LIBERAL BASHING AS BLOOD SPORT * THE WONDERS OF Wii
LIBERAL BASHING AS BLOOD SPORT
I finally broke down and bought the paperback version of Coulter’s last book. The one before the current one, the name of which I will not speak, because it might give power to Voldemort. I thought it was unethical to spring for the hardcover, in case the money went to fund abortion center bombings or produce more talking-Coulter dolls. I was so embarrassed to be seen buying a Coulter book again, that when the cashier tried to pry my hands off the title and spine so she could scan the price, I announced to everyone standing in line “I’m not a Republican. I’m just doing research!”
What if the entire premise her career is based on — the heinous immorality of liberals — turned out to be a complete lie? What if Ted Haggart's entire idea of Christianity is also based on a lie? I received this comment from my website: “Ann Coulter is certainly more enlightened than you. You will find that one cannot be a Liberal and be a Christian at the same time.” This sentence makes no sense at all, and it does so in such a bossy way! It’s like saying “white is black and that’s the law!” Certain news networks and certain fundamentalist sects — the ones who have declared a monopoly on values and Christianity — are in fact, diametrically opposed to true Christian values! Maybe they don't realize that Christ has something to do with Christianity because the vowel sounds are different. The God of Coulter has nothing to do with anything remotely Christian. So I guess being called Godless, is a compliment if you're going by her version.
Coulter attacks liberals for being the “porn” party, but what is the real truth? Who are the companies selling us this mind-numbing, mood-altering, bra-pumping sex appeal and drugs to make us thinner, richer, harder, younger? Are liberals immoral and capitalists corrupt? Why is sexual immorality considered the liberal’s sin? Don’t Republicans have sex? Why do they get to decide which moral defect is worse than the other? Isn’t stealing employee pension plans worse than having sex with a consenting adult?
According to my research, most of the large media conglomerates vote Republican; the bottom line is always profit — and sex sells. It’s not the artists who are pushing the envelope in Hollywood — it’s the corporate executives, and this is a fact: they are Republicans. The bottom line is always profit and sex sells. Personally I would like to know whose idea it was to program Britney Spears’ midriff into our homes 24 hours a day for the past few years.
I’ve come to the conclusion that even though Angelina Jolie has big lips, she’s an amazingly evolved soul. Our heroes should be people of courage, compassion and charity — not propagandists, Ferderline wives and pole dancers. Bono, Nicosi Jones, Mother Theresa, Eleanor Roosevelt, Faith Hill, Dixie Chicks, Bruce Springsteen and yes, Angelina Jolie are role models for young people.
This might send shockwaves through the right wing, but I think good conservatives are really liberals at heart.
LOVE MEANS CAMPING FOR A Wii ... Weee!
"The Nintendo Wii comes with a motion-sensitive controller that the gamer waves around in the air, using it as a tennis racket, golf club, steering wheel, gun or sword depending on the game."
I got up at 4 a.m. on Sunday morning and stood in line at Circuit City to get the Nintendo Wii game system for my son. He had been nagging me for 3 months to make sure I'm in the midnight line because he was away at GATE camp in the Palisades.
It's awesome! It's "intuitive gaming" virtual reality and at $250 a lot less than the $600 PS3 which doesn't even do the things this does.
I met some really cool nerds, moms and dads on line — and also some gang kids (looked like gang kids, but who knows; they were very sweet.) We're all going to meet in line next year for a reunion when Nintendo launches a new system!
My son has never been so happy. I suddenly realized maybe materialism isn't always a bad thing. I bought the amazing game "Zelda" as well as Rayman with the dancing rabbids! When they dance to the Blackeyed Peas it's really cool.
Seinfeld star Michael Richard's racial outburst is a career-ending tirade, and it's sad. But there is never any excuse for using the "n" word or any bigoted epithet. Seinfeld is my favorite show. We are living in such a strange time; people are so out of control. I think the media has everyone hyped up, ready to explode with their finger on the trigger.
Jamie Masada, owner of the LAUGH FACTORY, had a small role on our show, TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT, the very fist season, in the cookie episode. He played a Latino busboy whose only line was "You finished?" After that he bought the entire block in Hollywood and started the Laugh Factory. I kept thinking, "Wow they must have paid him a fortune on our show if he can afford a whole block of prime real estate." Duh.
An excerpt from a great article by my friend Robert Dreyfuss:GOING LONG IN IRAQ
Last week, the situation in Iraq took another major turn for the worse. That might seem impossible, since the level of carnage and destruction is so immense already that it’s hard to imagine things getting worse. But get worse they did, when the ministry of the interior —the death squad-dominated, Shiite-run agency that has become a factory for torture and murder—announced that it was seeking the arrest of Iraq’s top Sunni cleric, Harith al-Dari, who heads the Muslim Scholars Association.
Widely seen as someone who is close to the Sunni-led resistance in Iraq, Dari is hardly a radical. But that didn’t dissuade Iraq’s interior minister. “We have proof that he is involved in terrorism,” said a ministry spokesman. That announcement provoked a storm of outrage from those Sunnis, including moderates and centrists, who’d decided earlier this year to take part in Iraq’s political process rather than remain outside, and many of them immediately threatened to shut down the Iraqi government and boycott parliament. “We have to decide if we want a state, or not,” said Jalal Talabani, Iraq’s president, who would have done better to acknowledge that indeed, Iraq has no state at all. Indeed, over the past few days, terrorists—real ones, and the Shiite variety—launched brazen attacks against two government ministries, raiding the Iraqi education ministry and kidnapping scores of employees, and then kidnapping the deputy minister of health.
The worsening crisis in Iraq lends desperate urgency to efforts in Washington to find a solution. While the capital awaits the report of the Iraq Study Group, co-chaired by James Baker and Lee Hamilton, in December or early January, the die-hards and dead-enders in and out of the Bush administration are making one last push for, well, one last push. All reason to the contrary, they’re pushing the notion that the United States has to prepare for one more Alamo-like last stand in Iraq.
Such an effort was on display last week, when I attended the November 15 hearings of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which heard testimony from General John Abizaid, the beleaguered, political commander of Centcom, who placidly declared his support for staying the course. But Abizaid was pressed by Senator John McCain, from the Republican side, and Senator Joseph Lieberman, from the—well, from what?—to explain why it wouldn’t be a good idea to send at least another 20,000 American troops to Baghdad in order to prevent defeat. You can read the rest here:GOING LONG IN IRAQ
Also, check out this article by a gifted journalist:ED RAMPELL: POP CULTURE'S NEW BAD DREAM
I finally broke down and bought the paperback version of Coulter’s last book. The one before the current one, the name of which I will not speak, because it might give power to Voldemort. I thought it was unethical to spring for the hardcover, in case the money went to fund abortion center bombings or produce more talking-Coulter dolls. I was so embarrassed to be seen buying a Coulter book again, that when the cashier tried to pry my hands off the title and spine so she could scan the price, I announced to everyone standing in line “I’m not a Republican. I’m just doing research!”
What if the entire premise her career is based on — the heinous immorality of liberals — turned out to be a complete lie? What if Ted Haggart's entire idea of Christianity is also based on a lie? I received this comment from my website: “Ann Coulter is certainly more enlightened than you. You will find that one cannot be a Liberal and be a Christian at the same time.” This sentence makes no sense at all, and it does so in such a bossy way! It’s like saying “white is black and that’s the law!” Certain news networks and certain fundamentalist sects — the ones who have declared a monopoly on values and Christianity — are in fact, diametrically opposed to true Christian values! Maybe they don't realize that Christ has something to do with Christianity because the vowel sounds are different. The God of Coulter has nothing to do with anything remotely Christian. So I guess being called Godless, is a compliment if you're going by her version.
Coulter attacks liberals for being the “porn” party, but what is the real truth? Who are the companies selling us this mind-numbing, mood-altering, bra-pumping sex appeal and drugs to make us thinner, richer, harder, younger? Are liberals immoral and capitalists corrupt? Why is sexual immorality considered the liberal’s sin? Don’t Republicans have sex? Why do they get to decide which moral defect is worse than the other? Isn’t stealing employee pension plans worse than having sex with a consenting adult?
According to my research, most of the large media conglomerates vote Republican; the bottom line is always profit — and sex sells. It’s not the artists who are pushing the envelope in Hollywood — it’s the corporate executives, and this is a fact: they are Republicans. The bottom line is always profit and sex sells. Personally I would like to know whose idea it was to program Britney Spears’ midriff into our homes 24 hours a day for the past few years.
I’ve come to the conclusion that even though Angelina Jolie has big lips, she’s an amazingly evolved soul. Our heroes should be people of courage, compassion and charity — not propagandists, Ferderline wives and pole dancers. Bono, Nicosi Jones, Mother Theresa, Eleanor Roosevelt, Faith Hill, Dixie Chicks, Bruce Springsteen and yes, Angelina Jolie are role models for young people.
This might send shockwaves through the right wing, but I think good conservatives are really liberals at heart.
LOVE MEANS CAMPING FOR A Wii ... Weee!
"The Nintendo Wii comes with a motion-sensitive controller that the gamer waves around in the air, using it as a tennis racket, golf club, steering wheel, gun or sword depending on the game."
I got up at 4 a.m. on Sunday morning and stood in line at Circuit City to get the Nintendo Wii game system for my son. He had been nagging me for 3 months to make sure I'm in the midnight line because he was away at GATE camp in the Palisades.
It's awesome! It's "intuitive gaming" virtual reality and at $250 a lot less than the $600 PS3 which doesn't even do the things this does.
I met some really cool nerds, moms and dads on line — and also some gang kids (looked like gang kids, but who knows; they were very sweet.) We're all going to meet in line next year for a reunion when Nintendo launches a new system!
My son has never been so happy. I suddenly realized maybe materialism isn't always a bad thing. I bought the amazing game "Zelda" as well as Rayman with the dancing rabbids! When they dance to the Blackeyed Peas it's really cool.
Seinfeld star Michael Richard's racial outburst is a career-ending tirade, and it's sad. But there is never any excuse for using the "n" word or any bigoted epithet. Seinfeld is my favorite show. We are living in such a strange time; people are so out of control. I think the media has everyone hyped up, ready to explode with their finger on the trigger.
Jamie Masada, owner of the LAUGH FACTORY, had a small role on our show, TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT, the very fist season, in the cookie episode. He played a Latino busboy whose only line was "You finished?" After that he bought the entire block in Hollywood and started the Laugh Factory. I kept thinking, "Wow they must have paid him a fortune on our show if he can afford a whole block of prime real estate." Duh.
An excerpt from a great article by my friend Robert Dreyfuss:
Last week, the situation in Iraq took another major turn for the worse. That might seem impossible, since the level of carnage and destruction is so immense already that it’s hard to imagine things getting worse. But get worse they did, when the ministry of the interior —the death squad-dominated, Shiite-run agency that has become a factory for torture and murder—announced that it was seeking the arrest of Iraq’s top Sunni cleric, Harith al-Dari, who heads the Muslim Scholars Association.
Widely seen as someone who is close to the Sunni-led resistance in Iraq, Dari is hardly a radical. But that didn’t dissuade Iraq’s interior minister. “We have proof that he is involved in terrorism,” said a ministry spokesman. That announcement provoked a storm of outrage from those Sunnis, including moderates and centrists, who’d decided earlier this year to take part in Iraq’s political process rather than remain outside, and many of them immediately threatened to shut down the Iraqi government and boycott parliament. “We have to decide if we want a state, or not,” said Jalal Talabani, Iraq’s president, who would have done better to acknowledge that indeed, Iraq has no state at all. Indeed, over the past few days, terrorists—real ones, and the Shiite variety—launched brazen attacks against two government ministries, raiding the Iraqi education ministry and kidnapping scores of employees, and then kidnapping the deputy minister of health.
The worsening crisis in Iraq lends desperate urgency to efforts in Washington to find a solution. While the capital awaits the report of the Iraq Study Group, co-chaired by James Baker and Lee Hamilton, in December or early January, the die-hards and dead-enders in and out of the Bush administration are making one last push for, well, one last push. All reason to the contrary, they’re pushing the notion that the United States has to prepare for one more Alamo-like last stand in Iraq.
