihadists aren’t fighting for freedom, they’re fighting to eliminate most freedoms.
Indeed. To insist that terrorists are attempting to preserve innocent life would mean that any innocent lives amongst their people are threatened, which they are not except by themselves. They have never been under assault, but have instead been targets of retaliation that would otherwise have been unnecessary had the terrorists not begun terrorizing.
“They have never been under assault, but have instead been targets of retaliation that would otherwise have been unnecessary had the terrorists not begun terrorizing…”of course they have, you have simply allowed yourself to be manipulated and programmed by the true terrorists, and, as a result, confused them with the truly terrorizedand, there are many of us who understand that, you will NEVER allow reality to penetrate your consciousness, it’s psychologically not even possible, at this pointthat’s what happens, when your masters lose the moral high ground, and you never bothered to make a contingency plan
the intel was imperfect and in accurateAll intelligence is imperfect and often inaccurate. The fact is, the Bush administration conveyed a certainty when they knew there was conflicting or even opposing evidence: “It’s been confirmed”, “We know”, “We’ve learned”. These statements themselves are lies.The faulty intelligence tale is a lie. The intelligence wasn’t so much faulty as the administration chose to ignore the part of the intelligence they didn’t like.
Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy,The imperfect intel is what confirmed their suspicions and provided them with what they “knew” and “learned”. Give it a rest. I’m beginning to feel that I DO want the loons to bring Bush to trial just to give them a very public opportunity to expose themselves for the pathetic buffoons they are.
Hash,You too, need to give it a rest about the cause of Middle East unrest. Jew hatred isn’t welcome here anymore than Bush hatred and is viewed with the same level of sadness and boredom.
now, now, marshall playing the antisemite card where none exists will work no more successfully than geoffrey’s periodic references to racism, which are equally groundlessbesides, you, marshall, have had every bit of access to accurate information that i have had, you are the one who chose jihadist pie-in-the-sky terror storms as your very discredited basis of judgementAll intelligence is imperfect and often inaccurate. The fact is, the Bush administration conveyed a certainty when they knew there was conflicting or even opposing evidence: “It’s been confirmed”, “We know”, “We’ve learned”. These statements themselves are lies.”The faulty intelligence tale is a lie. The intelligence wasn’t so much faulty as the administration chose to ignore the part of the intelligence they didn’t like…”that doesn’t matter to them, jim, because their goals are not the same, the “terror” they claim to fight is only a tactic, in the first placefor them, it has ALWAYS been about writing the script (“a new pearl harbor”, etc.) and then moving heaven and earth to MAKE reality coincide with their narrative, so it all seems plausible enough, to a sufficiently large number of peopleeach “attack” always results in a “response” (and it is always one side that seems to “respond”, or “retaliate”), and each time is in reality, a drill of sorts, in order to gauge what the american citizenry, and the world, will tolerate, and the gravity of the next course of action to followthey will NEVER change, and barky’s departure from the ostensible script is far from any “new order” of his own design, it’s just a different spin on the same old playbook…
Hash,As we have discussed, my info comes from those who know the enemy best, former members. Your info is by those who do not listen to the enemy, but focus on isolated episodes by which they tarnish entire groups. My info does not dispute abuses occur, while your side argues they are policy. YOU believe crap and ignore reality. Why would someone who didn’t have some negative attitude about the real victims, the Israelis? As long as you continue to come to this blog and spew your one-sided and distorted view of Middle Eastern affairs, I will label you as your comments warrant.
“As we have discussed, my info comes from those who know the enemy best, former members…”yeah, LMAO?? like, WHO?steyn, malky, krauthammer, glick?paid shills like yon, and ardolino?please “Why would someone who didn’t have some negative attitude about the real victims, the Israelis?”you mean the bloodthirsty murderers that will NEVER stop grabbing land and picking fights with their neighbors? awww…that’s another prime example of you calling current world events that are completely out of your realm of understanding, as you would have them to be, and not as they areand a textbook example, of how america repeatedly builds up today’s “friend”, to be tomorrow’s enemyyou’ll see! yes, in your lifetime, you’ll see it all for what it isin the interim, i’ll continue to do my best, to reduce human suffering, despite your efforts to hide behind the biggest kid in the lunchroom line
Hash-smoker,”like, WHO?”Nice to know you don’t pay attention to what’s been printed here and elsewhere time and time again. Walid Shoebat is a name I’ve mentioned on more than one occasion. He expresses the mindset, strategies and policies of the Palestinian people and their leaders openly and with urgency. Another voice is the son of the founder of Hamas, who echoes the same sentiments of Shoebat. These are but two, there are more that you obviously ignore in your Jew-hatred. I’ve also offered MEMRI as a source to find out exactly what the Islamic radicals preach and tell each other in their own language in order to see how it differs from what they tell the rest of the non-Islamic world.People who really understand history, both Biblical and secular, know who has the true claim to the area of contention. YOU, in your hatred for all things Jewish, ignore history and preach the same lies of the real haters, murderers and land grabbers. I support Israel against those who would see them annihilated, the same people you support. Yeah, I know, you say you have no dog in this race. You’re a liar. You are anti-Israel and you are contemptable in your denials. Leave that shit at the door. It’s not welcome in here.