Such an effort was on display last week, when I attended the November 15 hearings of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which heard testimony from General John Abizaid, the beleaguered, political commander of Centcom, who placidly declared his support for staying the course. But Abizaid was pressed by Senator John McCain, from the Republican side, and Senator Joseph Lieberman, from the—well, from what?—to explain why it wouldn’t be a good idea to send at least another 20,000 American troops to Baghdad in order to prevent defeat. You can read the rest here:
Also, check out this article by a gifted journalist:
Labels: Liberal Bashing, Robert Dreyfuss, Wii
posted by Lydia Cornell at
12:37 PM
131 Comments:
Lydia said, quoting from the blog;
You will find that one cannot be a Liberal and be a Christian at the same time
Actually, it was Mark Twain who said;
A man can be a Christian or a patriot, but he can't legally be a Christian and a patriot, except in the usual way;
One of the two with the mouth, the other with the heart
By
Anonymous, at 10:01 AM
Stephen Heller, the whistleblower who turned over the documents showing DIEBOLD had illegally installed uncertified hardware and software in California voting machines, has been forced into pleading guilty to a felony, just to save his home, and his marriage.
Even though it was proved he was right, and DIEBOLD had to "DECERTIFY" the machines after Hellers whistleblowing, DIEBOLD lawyers along with a ignorant and apparently bought district attorney forced Heller into apologizing, RECANTING, and accepting a felony conviction.
America is in losing its freedom.
By
Anonymous, at 10:40 AM
Lydia,
A 40 year old never-been-married career woman (lawyer, to boot), who dates pornographers lecturing you and me about how we should be married with children, and women should be seen and not heard?
Of course it's a sham.
By
Carl, at 1:33 PM
Carl real knowledge of the facts has NEVER prevented these repugs from pontificating about everything, which they spin of course to their benefit, irregardless of the truth of the matter. Coulterguist is just a high paid dishonest shrill who is more interested in the money than the truth.
Her writings and actions reveal this and her definitions defy logical consistency, but then again her writings were never supposed to be taken for real after all every time she gets called on her stupid comments she either says it is a joke, or she gets so shrill she must be joking.
By
clif, at 1:57 PM
Daddy's getting an ear full;
'More popular' President Bush defends son from 'hostile audience'
After delivering a speech at a leadership conference in Abu Dhabi, former President George Herbert Walker Bush was forced to defend his son from verbal attacks by the "hostile audience," on the same day that a new poll reveals that more Americans preferred the first Bush president.
"We do not respect your son," a woman in the audience told Bush. "We do not respect what he's doing all over the world."
The Associated Press reported that "Bush appeared stunned as the audience of young business leaders whooped and whistled in approval" at the woman's comments, coming after the "retired president had just finished a folksy address on leadership by telling the audience how deeply hurt he feels when his son the president is criticized."
According to the AP, Bush's voice "quivered" in response.
"This son is not going to back away," Bush said. "He's not going to change his view because some poll says this or some poll says that, or some heartfelt comments from the lady who feels deeply in her heart about something."
"You can't be president of the United States and conduct yourself if you're going to cut and run," Bush 41 continued. "This is going to work out in Iraq. I understand the anxiety. It's not easy."
The former president lost his cool with one audience member, calling him "crazy" and recommending that he "go back to school."
According to the AP, a student implied that "U.S. wars were aimed at opening markets for American companies," and that "globalization was contrived for America's benefit at the expense of the rest of the world," but "Bush was having none of it."
"I think that's weird and it's nuts," Bush said. "To suggest that everything we do is because we're hungry for money, I think that's crazy."
"I think you need to go back to school," Bush added.
A new CNN poll finds that "only one in four Americans believe President Bush is a better president than his father."
"Six in 10 said the elder Bush, who served one term from 1989-1993, did a better job in office, according to a poll conducted by Opinion Research Corporation," CNN reports. "Twelve percent said both were equally good or bad, and 2 percent offered no opinion."
Boo Freakin Hoo poppy, your just defending your son's incompetence, NOT burying him because of it, like many fathers here and in Iraq are forced to do.
Even your "arab buddies" hate the little twerp.
By
clif, at 2:28 PM
You know Clif, a few days ago FF had the nerve to demand I show him just ONE poll where the Iraqi's want us to leave.
Then, when I showed him not one, but TWO polls, BOTH of which were almost 2 years old, showing an OVERWHELMING majority of Iraqi's wanted us out WAY BACK THEN, he ran and hid from me. He did not have the decency to even admit I had once again proven him wrong.
Well now today, I guess FF is hiding even more, as a new World Opinion poll shows that a whopping 74 percent of the Shiites want us out, and an overwhelming 91 percent of Sunni's want us to leave.
But do we hear a word from the self important freedom foe?
Well the other, Freedom Foe said this;
Freedom Fan said;
Germany is nice tour of duty, but our troops belong in Iraq as long as the Iraqi people want us to stay.
When I pointed out that ALL the polls showed that the Iraqi people want us to leave, he replied thus;
Freedom Fan said...
Show me one of the polls.
Show me one of the polls. What a downright ignorant thing to say. Show me one of the polls. Like I was just making it up. We've been bombarded with polls showing the Iraqis want us out for years now, and this idiot, (sorry FF, but you really are an idiot) has the trailerpark hubris to say, show me one of the polls. So I responded with not one, but TWO polls from 2005, showing that almost two years ago, the Iraqi people wanted us gone.
And did the great and honest debater come forward and concede his hubris? Of course not.
The knucklehead ran and hid like he always does, everytime I hand him back his ass.
By
Anonymous, at 4:35 PM
So lets see. Two years ago almost ALL the Iraqi people wanted us out.
Today, the polls show that almost ALL the Iraqi people want us out.
And since FF said, but our troops belong in Iraq as long as the Iraqi people want us to stay, then clearly, Freedom Foe wants the troops home now.
Right Freedom Foe? You want them home now, by your own admission. You said the troops belong there as long as the Iraqi people want us there. Well they don't, and all the polls show this, and have showed you this for years now.
So are you just a complete idiot? Not just a regular idiot, but a complete idiot, who actually believes their throwing flowers? Or do you have half a brain, and can admit you were WRONG?
100 percent WRONG.
By
Anonymous, at 4:39 PM
Don't let him fool you Lydia.
Freedom Fan openly lies, and openly ignores each time he is proven wrong. He hides from the truth, and pushes lies to perpetuate bloodshed. Bloodshed he is busy cowering from.
Don't by his bullshit. Cause thats all it is. Bullshit.
By
Anonymous, at 4:41 PM
The Iraqi people overwhelmingly want us gone.
So its time to go.
But since the republicans, like FF, just can never admit they are wrong...because the words, are just too hard to say, we'll have to just let young americans die while we all help the poor dumb lumbering elephants to see their own stupidity.
I wonder how many dead soldiers it will take?
By
Anonymous, at 5:01 PM
Maybe crusty shakleturd can take odds on it.
By
Anonymous, at 5:01 PM
You know, start a pool.
How many dead Americans will it take before republicans are comfortable admitting they were wrong?
By
Anonymous, at 5:03 PM
Maybe I'm going about this all wrong. Maybe if I applied my brainpower to helping them spin it as a victory, that would get the troops home sooner.
Ok, I'll give it a go.
Hey republicans. Listen up.
Spin it like this; We went in to remove Saddamn to set the Iraqi people free. We did that, and then stuck around to help the country from falling into chaos, however that is not working out so we'll leave, having accomplished our original goal.
Hows that?
By
Anonymous, at 7:30 PM
Say it with a smile, and give yourselves a few medals of freedom, and quietly step out the back door.
Its not technically accurate, but neither is anything else you put forth in the last 6 years, so why should this be any different?
By
Anonymous, at 7:32 PM
Just bring the troops home.
By
Anonymous, at 7:34 PM
From TPM
Pretty amazing stuff. And it seems like it's being treated with a near total media blackout. Stung by the voters' rebuke, the out-going Republican Congress has decided to close its doors without doing it's mandated job, finishing the budget bills for next year. By all rights they should send back their paychecks too.
From the AP ...
Republicans vacating the Capitol are dumping a big spring cleaning job on Democrats moving in. GOP leaders have opted to leave behind almost a half-trillion-dollar clutter of unfinished spending bills.
There's also no guarantee that Republicans will pass a multibillion-dollar measure to prevent a cut in fees to doctors treating Medicare patients.
The bulging workload that a Republican-led Congress was supposed to complete this year but is instead punting to 2007 promises to consume time and energy that Democrats had hoped to devote to their own agenda upon taking control of Congress in January for the first time in a dozen years.
We're their employers. Shouldn't there be some sort of garnishment?
Let me know if you see mentions of this elsewhere in the news media or on the shows.
-- Josh Marshall
**********************************************
These bills were supposed to be done before Oct 1 2006, but the anti gay legislation and anti first amendment "flag burning" amendment is MORE important than the repug assclowns doing their REAL jobs, which the constitution tells them to do.
They should have to return their salaries this year....especially the leadership of the house, and repug chairmen of the committees who have failed to perform their constitutionally prescribed duties.
They should NOT be allowed to collect the money if they are not going to do the work.
I guess overpaying them does NOT produce the best congress ...eh tiny?
Give their salaries to the troops whose families are living on food stamps.
Give the money to the "food deprived" children of this country.
But do NOT pay these cretins who have the hubris to utterly fail in their jobs, no over site, no appropriations bills to fund the budget, and this is especially significant because this was the process they tried to shut down the federal government in 1995, which backfired on them, so this time they just refuse to do their jobs.
Thus.....we should refuse to pay them.
By
clif, at 10:35 PM
I agree with you Clif, Congress should not be paid for work not done.
Why are they getting away with this?
By
Lydia Cornell, at 6:06 AM
Hey, I have a question: what do people think of Hustler Magazine?
By
Lydia Cornell, at 6:07 AM
Lydia,
I read Hustler when I was a wee lad of my teen years. Even then, it was pretty gross, but oddly...stimulating, in ways that neither Playboy nor Penthouse were at that time.
Today, I wouldn't bother. I enjoy the three dimensional woman much more. As my junior year English teached pointed out, "you know, it's all just paper and staples that you're getting excited by."
By
Carl, at 7:37 AM
But I am intrigued by where that comment came from, Lydia? Any confessions you want to make here? :-D
By
Carl, at 7:38 AM
I don't believe that Lydia posed for any magazine.
By
Anonymous, at 9:08 AM
A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining, but wants it back the minute it begins to rain.
Mark Twain
By
Anonymous, at 9:17 AM
Gerald Ford Becomes Oldest President
Gerald R. Ford has surpassed Ronald Reagan to become the longest-living U.S. president.
Ford, who turned 93 on July 14, 2006, became the oldest president Sunday by living to 93 years and 121 days. The milestone is based on full days.
"The length of one's days matters less than the love of one's family and friends," Ford said in a statement this week from the Rancho Mirage compound he shares with former first lady Betty Ford.
"I thank God for the gift of every sunrise and, even more, for all the years he has blessed me with Betty and the children, with our extended family and the friends of a lifetime," he added.
The nation's 38th chief executive was president from Aug. 9, 1974, when Richard Nixon resigned, until January 1977. Before that, he was House minority leader.
Ford has suffered a variety of health problems in recent years.
Reagan, born Feb. 6, 1911, was 93 years, 120 days when he died June 5, 2004. He had surpassed the longevity milestone of John Adams, the nation's second president, in 2001.
By
Anonymous, at 9:22 AM
What Carl said, I think the majority of people that read Hustler et al are probably Teens, that said I think Lydia is probably right on the money that the hippocrites lecturing us on morality are by THEIR definition the most immoral themselves, i'm sure most of the publishers of these magazines and owners of strip clubs, casino's etc are repug, just ask Rusty.
If you go to a strip club, the primary audience not counting the teens and early 20's somethings are wealthy upper class repugs and lower middle class blue collar workers that need to pay to see or touch a woman. Look at Coulter, she wears the short black miniskirts and pretty muchscrews FBI, DOD, any anyone else that is useful to "ITS" agenda or self.
promotion.
As for my views on pornography, drugs and other controvercial issues i'll just keep them to my self as they wouldnt be too popular with you righty whitey repugs even if some of our goals might dovetail, your phony hippocritical psuedo morality would get in the way of achieving them.
By
Mike, at 9:24 AM
Mike,
You need porn in your life, cause that's all you have.
I mean, for god sake, man...get a life and get out on your own already, 40 year old mommas boy!
By
clippy, at 9:45 AM
Mike,
You condone porn in it's fullest extent.
Drugs too for that matter to numb the dullness of your life.
By
clippy, at 9:48 AM
Mike,
You have been to SIN CITY.
Las Vegas is full of debauchery, People who would gamble and piss their money away and listen or watch filthy performers, not only being profane and blasphemous, then we wonder where all the trouble in our world comes from, it's Nevada and the Californian ilk that scourge our land.
By
clippy, at 9:55 AM
Oh look, its zippy.
By
Anonymous, at 11:08 AM
I've never posed nude.
By
Lydia Cornell, at 11:41 AM
The lying Reich Wingnuts can add mind reading and clairavoyance to their many "CLAIMED" talents. They claim to be all wise and be the ONLY ones to guide us regarding national defense, morality, foreign relations, etc.........
But the truth is I dont want or need lying hippocrites who know nothing about war and have never been in a fistfight no less a war advising our country on war and foreign policy, and I dont want Foul mouthed evil tramps who shun truth and facts and rely on lies, personal attacks and unsubstantiated propaganda and rhetoric to push their agenda telling me or America WHAT is moral, same goes for the media emoires who ram sensationalistic lies and porn down our throat because it makes them the most money all while trying to preach about our lack of morality that they helped create................it figures it was Fox Lies trying to make a buck off of the OJ crap and trying to buy off the familys opposing it.
By
Mike, at 11:51 AM
Both Hustler magazine and Hustler Casino are owned by Larry Flint,one of the biggest democratic contributors in the country.
Old Larry has been wheelchair bound for 30 or 40 years since he was shot in the spine.There was a movie made about him a few years back,Woody Harrelson played Flint and I think Courtney Love was in it.The movie was about Larrys court case deciding what or was'nt porn and his first amendment rights.He won the case.
Larry is also one of the highest stakes gambler's in the country routinely winning or losing millions sitting at a blackjack table.
By
Rusty Shackelford, at 12:42 PM
Lydia, I've never posed nude either, but for different reason....nobody wants to see me nude..........LOL
By
clif, at 12:43 PM
I remember that movie, I didnt know he owned a Casino though.
By
Mike, at 12:45 PM
Well dusty that leaves the rest of the casino's and porn industry in hypocritical repugnant's hands.
By
clif, at 12:47 PM
At least what Larry Flint says and does is consistant, unlike the lying reichwing preachers who twist the meanings of the bible to make it appear to justify their lies and lifestyles, let alone the ones like Jim Baker, Jimmy Swaggart and Ted Haggard, who break the very rules the want all the rest of us to follow, it's like the hypocrisy of Newt, Giuliani, and McCain, who CHEATED on one of their wives with a girl friend the later married after destroying a ,marriage by getting a divorce. But then again being consistent and NON hypocritical is NOT what repugnants do.
By
clif, at 1:00 PM
California is cool because it has some advanced thinkers. People with new ideas seem to head out west.
By
Lydia Cornell, at 1:01 PM
Cliff:
You aren't supposed to mention the Republican moralists misdeeds.
Aren't you aware that as they judge others, they never mention their backyard antics?
By
Larry, at 1:03 PM
Klink,you never were the sharpest knife in the drawer.Eighty percent of the casino's are owned by public corporations...hell,if you have a 401 or mutual fund you may be a part owner.The majority of the other casino's are native american owned.
By
Rusty Shackelford, at 1:06 PM
Did Murtha,Jefferson and Alcee Hastings become republicans?
By
Rusty Shackelford, at 1:07 PM
No moron, but Hastings conviction was NOT and the democrats called for a re-investigation into hastings impeachment because crooked FBI agents including the one who LIED for Whitey Bulger may have fabricated evidence, one of the people calling for opening up the process was John Coyners who LEAD the investigation, but the repugs BLOCKED the chance for Hastings to clear his name.
Find another stupid comment to ride son, this one is not what you make it out to be.
With a REAL congress which is going to do what it is supposed to do, hastings name will be cleared, after all son, HE was found NOT guilty in trial.
and the stocks of corporations are owned more by reichwingnuts mainly the leadership of other corporations, son,...It is not the middle class who owns the vast majority of stocks, just repugnant hypocrites LIKE YOU.
By
clif, at 1:16 PM
Jefferson only got 30% of the vote in Louisiana, and faces a run off which he probably will LOSE, and Murtha TURNED the bribe down so was NOT indicted or convicted...unlike Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham, and the repugs who are being investigated by the FBI at this time....Doolittle, Delay, Harris,Pombo, Lewis, among others...son.
By
clif, at 1:19 PM
I'd tell you to get a clue, but you'd have to pull your head out of your as to do that.
By
clif, at 1:19 PM
Klink,you ignorant slut (Sat.night live circa 1975,)more shares of common stock are owned through 401 and mutual funds then single owners.Stay with military stuff,dont try to stretch you look stupid.
By
Rusty Shackelford, at 1:26 PM
Lets give credit where credit is due.
Bush and the Republicans may have lost the war in Iraq.
Bush and the Republicans may be losing the war in Afganistan.
Bush and the Republicans may have lost control of the House and Senate.
The one war Bush and the Republicans are winning is the war against democracy in America.
By
Larry, at 1:26 PM
Rangel Is Right
Charlie Rangel is angry about the Iraq war, the one that Henry Kissinger has told us we can't win. Thanks, Henry, but most Americans figured that out before you did. Rangel saw combat in Korea. Kissinger has only seen combat on TV. That might have something to do with why Kissinger thinks our troops should stay in Iraq even though we can't win.
Kissinger says that if we leave now, all hell will break loose and Iraq will never achieve stability. Never mind that all hell has already broken loose. Never mind that Kissinger said the same thing would happen if we left Vietnam--all hell would break loose and Vietnam would never achieve stability. Vietnam has become so stable that Presidents Clinton and Bush, both combat cowards during the Vietnam war, have made well publicized, utterly safe visits to the country Kissinger used to think didn't have a chance without us.
In my one conversation with Kissinger, which occurred on TV, I asked him if he knew anyone who got killed in Vietnam. He was completely thrown. He doesn't go on TV to be asked such small-minded questions, he goes on TV to pontificate and TV interviewers are happy to let him do it. Kissinger sputtered and ran away from the question, leaving the distinct impression that he did not know anyone who was killed in the war he managed. His memoir of the period does not mention a single casualty. If you have ever stood at the Vietnam Memorial and run your hand over the name of a relative on the wall, as my mother and I did last month, you can get as angry as Charlie Rangel does about people like Kissinger deciding how long our soldiers should be exposed to enemy fire in a war we know we can't win.
Rangel announced on Sunday that he wants to reinstate the draft. He said the same thing a few years ago but quickly let on that he wasn't serious. He's playing it straight this time and has already introduced a bill. Local New York TV news has given Rangel saturation coverage.
You can see his anger and frustration building each time he answers another reporter's question about the draft. The point he keeps repeating is: "There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way."
Rangel could never get such attention to that message without introducing his bill. Nancy Pelosi should let it come to a vote. She should let the House debate the draft. Let the Republicans give speeches listing all the good reasons why we should have a volunteer Army. But let's hear Rangel's speech about how the burden of war is not fairly shared in this country. Let's get America thinking about exactly who is being left in the line of fire in the war Americans have turned against and know we can't win. Let's get America thinking about John Kerry's line about Vietnam--who is going to be the last soldier to die for a mistake? A real debate on the draft will do that. Don't worry, the bill has no chance of passing.
Well over 95% of Americans, including Congress and White House staff, have no personal connection to this war--no relative or friend serving in Iraq. Over 99% of us have made no sacrifice for this war--we have not paid one more penny of taxes nor shed a drop of family blood. One of my military relatives thinks of it this way: "The American military is at war, but America is not at war."
Advocating war is easier when you and your family are not endangered by it. I've reached a Rangel-like breaking point with my TV pundit colleagues who championed the Iraq war and now say we can't leave even if we went there for the wrong reasons. For every one of them, I have a simple question: Why aren't you in Iraq? Or why did you avoid combat in your generation's war? The one unifying characteristic that all of us men in make-up on political chat shows share is fear of combat. Every one of us has done everything we can to avoid combat or even being fitted for a military uniform. Just like George Bush, Bill Clinton, and Dick Cheney, we are all combat cowards. It takes a very special kind of combat coward to advocate combat for others. It's the kind of thing that can get you as angry as Charlie Rangel.
Charley Rangle and Lawrence O'Donnell are right, gutless punks like the gutless trolls on this blog are wrong. If your NOT willing to sign up and go...STFU
By
clif, at 1:27 PM
Clif,
What the Sam Hill you bawling about, you sumbitch....Why don't you re-enlist
By
clippy, at 1:42 PM
BTW dusty stupidturd, here is two posts about the "evidence" against Hastings......
Alcee and the Leak
"Stay away from Kevin Gordon. He's hot. He is using your name in Hialeah."
If they consider the issue at all, Americans probably expect the person in charge of overseeing their nation's spies to be smart, insightful and thorough -- but above all else, he or she must be able to keep a secret. As the debate builds over who will next lead the House intelligence committee, at least one conservative publication has asked whether the Democrats' presumptive pick, Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), has whispered secrets that ruined federal investigations.
When the House impeached federal judge Alcee Hastings in 1989, 16 of the 17 counts had to do with a bribery allegation dating to 1981, as we detailed yesterday. But one count was different, the National Review's Byron York noted a few days ago, and it cuts to the very core of whether Hastings is suitable to chair the House intelligence committee.
It was an accusation that in 1985, he leaked secret government information that ruined three FBI probes.
The House voted to impeach Hastings on that count, known as "Article XVI," but the Senate unanimously voted to acquit, blasting the House prosecutors for using "weak" evidence, leaving "gaping holes" in their proof and "fail[ing]. . . to identify any credible motive" for Hastings to leak the information.
What happened? Did Hastings leak a secret? Or was the case as weak as the senators said?
The alleged leak occurred in Miami in 1985 -- that's right: Crockett and Tubbs, loafers with no socks, casual white suits paired with pastel T-shirts, immaculately trimmed stubble, and lots and lots of blow.
The local FBI office kept itself busy. They ran wiretaps and undercover agents to catch dirty cops taking bribes from big drug dealers; longshoremen said to be extorting huge sums from workers trying to join their union; and a ring of zoning officials doing favors in exchange for bribes.
One of the guys under FBI surveillance was Kevin "Waxy" Gordon. Anywhere else, a name like "Waxy" should have been enough to keep a guy out of a government job. But in Miami, he was a local zoning officer -- and drug dealer. He was also a pal of the mayor of Miami-Dade County, Steve Clark.
Then-Judge Alcee Hastings wasn't close with Mayor Clark like Waxy was. According to arguments by Hastings' defense lawyers in his 1989 Senate trial, the judge and the mayor never visited each other's homes, never met at each other's offices, never even spoke on the phone. When they saw each other, it was by chance at local civic events.
It's unlikely the judge ever met Waxy, but he knew the name well: he signed the FBI's requests for the wiretaps that allowed agents to eavesdrop on Waxy's phone conversations, and he got weekly updates about what the Feds were hearing.
One late summer day, a bureau agent and a U.S. attorney were briefing Hastings on the latest details they'd pulled off their tap on Waxy's phone. Waxy's been talking about Mayor Clark, they told the Judge. Hastings was struck by that revelation, according to congressional prosecutors in the 1989 impeachment trial.
"That is heavy stuff," the prosecutors said Hastings exclaimed. "The mayor better watch out what he's doing."
* * * *
On the morning of September 6, 1985, a local group held an event honoring Judge Hastings and others at the Miami Hyatt Regency. Mayor Clark attended, sitting in an aisle seat. Hastings gave the keynote speech; what happened in the next moments may never be known for sure.
In repeated sworn testimony before a grand jury and Congress, Clark has maintained that after Hastings concluded his speech, the judge walked down the center aisle of the room, stopped to shake Clark's hand, and whispered sensitive information about an ongoing FBI investigation into the mayor's ear.
"Stay away from Kevin Gordon," Clark says Hastings told him. "He's hot. He is using your name in Hialeah."
Clark immediately telephoned his office and ordered his staff to set up a meeting with Gordon, the former mayor has repeatedly recalled.
But there are problems with that story.