marshall, when you continually denounce me as a “jew-hater” (an lgf term if i ever heard one), “anti-israel”, or any other of your stock diversions, you are lying, and furthermore attempting to tar me with a particular brush that is just taken for granted as “evil” by those in your specific ideological group of the day, this does not make it true, and i do not receive itit’s hysterically funny that you employ the same weak tactics that obots that falsely venerate blacks for being black, use against you, ROFLMAO!speaking out in criticism of jews is not anti-semitism, expressing anger and frustration at solely jewish war crimes, acts of aggression, and uncivilized foreign policy is NOT anti-semitism or “jew-hating” either, whether you choose to view it as such, or notand the only “dog” i have in the race, is the fact that my tax dollars are being used, to maintain sovereign peoples, including many, many christians, in concentration camps, and systematically liquidatedyou disapprove of abortion, you protest the concept of your tax dollars being used in furtherance of what you see as an extermination of innocents, and whether or not i agree with the passion that you view the subject, does not in anyway mean you should not speak your mind about itif you could come to an acceptance of the fact that other americans view issues very differently than you do, and those opinions are no less worthy than yours, without bashing them, calling them immature names, or raging in offense over every single, possible point of agreement, it would facilitate dialogue, between everyoneif you have an unusual amount of anger or frustration in life, for whatever reason, you are misdirecting these emotions at me without any rational provocation, and i do not accept it, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand
First of all, I determine the topic at hand. Secondly, it wasn’t me who brought up Israel.Thirdly, you can deny all you want, but as I said, I base my beliefs about you on the comments you post here and elsewhere and the choice of terms you use to describe the Israelis and their policies. No one else comes here talking about “bloodthirsty murderers that will NEVER stop grabbing land and picking fights with their neighbors” and other inflamatory crap when referring to the Israelis. So your offense taken by my righteous accusations toward your anti-semetism can be relieved by stifling your anti-semetic rantings.Finally, I have no problem with our sending aid to allies who’s very existence is constantly threatened by their neighbors and a group of Arabs who have no true claim to the land they insist is occupied by those who actually belong there. So if any of the above troubles you in the least, you are more than welcome to take your lunacy elsewhere. You know, you had me fooled for a while there. You’ve posted some comments recently that indicated you may have returned from successful psychological treatments. So sad to find that was just an anomaly and that you’re still goofy as all get out.
He attended the ball honoring the Medal of Honor recipients…ya know, if he went to all the balls, we’d be hearing from you about what a party boy he is and how he was glad-handing and living it up while the rest of us are suffering.If he made it to all the millitary balls, we’d be hearing about how hes partying on the graves of our poor soldiers.Seems to me that the conservatives were all up in arms that there was any partying going on at all…it cost too much money when people are suffering (although they had to do all sorts of cheats and such to artificially inflate the number to get it significantly above what Bush spent)But somehow now it’s bad that he didn’t go to ALL of the millitary balls. I dont envy this guy. Whatever he does, you’ll hate it.
Teresa,”He attended the ball honoring the Medal of Honor recipients…”I gonna assume you mistyped since he obviously didn’t attend that ball as the link plainly states.”Whatever he does, you’ll hate it.”No, that would make us liberal Democrats, who would’ve chided Bush for breaking wind if he didn’t lift the proper cheek off the chair. WE, on the other hand, disagree with policy proposals and decisions based on the merits of those proposals and decisions, such as ignoring the best of the best in favor of partying with celebrities.Frankly, I have no problem with celebrations highlighting such important events as presidential inaugurations. I think it’s an appropriate outpouring of emotion and honor for the president. The form in which that outpouring takes is a different matter and very subjective, as is this very topic. I’m not surprised that libs see no problem with Obungle’s choice as they have a hard time with such priorities in the first place. But do any of you libs have any idea what MOH winners did to be considered for that award? Are you gonna then insist that to snub them is no big deal? If so, you have no honor either, and you and Barry aren’t worthy of even being in the presence of such people as those who have earned by their selflessness such lofty recognition as the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Hash, Some of these comments are too long to hold my attention, especially since I have read the same old, same old from the libs at so many sites so many times. However, that one liner of yours where you called the Israelis land grabbers is totally off the wall. God promised much more land than they now occupy and God does not go back on His Word. Wait and see if what His Word says does not come true. mom2
oh, i am, mom2, watching very carefullymy tax dollars and my own true doctrine of faith, have bought me that right and privilegei, personally, don’t think, we will have long to wait…so, why allow it all to divide us?glad to see you, btw