First, times don't match up: Hastings completed his speech around 10 a.m., but the FBI wiretap on Waxy's telephone recorded an urgent call from Mayor Clark's office to Waxy at 8:58 a.m., more than an hour before the mayor says he heard that Waxy was "hot." Second, Hastings and three eyewitnesses maintain that he exited the room immediately through a door behind the dais, and had no contact with anyone in the crowd, including Clark.
House prosecutors said Clark's memory was faulty, and Hastings must have brush-passed FBI secrets to the mayor before, not after, his address. But Clark adamantly stands by his story that it happened afterwards.
House prosecutors never identified Hastings' motive for sharing these secrets. After all, there's little evidence the mayor and the judge were closer than mere acquaintances. Why would Hastings share potentially career-ending information with a man he had recently learned had criminal ties?
When pressed to establish Hastings' motive during the 1989 Senate trial, House prosecutor Rep. George Gekas (D-PA) admitted he had no basis to determine the judge's motive, which left his team to conclude Hastings must have wanted to demonstrate to the mayor that he could "do a favor" for him, and thereby show "that he was a powerful man."
Why a federal judge with a lifetime appointment would need to demonstrate his potency to the local mayor -- and break a law, and compromise several ongoing investigations -- was never answered.
Also, Hastings' lawyers pointed out, Mayor Clark had an unusual group of friends beyond "Waxy." Clark regularly played golf with Tony Amoroso, an FBI agent with direct access to the same investigative files from which Hastings was accused of leaking. Amoroso would have provided another avenue for Clark to have learned of Waxy's trouble, and one at least as plausible as Hasting's alleged brush-pass.
Clark's golf group also included H. Paul Rico, the "undercover FBI agent" who set up Hastings' alleged extortion accomplice, William Borders, in the 1981 bust that eventually led to Hastings' criminal prosecution. (He was acquitted, as we've reported.) It has since come out that Rico was a corrupt agent who set up murders for mob boss Whitey Bulger.
Hastings' defenders, including his former chief defense counsel Terence Anderson, maintain that the congressman is innocent, and Mayor Clark was put up to lying about him by his FBI pals.
Rico and the mayor's other pals had tried to get Hastings on bribery in 1981 and failed, Anderson explained to me today. "For the rest of [Hastings'] life, he'd sit in judgement of the work of the men who'd tried to get him and missed."
Was the leak allegation the product of a a cabal angry FBI agents eager to take down Hastings by any means possible? Unlike the case against Hastings, that argument is supported by no evidence but plenty of motive.
One fact isn't in dispute: Clark learned of the FBI investigations, and so did Waxy. The bureau immediately pulled its undercover agents, and shut down two of its investigations completely.
Mostly bad news came out of the episode: Waxy was busted on drug charges; he died of a heart attack a few weeks later. Rico died in federal custody in 2004. Miami Vice was made into a movie and released this summer; it flopped.
But Alcee's within sneezing distance of one of the most sensitive posts in the federal government. Whether that's good news or bad, that's up for debate. I guess you could say, though, that by any measure -- Hastings is hot.
By
clif, at 1:43 PM
House Intelligence: The Trouble with Hastings
He may not be a former spy, but he's got better cred on intelligence issues than the outgoing House intelligence committee chair, Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI). (Hoekstra's off-kilter ramblings have included charging CIA employees are al Qaeda sympathizers, and insisting WMDs still exist in Iraq after the White House has dropped the cause.) Besides, despite having little background in the cloak-and-dagger world, Hastings is said to have boned up on the subject since joining the intelligence panel in 1999.
So why do people think Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) isn't fit to lead the House intelligence committee?
The answer lies all the way back in 1981 -- when James Watt became Secretary of the Interior, the Berlin Wall was still up, disco wasn't yet ironic, and Alcee Hastings was a federal judge in Florida.
That year, according to Congress, Hastings and a friend tried to shake down a defendant facing trial in Hastings' courtroom for $150,000. In exchange, the two promised a reduced jail sentence and the return of over $800,000 in confiscated property.
A jury acquitted Hastings of criminal charges stemming from the scandal, but in 1989 a team of lawmakers -- including Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), among others -- prosecuted Hastings in Congress, and the Senate voted to strip him of his judgeship.
Hastings was only the sixth person in history to be impeached, convicted and removed from office by Congress, according to news accounts at the time.
The House prosecution based much of its case on a brief, cryptic conversation between Hastings and his friend, lawyer William Borders, who handled the arrangements of the scam.
"See, I had, I talked to him and he, he wrote some things down for me," Borders told Hastings in the conversation, recorded by an FBI wiretap.
"I understand," Hastings responded.
"And then I was supposed to go back and get some more things," Borders said.
"Alright. I understand. Well, then, there's no great big problem at all. I'll, I'll see to it that, uh, I communicate with him. I'll send the stuff off to Columbia in the morning," Hastings replied.
The FBI believed Borders was telling Hastings he'd received a $25,000 down payment ("he wrote some things down for me") and he was going to get the balance later ("I was supposed to go back and get some more things"). The Feds said Hastings was telling Borders he'd prepared the necessary paperwork for the order and would put it through ("I'll send the stuff off to Columbia in the morning"), according to a 1989 account from the Orlando Sentinel.
As it turned out, Borders had not been negotiating with a confidante of the defendant facing trial, but with an undercover FBI agent. He was arrested and later convicted of bribery. There was evidence that linked Hastings to Borders' scheme beyond the one cryptic call, but it was all circumstantial. For instance, Borders promised his contact that Hastings would have dinner at a time and date and at a restaurant of his contact's choosing; Hastings did so. Borders called that proof Hastings was in on the scheme; Hastings said Borders made plans to meet at the restaurant but never showed.
As a result, the criminal case against Hastings fell apart. But Congress had concerns, and with a grave bipartisan prosecution and impeachment, removed Hastings from the federal bench. Interestingly, Borders refused to testify before Congress, even when granted immunity to do so.
Hastings has never conceded any role in the affair, insisting that Borders -- a well-known fundraiser for former president Jimmy Carter -- was acting alone, essentially running a con on wealthy defendants.
The intel committee Hastings would chair -- insiders call it "Hipsee" (for HPSCI, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence's acronym) -- was borne from the fiery furnace of scandal: following a torrent of gross constitutional violations by the CIA, the Pentagon and the FBI in the 1960s and 70s, Congress created the committee as part of its effort to rein in the spooks. But less than 30 years later the committee gave birth to its own scandal, when committee member Duke Cunningham was revealed to have taken millions in bribes in exchange for wiring secret government contracts to certain companies.
Duke's in prison, but massive investigations into his misdeeds are still being carried out by the FBI, the CIA, the IRS and the Pentagon's criminal investigators.
By
clif, at 1:45 PM
Hastings to Dems: I'm Innocent
As we've noted, the debate over Nancy Pelosi's likely candidate for House intelligence chairman, Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), centers on corruption allegations dating back to 1981 -- allegations which Hastings has fought tooth and nail.
This Monday, Hastings sent a five-page letter out to all House Democrats detailing why the charges against him are false. In it, he rails against journalists and pundits who've covered the allegations against him as ill-informed and too keen to attribute the House's impeachment and Senate's conviction of him as proof enough. Above all, he points to the fact that he was acquitted of wrongdoing in a criminal trial, which he believes has been downplayed. "In a jury trial, the evidence is the only consideration," Hastings writes. "In an impeachment, politics is central."
Full text below the fold...
The letter:
November 20, 2006
Dear Colleagues,
Because I know you and because many of you are mindful of my 14 years in Congress, and in order not to stoke a simmering fire which had the potential to adversely affect Democrats in the ’06 election, I elected not to participate in the “discussion” about whether I should be appointed Chair of the HPSCI.
The noise and misleading, poorly informed, misinformed, and sometimes venomous attacks on my integrity and character by pundits, politicians, and editors screaming the word “impeachment” (ignoring a Not Guilty verdict in a court of law) in a frenetic attempt to justify denying me a position I have certainly earned and am completely competent to perform requires now that I set the record straight.
Colleagues, some of the things I write you may be familiar with. Some you may not know. It is all meant to edify you so that you have the best information possible in case you are asked about me or read about me in the paper or online.
Recently, I asked our Speaker-elect to set aside 45 minutes to meet with me and Professor Terrance Anderson of the University of Miami. Terry is the most informed person in the world regarding my trial in U.S. District Court, the 3 ½ year investigation by the five judge 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the 26 judge Judicial Conference, the seven person impeachment inquiry in the House of Representatives, the 12 person U.S. Senate trial, and the numerous appeals to courts at every level. In particular, Professor Anderson could explain to anyone interested about our experiences at the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. And finally, the decision after my election as to whether or not I should be seated in the House of Representatives.
Having read the above paragraph, you would immediately discover that there is a whole lot of information that is not being discussed at all.
Second, I hope that my fate is not determined by Newt Gingrich, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Michael Barone, Drudge, anonymous bloggers, and other assorted misinformed fools. Nor should faceless and nameless people at the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, the L.A. Times, the Dallas Morning News, and others take liberties without at least giving me an opportunity to respond.
I do take Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post’s judgment as partially informed opinion. And, she did speak with me for one hour and five minutes, resulting in a two-sentence quote. And, using excerpts of my trial without asserting that the information came from me, and that the more than plausible explanations before a 12 person jury that heard all of the evidence was accepted by them.
In fairness to the Washington Times when they wrote, “Don’t Do it, Ms. Pelosi” in their editorial, they did give me an opportunity to respond. I called Tony Blankley and he invited me to his Editorial Board. I went and spent 1 hour and 25 minutes explaining every thing about my life that they wanted me to. And, I answered every question asked by them and the board member that did do exhaustive research. But, like everyone else, including Members of Congress, he did not review the trial transcript.
While in this vein, let me mention a few other things about others I mentioned above.
Newt Gingrich opined that it would be an “unmitigated disaster” if I became Chairman of HPSCI. First, I went on the Intelligence Committee when he was the Speaker of the House. Second, I was appointed by then Speaker Gingrich as the only Democrat on a committee headed by Doug Bereuter to study the reversion of Hong Kong and Macau to China. And, I might add, he invited this potentially “disastrous” person to travel with him to Asia. And, I saved him from at least one major protocol gaffes. What irony!
Sean Hannity, who screamed that I was “unworthy” did not deem me unworthy to be co-host, in the studio, in place of Alan Colmes for two days a few years ago.
Michael Barone would not return my calls (3 of them) requesting that he speak with me.
Jonathan Alter, who I did not mention above, did return my call. He was doing a piece for Newsweek on me and other potential chairs. His comment to me after a 45 minute conversation was, “gee, I did not know all of that” and, “you need to get that information out there.” He did not write anything about me at that time.
Friends, some months ago Karl Rove was said to use you, me, and others in our Caucus as poster bogeymen and women to influence the electorate, particularly the Republican base. Obviously, that strategy was not totally successful.
So, what are we to believe? I did not cause us to lose the ’06 election, but I will cause us to lose in ’08? We all know that if I am appointed as Chair, and as I intend with Speaker Pelosi’s tutelage and help to do a very good job, talk about the HPSCI Chair won’t even be an afterthought.
I was impeached and removed after I was acquitted by a jury in a nearly one month federal trial. It is amazing how little importance is given to this fact. It is also baffling. I dare say that a person whose future depended on a decision as to whether or not that person committed a crime would think the chances of receiving justice far more likely in a jury trial than in an impeachment. That is because ALL of the jurors hear and see ALL of the evidence in a trial. In my impeachment proceedings, the evidence was taken and received by a committee, and all members of the committee were not present at all times. The committee then made a recommendation to the House regarding impeachment and to the Senate regarding removal. Most of the congresspersons and senators who voted never saw the evidence. Many of them never read the reports of the committee or reviewed the daily videos. Iraq and the budget are not the only times votes have been cast without adequate review and knowledge of the facts.
My life was voted on in that same manner.
In a jury trial, the evidence is the only consideration. In an impeachment, politics is central. A trial is of the first priority. The impeachment proceedings compete with votes in the various committees who are holding simultaneous hearings and with votes taken on the floor. The protections mandated in a jury trial are substantially reduced in an impeachment. The list of differences goes on and on.
These differences are not necessarily so egregious in view of the fact that the purpose of an impeachment is not to determine whether a crime has been committed but to determine whether to remove a constitutional officer from his position. The hearings are only a means to that end.
The germane question is, if I have not been convicted of a crime, should impeachment in and of itself prevent me from being chair of a committee in Congress.
There are several reasons why it should not. First of all, the Senate had the option to prohibit me from holding federal office. It specifically chose not to. The ordinary meaning of that act is that impeachment is not to be a bar to my being elected to Congress and consequentially should not be a bar to my being as great a congressperson as my talents allow me to be.
Second, I have been on the Intelligence Committee for seven years. Like Jane, Silvestre, Bud, and others, I have been entrusted with America’s secrets. And, I have never violated that trust.
Colleagues, I am sure each of you knows well the high importance of protecting classified information. Further, you may be aware of how Members conduct oversight.
What you may not know is the extent of my involvement in learning about our nation’s intelligence operations. Please consider the following:
I have visited and consulted with more than 30 intelligence stations around the world over the past several years.
I have visited ports in Rotterdam, Los Angeles, Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, Singapore, West Palm Beach, and Seattle.
I have visited, consulted, or spoke to Joint Terrorism Task Force offices in Chicago, Boston, Miami, and the metropolitan Washington, D.C. area, and NATO on three occasions. Others that come to mind are Langley (three times), NSA, Tampa’s Macdill Air Force Base, and Southcom.
Returning for a moment to the impeachment, during that period I learned more than I already knew about how the government had not played fair in its attempt to convict me. Preeminent among these findings is the fact that the FBI tampered with the evidence to trump up their charge that I lied. It was whistleblower Frederic Whitehurst of the FBI who came forward with the revelation that Fred Malone in the FBI laboratory cut the strap of a man-purse of mine (they were popular in the ‘70s) and then testified that the lab determined that I had cut the strap to provide myself an alibi. That and additional revelations about improper FBI conduct in my case caused Judge Sporkin of the Federal District Court of the District of Columbia to state that if he had the constitutional authority, he would reverse the impeachment. (Incidentally, Judge Sporkin was a Reagan appointee.)
Friends, I was not convicted of anything in a court of law. Ever. I was acquitted by a federal jury after the United States of America spent $40,000,000.00 and left no stone unturned in its attempt to convict me. I have served the people of Florida’s 23rd District honorably and with distinction for 14 years.
Obviously, I could write a book or two about the politics of my impeachment. Suffice it to mention how my impeachment was initiated: concomitant with my indictment, the Congress passed 28 U.S.C. 372, the Judicial Conduct and Disability and Reform Act. The law required implementation in the 13 U.S. Circuit Courts. Then Chief Justice Warren Burger appointed the Chief Judge of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, John Godbold, to implement the above-referenced law.
Two and one half weeks after my acquittal, in a regularly scheduled meeting of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, and after the conclusion of the agenda of the day, Judge Godbold made the following statement, “Judge Hastings has been found not guilty, and no one has filed a complaint against him.”
Two judges, William Terrel Hodges (Middle District of Florida) and Anthony Alaimo of Brunswick, Georgia, in testimony before the U.S. House Impeachment Inquiry said they went to dinner that night, and among other things, discussed Judge Godbold’s entreaty. They said they took it to mean that Judge Godbold wanted a complaint filed.
Standing alone, the matters related would not sound any alarm. That would ignore the fact that the law, 28 U.S.C. 372 requires the Chief Judge of the Circuit where a complaint is lodged to determine the meritoriousness of the complaint. In this case, that would be Judge Godbold.
It gets more bizarre. Judges Alaimo and Hodges awakened the Clerk of the 11th Circuit that same night at or about midnight. They retrieved from the Clerk newspaper clippings and used them as the basis of their complaint against me.
Colleagues, you need to know that neither of the Judges was present at any time during the trial proceedings that led to my acquittal. One is from Tampa, Florida, the other from Brunswick, Georgia. I was on trial in Miami, Florida.
Also, the transcript of that trial had not been prepared. How in Heaven’s name could these people file a substantive complaint? The answer is obvious; they could not and did not. So that complaint led to the remaining events that are so convoluted, voluminous, complex, and mundane that it would boggle the mind.
I commend to you two rather definitive pieces regarding my circumstances. One by Professor Terrance Anderson (mentioned above), the other is the floor statement of Senator Arlen Specter, the Vice Chairman of the Hastings Senate Trial Panel.
As I said earlier, no one knows more about this matter than Professor Anderson. And Senator Specter did the real heavy lifting on the Senate Trial Panel. (There were other statements, pro and con, though none more comprehensive.)
Colleagues, I know you have many, indeed, too many matters to attend to. I implore you, though, to please give this matter as much time as you can. I have no choice but to live with this decision. I have labored hard here for 14 years, and I will make you proud if I am selected to Chair the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Most Sincerely,
Alcee L. Hastings
By
clif, at 1:47 PM
dippy the gutless idiot said...
Clif,
What the Sam Hill you bawling about,
I'm NOT bawling, but reposting an article by Laurence O'Donnel, I guess your too stupid, or drunk and HIGH to understand the difference between what I am doing, and what you claim I am doing.
you sumbitch
That is debatable, but your NOT the first person who has called me that, so your entitled to your opinion, BTW sober up son.....
Why don't you re-enlist
Can't son, I have been determined by both the United States army, and the Veterans Administration as 100% disabled and not physically fit for combat after Desert Storm.
See when your lungs fail to function well enough to wear a protective mask, you can not deploy, it is against the rules son.
But your already a vet so YOU already knew that didn't ya son?
By
clif, at 1:54 PM
Clif,
I stand corrected
By
clippy, at 1:59 PM
Clif,
I was Never in the service, and never thought you were 100% disabled. I needed that slap in the face.
By
clippy, at 2:01 PM
Although I have made some very stupid statements in the past, I realize that WE all owe our lives to those men and women who fought and died for this country.
By
clippy, at 2:03 PM
Did'nt Ted Bundy,Son of Sam,John Hinkley, and about a million other crooks say they were innocent? In fact about 90% of the people in prison say they are innocent.Nice try Alcee
By
Rusty Shackelford, at 2:06 PM
Am I wrong? Was'nt old Alcee removed from the bench?
By
Rusty Shackelford, at 2:07 PM
I guess the schools for the "special kids" must have let out early for Thanksgiving, as I see the usual suspects (trolls)are here.
Well happy Thanksgiving everyone.
By
Anonymous, at 2:20 PM
Thank you clippy, yes we all owe our freedoms to the soldiers who go fight the wars, AND we owe the soldiers the truth, and if we can not give them that, we need to bring them HOME.
Just as in Vietnam, a war with a FLAWED strategy, and NO plan for victory is unjustified as far as asking the troops to sacrifice their lives and limbs.
Either Bush ET AL need to start getting HONEST, or bring all the troops home. Asking troops to die, just so the leadership does not have to admit they were wrong, is criminal.
By
clif, at 2:27 PM
BTW dusty stupidturd,
There is very FEW cases where the lead prosecutor changes HIS mind and wants to re-open the case to clear the name of the person he prosecuted...as John Coyners wanted to in 1997.
So you comments about the republican Ted Bundy..ET AL is as stupid as most of your comments, there IS no comparison, their prosecuting officers did NOT re-evaluate the evidence, and change their view of guilt.
Typical dusty stupid bait and switch to something unconnected to try to smear and confuse the situation.
Where is THE honesty son?
Where is the idea that dishonest FBI agents who give testimony have no credibility, so what they say, and those they lie on the stand to convict are NOT Guilty.
Where is the constitutional rights to have a FAIR trial, not one with tainted evidence.
Remember son, just because somebody LIED on the stand and because he had a position that is SUPPOSED to be beyond reproach, it just means an innocent man like Hastings, will be acquitted in the criminal trial...which HE WAS, and congress can inject political reasons for convicting him in an impeachment which has NOTHING to do with the evidence.
Sort of like what happened to Bill Clinton.
You have NOTHING but a lying FBI agent to back up your stupid allegations son, and most no longer believe him, except repug trolls who had NO problem with the repugs covering up for Delay, Ney, Frist, Cunningham, Pombo, Lewis, Blackwell, Harris, Doolittle, Fletcher, Hastert, Foley, ET AL......seems being hypocritical is truly a repug trait that goes right into their DNA makeup.
By
clif, at 2:39 PM
Stick to shucking and jiving while setting people up to hustle them out of their money son, it appears to be all your really good at.
By
clif, at 2:40 PM
Yo dusty Kirk Kerkorian is gonna sell 14 million shares of GM, to buy millions of shares of MGM Mirage.
Looks like your gonna get a new boss of sorts son.
BTW son, how many people can say they own 56 million shares of GM?
By
clif, at 2:44 PM
Clif,
I agree, it's criminal, but unfortunately, at this point in time, there isn't much we can do, but hope and pray that everyone will return home safely.
By
clippy, at 3:00 PM
Lydia. Season One is by far the best season of Too Close for Comfort. The show was more about all of you, not Ted Knight, back then. And it worked. That first season is hilarious, and its bringing back lots of memories.
Watching it is like stepping back in time.
By
Anonymous, at 3:01 PM
Thank you Worf! HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE!
I'm rushing out, but I just posted some paragraphs from Dreyfuss' new article. He met with Harry Reid and with teh Senate Intelligence committee last week.
Check out what he has to say.
I'll post an amazing true war story from my friend John Conley who was in Vietnam -- about the price of war on young boys.
WE HAVE TO GET OUT OF IRAQ!!
By
Lydia Cornell, at 3:07 PM
Hey Klink,did the army have a 401K for you?
By
Rusty Shackelford, at 3:15 PM
Kirk Koerkorian owns a lot of things.He's done pretty damn well,a prime example of capitalism at its best.America,what a country,work hard,work smart,take a gamble or two and what do you know you're worth some money.Anyone who does'nt respect and admire a capitalist society is either lazy or looking for a handout for doing nothing.
By
Rusty Shackelford, at 3:23 PM
Worf.. I read that YOU were in the first season of Too Close For Comfort.
You had picked a raucous fight with Monroe, who proceeded to bitch slap you all over the room... You went into a tirade and started throwing crap all over the Rush's apartment floor. Henry came in, called you a son of a bitch, and kicked your ass out the door.
That is one of the funniest moments in television history, ranking higher than the last episode of MASH
By
Anonymous, at 3:24 PM
There was an episode where Mike wanted to appear, but the censors at that time wouldn't permit homosexual characters on TV.
By
Anonymous, at 3:28 PM
So Mike went prissing and pantywaisting out the studio doors
By
Anonymous, at 3:29 PM
I hear-tell that Mike started bitching to the producers of Three's Company.The producer took Mike out behind the studio lot and beat the shit out of him.
By
Anonymous, at 3:36 PM
Worf said "Lydia. Season One is by far the best season of Too Close for Comfort. The show was more about all of you, not Ted Knight, back then. And it worked. That first season is hilarious, and its bringing back lots of memories.
Watching it is like stepping back in time."
I coldnt agree more Worf, I said basically the same exact thing back in January, and the thing is I really like Ted Knight, he's probably my favorite actor in the show other than Lydia, but I think his ego ruind a fantastic show by trying to make it about him in the latter seasons.
By
Mike, at 3:52 PM
Clif said "Just as in Vietnam, a war with a FLAWED strategy, and NO plan for victory is unjustified as far as asking the troops to sacrifice their lives and limbs.
Either Bush ET AL need to start getting HONEST, or bring all the troops home. Asking troops to die, just so the leadership does not have to admit they were wrong, is criminal."
Exactly right Clif, at this point I think its about Bush not wanting to admit the lie and say he was wrong and hoping to "somehow" protect his failed legacy by still cling to the lies and the hope that things "may" work out in Iraq."................how many people need to die to protect this jackass's pride and ego.
By
Mike, at 3:56 PM
You know Mike, I feel bad. I said that crusty shackleturd writes at the level of a 4th grader, and now I see, I was clearly wrong.
Based on his last few posts, I would judge it no higher than 3rd.
By
Anonymous, at 4:58 PM
This is an Ann Coulter tactic; since the trolls lost the election, they have nothing to say.
By
Lydia Cornell, at 5:23 PM
Or a Dr Laura tactic.
By
Anonymous, at 5:28 PM
Its cause they suck.
By
Anonymous, at 5:28 PM
Poor Tall Texan. He hasn't managed to drag himself from his drunken stupor since just after the election. After it all begin to sink in, he just couldn't seem to muster the will to "carry the water" those who like his hero, Rush Limpbaugh said, "don't deserve to have their water carried"
By
Anonymous, at 5:31 PM
Its hard lying for someone when they can't even win a war, huh fellas?
lol
By
Anonymous, at 5:35 PM
It is a Coulter tactic, they have NOTHING to say and dont have a snowball's chance in hell of actually winning the debate, so they try and derail the debate by sliming the opposition and calling them names like a retarded 4th grader.
By
Mike, at 7:49 PM
Have you seen the new book by Susan Estrich called Soulless?
It is a rebuttal of Coulter's Godless. Its focus is Coulter and the "religious right" hate-mongering.
On the cover Estrich has the same dress, hairstyle and pose as Coulter does on her book.
It is a good read.
By
Larry, at 7:55 PM
I'll have to check that out Larry, but you know what I find interesting, now that the repugs lost the election and now that there are books coming out to challenge her BS, Coulter is hiding, you dont see her anywhere, just like the trolls, she has NOTHING to say and even more important the nation and the MSM dont care to hear anything she has to say.
By
Mike, at 8:09 PM
Estrich has a good take on Coulter and the Falwell's of society.
She managed the Dukakis Prsidential run and she is on Fox alot being attacked.
Barnes and Noble had both books side by side on the shelf and the covers are almost identical.
By
Larry, at 8:12 PM
Anyone see Bush holding the turkey today, I had to ask which one was the REAL turkey.
Anyone see Chris Mathews, John Batiste looked like he was bought and paid for by the Neo Cons, at least Chris Mathews didnt give him a free ride, the Hubris of his hippocrissy to say it doesnt matter who we are fighting and doesnt matter if there is a civil war going on is unbelievable. He wouldnt even answer Mathews questions.
By
Mike, at 8:19 PM
Matthews appeared angry at the phony Bush comrade.
Harold Ford even said some of the things he heard scared him and he used to support the worthless war.
By
Larry, at 8:22 PM
Mathews did mad, Mathews has always despised the war and the Neo Cons, he may have voted for Bush and may ne a repug in drag, but he certainly has no love for the Neo Cons, Cheney and Libby kept calling him, his producers and the higher ups at the network to try and get him to back off the last 4 years to no avail, he doesnt like Cheney or Libby and calls their BS!
By
Mike, at 8:31 PM
NBC news finally had a segment about old man Bush being heckled because of his baby boy,and he lost him temper.
Fox had something on it this morning, but of course they made it sound like Bush was a victim.
By
Larry, at 8:36 PM
Poppy in the UAE
The father is hurt by criticism of his son:
ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates - Former President George H.W. Bush took on Arab critics of his son Tuesday during a testy exchange at a leadership conference in the capital of this U.S. ally.
"My son is an honest man," Bush told members of the audience harshly criticized the current U.S. leader's foreign policy.
The oil-rich Persian Gulf used to be safe territory for former President Bush, who brought Arab leaders together in a coalition that drove Saddam Hussein's troops from Kuwait in 1991. But gratitude for the elder Bush, who served as president from 1989-93, was overshadowed at the conference by hostility toward his son, whose invasion of Iraq and support for Israel are deeply unpopular in the region.
"We do not respect your son. We do not respect what he's doing all over the world," a woman in the audience bluntly told Bush after his speech.
Bush, 82, appeared stunned as others in the audience whooped and whistled in approval.
A college student told Bush his belief that U.S. wars were aimed at opening markets for American companies and said globalization was contrived for America's benefit at the expense of the rest of the world. Bush was having none of it.
"I think that's weird and it's nuts," Bush said. "To suggest that everything we do is because we're hungry for money, I think that's crazy. I think you need to go back to school."
It's almost amusing for former DCI George Herbert Walker Bush to get huffy when someone suggests the United States' polices in the Middle East are driven by greed. A country that is $8,613,185,234,573.26 dollars in debt is not hungry for money? Why did we install the Shah in Iran in 1953 if not to keep "open markets for American [and British] companies"? I mean, let's get serious:
With the establishment during World War II of a small United States military mission to the Gendarmerie (known as GENMISH) in 1943, Washington initiated a modest military advisory program. In 1947 the United States and Tehran reached a more comprehensive agreement that established the United States Army Mission Headquarters (ARMISH). Its purpose was to provide the Ministry of War and the Iranian army with advisory and technical assistance to enhance their efficiency. As a result, the first Iranian officers began training in the United States, and they were followed by many more over the next three decades. The United States initiated its military assistance grant program to Iran in 1950 (the bilateral defense agreement between Iran and the United States was not concluded until 1959) and established a Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) to administer the program. In 1962 the two missions were consolidated into a single military organization, ARMISH-MAAG, which remained active in Iran until the Islamic revolutionary regime came to power in 1979. Between 1973 and 1979, the United States also provided military support in the form of technical assistance field teams (TAFTs), through which civilian experts instructed Iranians on specific equipment on a short-term basis. Although the GENMISH program ended in 1973, United States military assistance to Iran rose rapidly in the six years before the Revolution.
United States military assistance to Iran between 1947 and 1969 exceeded US$1.4 billion, mostly in the form of grant aid before 1965 and of Foreign Military Sales credits during the late 1960s. The financial assistance programs were terminated after 1969, when it was determined that Iran, by then an important oil exporter, could assume its own military costs. Thereafter, Iran paid cash for its arms purchases and covered the expenses of United States military personnel serving in the ARMISH-MAAG and TAFT programs. Even so, in terms of personnel the United States military mission in Iran in 1978 was the largest in the world. Department of Defense personnel in Iran totaled over 1,500 in 1978, admittedly a small number compared with the 45,000 United States citizens, mostly military and civilian technicians and their dependents, living in Iran. Almost all of these individuals were evacuated by early 1979 as the ARMISH-MAAG program came to an abrupt end. Ended also was the International Military Education and Training (IMET) Program, under which over 11,000 Iranian military personnel had received specialized instruction in the United States.
Washington broke its diplomatic ties with Tehran in April 1980, closing an important chapter with a former CENTO ally whose security it had guaranteed since 1959. The relationship had evolved dramatically from the early 1950s, when Iran depended on the United States for security assistance, to the mid-1970s, when the government-to-government Foreign Military Sales program dominated other issues. Arms transfers increased significantly after the 1974 oil price rise, accelerating at a dizzying pace until 1979. From fiscal year 1950 through FY 1979, United States arms sales to Iran totaled approximately US$11.2 billion, of which US$10.7 billion were actually delivered.
You know what happened in 1974? Donald Rumsfeld became the Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney became Gerald Ford's chief-of-staff, and Bush became Chief of the U.S. Liaison Office in the People's Republic of China. In 1976, Bush became DCI. Like I said, it's amusing to see Bush get huffy when someone suggests the United States' policies in the Middle East are not exactly altruistic.
By
clif, at 8:46 PM
Maybe Bush got huffy because he raised his "baby boy" in his image, and the arrogance and greed of the son, is an inheritance of the father.
By
Larry, at 8:50 PM
Arkansas Republican Governor Mike Huckabee furnished his 500K home by registering on several guest registries.
As this came to light, the registries suddenly disappeared.
Isn't he running for President?
By
Larry, at 8:55 PM
daddy Bush better get used to it, bebase GWB will go down in history as the stupidest, most arrogant and most corrupt president in history, his legacy will be one of COMPLETE failure, he will make Hoover look good in comparison......................BTW the truth MUST hurt because this Fiasco in Iraq is all about money.
As for lying I have NEVER seen a president look the American people in the Eye and just tell a bald faced lie time after time like GWB does, he should be impeached just for the lies then tried for treason.
By
Mike, at 9:02 PM
After Baker gets done with a baseless list of things in Iraq that have nothing to do with leaving, Bush will "consider" these options, act like they are trying to talk with Iran and Syria, and then proceed with more war.
Old man Bush is just trying to give cover to his "baby boy".
By
Larry, at 9:06 PM
Top Marine: Troops under too much strain
The new Marine Corps commandant said Wednesday that the longer than anticipated pace of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan is putting an unacceptable strain on his troops.
Gen. James Conway said the service is unable to meet its goal of giving Marines twice as much time at home as in a war zone.
He said unless the demand on the corps eases, he may have to propose increasing the size of the force.
Currently there are 180,000 Marines on active duty and about 40,000 in the active reserves. Marine units serve seven-month deployments in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Conway, who led Marine units into Iraq in 2003 and served on the Pentagon's joint staff, said his troops should get 14 months of relief before they are sent back.
Typically, however, they get only seven or eight months home before being returned to combat, he said.
Assuming the Marines' top job little more than a week ago, Conway told reporters at a Pentagon roundtable discussion that he sees two ways to alleviate stress on troops.
"One is reducing the requirement [of a set deployment time]. The other is potentially growing the force for what we call the long war," Conway said.
Some units are serving their fourth tour in Iraq, and the strain on their families has raised concern that Marines will start leaving the service when their enlistments are up.
"There is stress on the individual Marines that is increasing, and there is stress on the institution to do what we are required to do, pretty much by law, for the nation," he was quoted by The Associated Press as saying.
The current rotation of troops to Iraq is also limiting training, he said.
"We're not sending battalions like we used to for the mountain warfare training, the jungle training," he told reporters. "We're not doing combined arms exercises that we used to do for the far maneuver-type activities we have to be prepared to do."
Conway said he doesn't know whether an expected adjustment in strategy in Iraq will result in the need for more Marines, so he's holding off on making any formal recommendations.
The Marine Corps is the smallest of the Pentagon's military services. The Coast Guard, which is even smaller, is part of the Department of Homeland Security.
********************************************
I wonder if Gates will listen to him better than Dumsfeld listened to Gen Shinseki
By
clif, at 9:07 PM
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
By
clif, at 9:09 PM
Gates will probably get reprimanded for speaking the truth.
If Rummy doesn't get him before he leaves, then Gates will nail him for telling things out of school.
By
Larry, at 9:10 PM
Larry with what Gen shomaker did for the Army budget and the Commandant of the Marine Corps speaking out, I do not think they fear Gates, Dumsfeld or even Bush any more, they care more about the military than what ever weak wrath Bush ET AL has left, after all....they still can count on the men and women of the services and their families to tell the truth the neo-con repugs still do not want to hear.
And hundreds of congressionals to a DEMOCRATIC congress will get press conferences and many hearings which will further undermine the neo-con idiots hold on power in DC.
By
clif, at 9:16 PM
You are probably right. I just lump all the arrogant Repugs into the same garbage bag of dirty moves.
By
Larry, at 9:19 PM
You guys see Lawrence O'Donnell on Countown? He is speaking with amazing clarity right now.
By
Anonymous, at 9:22 PM
The How and Why of America's Polarization: Republicans Declared War
"Gosh," professional pundits and pseudo-journalists like Tim Russert and Katie Couric wonder, "how did American politics become so 'polarized?''' One assumes it is a sarcastic rhetorical question. The how and why of America's polarization is after all, as obvious as it was intentional. Most absurd, however, is the way in which the Russerts, Blitzers, and Courics of the world tend to blame the so-called liberals for America's polarized condition.
How America became polarized is simple. More than thirty years ago, the Republican Party set out on a mission to divide the country. Early on they used race-based wedge issues to make inroads into the South. Come to think of it, if the recent senate campaign in Tennessee is any indication, that whole race-based wedge issue trick remains a vital and vibrant part of today's Republican electoral strategy. When pitting Anglo-American against African-American finally failed to get the big results, Republicans turned to the so-called social issues. They rode abortion for all it was worth. Then the Republicans simply declared war. They call it a "culture war," but for them it is a very real war. In some cases, regarding doctors that provide abortions, the Republican war has become a shooting war...and at abortion clinics, a bombing war.
For the better part of twenty years blathering buffoons like Rush Limbaugh, mouth-frothing morons like Sean Hannity, bigots like Michael Savage, and liberal assassination supporting bit...ladies like Ann Coulter have been making it their business to ensure that the "Conservative Crusaders" understood who America's real enemy was. Then along came FOX "News" and before the country knew what had hit, the entire Republican Party propaganda network -- the people that started and declared the "culture war" -- was busy telling the GOP faithful that the LIBERALS were waging a war against CONSERVATIVES ... against "American values," Christianity, and anybody that disagreed with "their secularist agenda."
Boy-howdy damn! If Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, O'Reilly, and FOX News's listeners and viewers didn't get their butts in gear the liberal horde was going to burn down their churches, make their children engage in "home-ah-sectial" sex, force conservatives' daughters to become impregnated by black men and then make them abort the babies. This insanity started more than twenty years ago and continues on through to this day. The media, of course -- the Russerts, Courics, Blitzers et al -- pretends that this very real and pervasive GOP propaganda network either exists in a vacuum or isn't related to the Republican Party.
"Hmmm...just how did the country become so polarized," ask the so-called journalists.
Nobody on the left, liberal or otherwise, has ever declared a war on fellow Americans. If anything, the left didn't take the threat seriously until Bush came to power and made it clear -- Crystal clear? Crystal clear, Sir! -- that the "culture war" was real and that Republicans were playing for keeps.
Once that realization finally struck home, people on the left had no option but to fight back. True enough, so-called liberals wanted legalized abortion to be a choice women could exercise so that they didn't have to hire Crack Dealer Karl and his handy wire hangar and end up bleeding to death in a dark alley, but nobody ever said women had to have an abortion. Yet, Republicans have made abortion the "central front" in their "culture war." Unlike pro-choice advocates, conservatives want to tell women what medical procedures will and won't be available to them.
It is the same situation regarding publicly displayed religious symbols. People on the left view publicly displayed religion and religious symbols, as the government explicitly supporting that particular religion at the exclusion of all others and the Constitution/Bill of Rights prohibits such practices. At no time ever, has a so-called liberal said that snake worshipping evangelical Christians couldn't practice their religion (if you are wondering, there are real sects that do worship snakes). All anyone has ever said was that the government shouldn't be in the business of being perceived as supporting Christianity over Judaism over Islam over Hinduism or any other religion or non-religion. There isn't a single liberal that has ever called for limiting the free practice of any religion.
Reasonable Republicans and the Republican Party knew these things to be the case, but they didn't care. The GOP knew people on the left weren't going to try and outlaw religion or force abortion on people. Republicans willfully and actively created and exploited these non-issues in order to "polarize" the country and win a few votes. But the insidious part of this is that Republicans really and truly want to limit Americans' options.
Whereas the left only seeks to limit religious intrusion on fellow Americans, the Republicans want to impose their religion on all Americans. Whereas the left only seeks the right for women to make their own choices about their bodies and futures, the Republicans want to tell women what they will do. And that is a huge difference.
Still, not even hot-button social issues could truly raise the ire of most people on the left. No, that didn't happen until President Bush and the Republican Party started labeling environmental groups as being "terrorist" organizations, started spying on American citizens that didn't support their policies and political objectives, began illegally eavesdropping on phone calls, and passed legislation that gave the government the right to enter homes without warrant or warning. That is when the left really realized that Republicans were dead serious about this thing they called a "culture war."
Whereas the left only seeks reasonable limits on the government's powers, the Republicans believe the government should have unlimited power to do as they please and when they please. And that is a huge difference.
The how and why of America's political polarization is obvious. That the Russerts, Blitzers, and Courics pretend not to know the answers or to understand what brought the nation to this point is absurd. Just incase the answer continues to elude them, here it is: America became polarized when the people on the left realized that the Republican Party was serious when they declared war on fellow Americans. The left had no choice but to engage in that war. History is littered with the mass graves of those that didn't take seriously the threat of war declared upon them by their fellow countrymen.
If by chance the so-called journalists feel an urge to smirk and roll their eyes - just ask Keith Olbermann, Tom Brokaw, and Democratic politicians if they didn't feel seriously threatened or under siege when they opened the envelopes stuffed with anthrax-like white powder. Ask the people working at abortion clinics that have to check their garbage for bombs or the doctors that have been shot by the Republican "culture warriors."
This country is polarized all right, but only because that is how the Republican Party wanted it to be. After all, it was the Republican Party that actually declared war on fellow Americans. War is inherently "polarizing" is it not?
By
clif, at 9:27 PM
BTW today is the 43rd anniversary of the assassination of JFK, which to me started the slide downward toward the reichwing state we have today, Bush ET AL.
If he had lived and served a second term, Vietnam would never had become the quagmire it had become, and Nixon would have had NO way to get elected.
And the Bush family would have had to find another job to save Georgie from.
By
clif, at 9:30 PM
O'Donnell is great. He isn't backing down about the pundits and politicians craving war when they have never been themselves.
O'Donnell is right. They are cowards.
By
Larry, at 9:32 PM
Lawrence O'Donnell is willing call a gutless coward a gutless coward........and the reichwingnut gutless repugs do not like to hear the truth about themselves.
By
clif, at 9:35 PM
Chris Shays is saying the Democrats now own the Iraq war.
This idiot barely won reelection and is now blaming a party that hasn't taken control yet.
By
Larry, at 9:37 PM
AS I SEE IT: America’s youth should not die for wrongful war
By KELLY FEIGENBAUM
My oldest son turned 17 on Oct. 5.
A week later, as we sat down to dinner, the phone rang. I glanced at the caller ID and queried out loud, “U.S. government?”
The male caller asked to speak to my oldest son. Not in the habit of allowing my children to speak to perfect strangers, I asked who was calling.
“Staff Sergeant …” and my brain blurred, “… of the U.S. Army.”
The blur became a spin, and all I could think was, “They’re after him.”
I managed a faint but firm “No thank you,” and the sergeant offered in reply, “Well ma’am, you have a nice evening.” Click. Gone.
But the call was lingering and very disturbing.
We don’t need a draft. But we’ll call 17-year-olds at home like the cheesiest of phone solicitors.
The next morning, The Star reported the death of Pfc. Shane R. Austin, 19, in Ramadi, Iraq. His mother remembered him as “a very proud soldier” and a “hero in Edgerton today.”
I don’t doubt that either is true, but I don’t want to “remember” my son. I want my son to remember me.
Too many American men, women and children are remembering proud soldiers, heroes for a day — the day they die.
Many of us continue to numb ourselves to this monumental and irreplaceable loss, hiding behind party rhetoric and the comfort of the knowledge that the war will not come knocking at our doors.
We take the deep respect and patriotism embodied in our nation’s flag, wrap our war dead in the mystique of it and hand it to grieving families, who clutch it against broken hearts. We have nothing else to give them.
President Bush, whose own children have not enlisted and served, refuses to “cut and run” while never addressing the lies and shaded truths he spoon-fed a grieving, vengeful post-Sept. 11 American public to justify the launch of an assault on a country that is now plagued by our invasion and the resulting civil war.
Brave Americans will continue to pay the ultimate price in duty to their country.
But that duty is tainted by the administration that called upon them, leaving only their service and death honorable.
President Bush, you will not pay for your lies, deceit, miscalculation, lack of understanding or planning with the blood of my children.
Your rhetoric will not be their epitaph.
By
clif, at 9:40 PM
True article. If the war was so worthwhile why doesn't the little Bush Belles sign up and see how great things are in Iraq.
Maybe Jeb's daughter could go. It might keep her out of jail.
By
Larry, at 9:46 PM
It looks like 41 might be trying to buy time for his little Georgie, They all know America will be more patient if they think the idealogues are being reasonable and evaluating all their options, but meanwhile we are still there with no plan to pull out in the immediate future.
By
Mike, at 9:50 PM
Anyone see John Batiste on Hardball, it was clear he was a lying Bush shill with an "agenda" he wouldnt answer Any real questions and all his statements made no sense.
By
Mike, at 9:52 PM
Bush is using the same rhetoric on Iran that he did Iraq. They are supposedly trying to go through other countries to stop the nukes.
Didn't he say that in Iraq before he attacked?
By
Larry, at 9:53 PM
Mike. I saw a few minutes of it, and I'm not sure what he said that bothered you but Maj General Batiste has been a stalwart critic of Bush and the war, even going so far as to publically resign his commision as an act of protest against the Bush administration.
He is no Bush shill.
By
Anonymous, at 10:19 PM
I know he has been a critic of the war, but his statements just sounded too much like pat Neo Con BS like we need to fight the war on terror over there so we dont have to fight it over here and he CLEARLY dodged Mathews questions which were very analytical and probing and were the very questions I would have asked..................sure he opposed the ammount of troops used but he did not sound very credible to me or like he opposed the war, its a civil war and he kept linking it to the war on terror and the talking point that we need to fight them over there and i just dont buy into that crap, he's right that Afghanistan is important, but I cant buy into the fact that it is irrelevant if it is a civil war in iraq and it makes no difference if we are fighting Al Qaeda terrorists, Sunni insurgents or Shite milititias, I think we need to understand the situation as well as who we are fighting and what their goals and motivation is................................and just paroting "we need to fight them over there so we dont need to fight them over here" isnt acceptable to me regardless of who says it.
By
Mike, at 10:32 PM
The reichwingnuts are gonna go crazy, in fact their heads might just explode...
why you ask?
Israeli court accepts gay marriages
I wonder how they will spin THIS one?
By
clif, at 10:38 PM
If this is the same interview I watched earlier this evening I thought Gen Batiste was also wanting more troops. Maybe I took it wrong but I thought he sounded like an advocate of the war.
By
Anonymous, at 10:41 PM
BTW the reichwingnuts will have to deal with this Vatican may allow use of condoms to combat Aids also.
By
clif, at 10:43 PM
My boys (9 and 15) and their friend decided they were going to be the first in line for the Wii at the Target in Van Nuys, so they begged me to let them camp out there overnight. The official line started at 8 PM - they got there at 4 in the afternoon with their blankets, food, video games and books.
It turned out to be a cool adventure - we parents took turns checking on them , and they were indeed the first in line and got their Wiis at 8 in the morning. The kids (and adults) there were nice and they made some friends. It will definitely be something they'll always remember.
By
Alicia, at 10:48 PM
Alicia you are very fortunate. The stores I have been to are sold out and have no idea when they will receive more.
By
Anonymous, at 10:54 PM
Well I am going to have to see the interview. He is a hawk, that I am aware of but he was well on his way to becomming a Brigadier General, and he resigned his commision in the Military (he was already a Maj General) to voice his opposition to the President.
I will look at this interview and see what he said, cause I know he is no liberal or democrat, something the right tries to paint him as. He may be shifting to far to the right. I'll watch the interview if I get the chance.
By
Anonymous, at 10:57 PM
What is Wii?
By
Anonymous, at 10:58 PM
Worfeus, Baptise was going to be Lieutenant General, he had already been a Brigader General;
the ranks go:
Brigader General...one star
Major General.....two stars
Lieutenant General..three stars
General ...............four stars.
By
clif, at 11:14 PM
Thanks Clif. I knew it was something like that.
I'm no expert on ranks, as you can clearly see.
By
Anonymous, at 11:25 PM
Most people can not understand why a lieutenant general out ranks a major general, when a major outranks a lieutenant, but the rank of major general was formally known as sergeant major general, and around WW1 the term sergeant was dropped.
By
clif, at 11:30 PM
He is the very model of a modern Major General.
By
Anonymous, at 11:59 PM
Liar. 'Liar?'
Once upon a time, only people with bad manners took note of the fact that George W. Bush was an inveterate liar. One such person, pundit Michael Kinsley, observed back in April 2002, "Bush II administration lies are often so laughably obvious that you wonder why they bother." Back then it was undeniable but all but unsayable in the mainstream media. Even when addressing himself to the very topic of Bush's myriad lies six months later, Washington Post scribe Dana Milbank combed his thesaurus and came up with "embroidering," "taken some flights of fancy," "taken some liberties," "omitted qualifiers," etc. But even this artful linguistic circumlocution so infuriated Karl Rove & Co. that the White House pressured the Post to reassign the reporter. When asked to comment on an incontrovertible, unarguable, prime-time presidential lie--Bush publicly claimed that Iraq would not allow inspections, when in fact the UN inspectors had to be kicked out for his war to begin--on CNN's Reliable Sources program, Milbank said, "I think what people basically decided was this is just the President being the President." What, after all, is the big deal about lying about why you started a war?
Bush had been lying right from the start, of course, but just for fun, one assumes, he recently decided to double-down on his bet. On the day after the election, Bush explained to the media that the discrepancy between his insistence just a few days earlier to reporters that Donald Rumsfeld would stay in his job come hell or high water while, in fact, he had already started the process to replace Rumsfeld with Robert Gates could be explained by... well, heck, Bush just felt like lying about it. His exact words: "I didn't want to inject a major decision about this war in the final days of a campaign. And so the only way to answer that question, and to get you on to another question, was to give you that answer."
Bush's bald admission proved a breathtaking break with presidential precedent. After all, presidential lying is nothing new, but on virtually every occasion I studied for my book on the topic, When Presidents Lie: A History of Official Deception and Its Consequences, presidential lies were said to rest, somehow, on national security needs. (The obvious exception was Bill Clinton's blowjob lie, which he attributed--compellingly in my view--to his constitutional right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment.)
Given Rumsfeld's portfolio, Bush could easily have gone the "national security" route. The lefty blogosphere would have grumbled, as would a few liberal pundits, but the news pages and the Sunday shows would have swallowed hard and moved on. And on cable and talk-radio, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly would have used words like "traitor" and "pro-terrorist" for anyone who didn't. (Presumably, the old Andrew Sullivan would have called for jailing the current one.)
But because Bush couldn't be bothered to pretend this time, he created a conundrum for much of the media. The press claims all kinds of special privileges for itself--legal, financial and ethical--based almost exclusively on its constitutionally protected role as the watchdog of the rulers for the ruled. Democratic theory requires that citizens choose their leaders on the basis of true information about their preferences and performances, and the very raison d'être of the political press is to provide it. But if those leaders are free to lie--and the press plays along with those lies--then democracy itself is undermined. How many members of Bush's base, one wonders, roused themselves to run to the polls on November 7 because, well, "say what you will about Bush, at least he promised to stick by that Rumsfeld fellow." A day later their democratic decisions would seem a cruel joke.
What's more, now that Bush has come out and all but said, "I lie because I feel like it," nothing he says can be taken on faith. Some will no doubt resist this. Having been deprived of the "It's not a lie if the liar believes his own lie" argument that had previously proven so popular, This Week's George Will excused Bush on the grounds of his apparent imbecility. "The English language is not always the President's friend," Will explained, as if Bush had been reared speaking Sanskrit. But this dog is not likely to remain in the media's hunting party for long. Bush's revealed contempt--both for the truth and for the reporters whose job it is to find it--has created a kind of existential crisis for reporters and their bosses: "If the President is willing to call himself a liar, how can we go on pretending it isn't so?" And yet, if they remain unfree to call the President a liar, well... you get the point.
So far, nobody in the MSM really has a handle on the issue. The Washington Post, to its credit, ran five separate news stories that touched on the lie--two online and three in the paper. (This was originally misreported in the liberal blogosphere, which charged the paper with changing the wording of its stories to protect the President from his lie. In fact, the Post merely printed multiple stories with differing descriptions of the lie, with no subsequent changes in any of them.) All were reasonably straightforward, deploying phrases like "appeared to mislead," which is as close as the paper's editors can bring themselves to calling a lie a lie. Unfortunately, the only story devoted exclusively to the lie itself was by Howard Kurtz, who could think only to ask if Bush's lie about Rumsfeld was "on par with President Bill Clinton's hair-splitting defense in the Monica S. Lewinsky investigation that 'it all depends on what the definition of is is.'" The New York Times barely touched on the question--treating the decision to replace Rumsfeld as a typical Washington soap opera. Save for the occasional op-ed, the issue soon disappeared under an avalanche of stories about Nasty Nancy Pelosi (the new Wicked Witch of the West in Morton Kondracke's phrasing) and "maverick" John McCain, the MSM's President-in-Waiting. We were back to business as usual in George Bush's America.
Bush admitted HE LIES, and Rush admitted he lies for them, so why should we believe anything the reichwing says any more?
After all tiny ET Al spread their LIES here........so I wonder what they really think knowing they were fooles who spread the lies of bigger FOOLES
By
clif, at 12:11 AM
Rush Limpballs said he lied too. Right there on his national television show.
He must have been having a moment of clarity.
By
Anonymous, at 12:19 AM
Mike.
I am just seeing part of the interview now on Hardball. And you were right about how he is pushing the war, and it looks like he wants to stay.
Guess he's not the very model of a modern Major General.
By
Anonymous, at 12:21 AM
Hey, since its Thanksgiving, I just posted a new thread about a woman in Nashville that I know who singlehandedly started serving meals under the bridge to the homeless.
This is an amazing human being.
Love to you all,
HI Alicia! I love your blog and I'll visit soon.
xo
By
Lydia Cornell, at 12:33 AM
Dick Cheney is supposedly in Baghdad, too bad the gutless punk won't don a uniform and FIGHT the war he wanted so badly.
By
clif, at 12:41 AM
Batiste has signed on with some think tank or spin meister group, because a lot of what he said is rehashed pre-election talking points.
Slippery slope is the old domino theory in a new dress.
He statement about stability in the middle east was operative in 2003 BEFORE the invasion, but the bombed, shot, ran over and killed that idea for a generation or two, especially inside Iraq.
He was as incoherent as Bush with his mix and stir metaphors of 9-11 Afghanistan and Iraq at will, but with not the clear thinking that a division commander would demand of his intell officer.
He either has drunk the neo-con kool aid, or is simply trying to get a job at Heritage or AEI, because his words do NOT reflect the reality on the ground there.
Chris Matthews asked him many questions he simply ignores and responds with talking points which have nothing to do with the question, or the reality on the ground.
Place his comments on Hardball tonight against what he said before;
The conduct of the Iraq war fueled Islamic fundamentalism across the globe and created more enemies for the United States, a retired U.S. Army general who served in the conflict said on Monday.
The views of retired Army Maj. Gen. John Batiste buttressed an assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies, which intelligence officials said concluded the war had inspired Islamist extremists and made the militant movement more dangerous.
The Iraq conflict, which began in March 2003, made "America arguably less safe now than it was on September 11, 2001," Batiste, who commanded the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq in 2004-2005, told a hearing on the war called by U.S. Senate Democrats.
"If we had seriously laid out and considered the full range of requirements for the war in Iraq, we would likely have taken a different course of action that would have maintained a clear focus on our main effort in Afghanistan, not fueled Islamic fundamentalism across the globe, and not created more enemies than there were insurgents," Batiste said.
Something has made HIM flip flop.
By
clif, at 12:47 AM
I think one of the least talked-about reasons that Bush always seems so disoriented is that Washington has always upset his equilibrium. For a seemingly accurate confession (albeit somewhat coerced) by Bush of where he is happiest, this 3 minute video might shed some light: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7dPISoH6Ok
By
Anonymous, at 3:39 AM
You cannot be liberal and a Christian at the same time?
Explain Ms. Lydia Cornell, Ms. Coulter.
By
Anonymous, at 5:41 PM
The conservatives will probably promote the Playstation 3 as a "true" console, maybe because it's so high-profile (i.e. big, heavy, impressive graphics even if the games are awful, and you have to commit violence to get one), while they'd have a field-day with a name like "Wii" (they're probably scheming the anti-gay/homophobic comments already), even if the console is actually fun and can get parents to play games with their kids.
By
Anonymous, at 2:04 PM
TELECOM PLC
We are international company.We sell different types of latest mobile phones and ipod all at affordable and cheap price.
Our phones are company class 1 tested and approved by global standard organization of Wireless industries.We give 1 year international warranty.
Send your enquiry to us via e-mail below
Here are list of some of our product
NOKIA MOBILE PHONE
Nokia N70..$155USD
Nokia N71..$160USD
Nokia N73..$170USD
Nokia N80..$180USD
NOKIA N90..$190USD
NOKIA N76..$270USD
NOKIA N91..$200USD
Nokia N92..$230USD
NOKIA N93..$250USD
NOKIA E90..$400USD
Nokia N95..$320USD
Nokia N93i..$280USD
Nokia 6060..$175USD
Nokia 6111..$175USD
Nokia 6270..$175USD
Nokia 6270..$175USD
Nokia 6280..$175USD
NOKIA 8850..$150USD
Nokia 8800..$265USD
Nokia 6021..$145USD
Nokia 6030..$145USD
Nokia 6680..$145USD
Nokia 6681..$120USD
Nokia 6101..$110USD
Nokia 6822..$110USD
Nokia 7710..$110USD
Nokia 6170..$145USD
Nokia 6260..$145USD
Nokia 6630..$120USD
Nokia 9300..$205USD
Nokia Vertu..$255USD
Nokia 5140i..$145USD
Nokia 6230i..$145USD
Nokia 8800 sirroco..$280USD
And others..
SAMSUNG MOBILE PHONE
SAMSUNG D600..$180USD
SAMSUNG D900..$210USD
SAMSUNG D500..$160USD
SAMSUNG P860..$175USD
SAMSUNG P850..$175USD
SAMSUNG E730..$175USD
SAMSUNG D510..$175USD
SAMSUNG Z700..$145USD
SAMSUNG D720..$175USD
SAMSUNG Z130..$110USD
SAMSUNG Z500..$120USD
SAMSUNG Z300..$110USD
SAMSUNG E350..$175USD
SAMSUNG E720..$175USD
SAMSUNG B100..$175USD
SAMSUNG X640..$175USD
SAMSUNG X480..$155USD
SAMSUNG X460..$155USD
SAMSUNG P730..$155USD
SAMSUNG P710..$120USD
And others..
MOTOROLA MOBILE PHONE
MOTOROLA V8..$120USD
MOTOROLA V6..$120USD
MOTOROLA V560..$130USD
MOTOROLA K600..$100USD
MOTOROLA V635..$100USD
MOTOROLA A668..$120USD
MOTOROLA V980..$130USD
MOTOROLA C980..$120USD
MOTOROLA V600 .$120USD
MOTOROLA E895...$120USD
MOTOROLA V1150..$120USD
MOTOROLA A1010..$100USD
MOTOROLA E1060..$122USD
MOTOROLA E1120..$110USD
MOTOROLA V600i..$120USD
MOTOROLA MPX 300..$150USD
MOTOROLA MPX 200..$155USD
MOTOROLA RAZR V3..$155USD
And others..
SONY ERICSSON MOBILE PHONE
SONY ERICSSON P910..$160USD
SONY ERICSSON P900..$150USD
SONY-ERICSSON W800..$175USD
SONY-ERICSSON K750..$175USD
SONY-ERICSSON J300..$175USD
SONY-ERICSSON K600..$155USD
SONY-ERICSSON Z800..$155USD
SONY-ERICSSON K300..$175USD
SONY-ERICSSON S600..$185USD
Sony Ericsson w800i..$175USD
SONY-ERICSSON K600...$175USD
SONY-ERICSSON K700i..$145USD
SONY-ERICSSON K500i..$120USD
SONY-ERICSSON D750...$175USD
SONY-ERICSSON K750i..$175USD
And others.......
Qtek
Qtek 8500..$130USD
Qtek S200..$180USD
Qtek 9000..$250USD
Qtek 8310..$200USD
Qtek 8300..$185USD
Qtek 9100..$270USD
Qtek 8100..$150USD
Qtek S110..$175USD
Qtek S100..$190USD
Qtek 9090..$200USD
Qtek 8020..$190USD
Qtek 8010..$140USD
Qtek 2020..$200USD
Qtek 1010..$140USD
Qtek 2020i..$220USD
02 Phones
02 X4..$130USD
02 X3..$120USD
02 x7..$140USD
O2 X2i..$120USD
02 XDA IIi..$150USD
02 XDA IIs..$160USD
02 XDA NEO..$200USD
o2 xDA Exec..$220USD
02 XDA Atom..$200USD
02 XDA mini S..$220USD
02 XDA II mini..$180USD
AND OTHERS..
I-MATE PHONES
I-MATE SP3..$135USD
I-MATE SP5..$150USD
I-MATE JAM..$160USD
I-MATE SP5m..$155USD
I-MATE SP4m..$120USD
I-MATE PDA2..$190USD
I-MATE SP3i..$130USD
I-MATE JAMIN..$240USD
I-MATE K-JAM..$180USD
I-MATE PDA2k..$170USD
I-MATE JASJAR..$250USD
I-MATE Smartflip..$140USD
I-MATE JAM Black..$150USD
I-MATE Pocket PC..$140USD
I-MATE Smartphone..$160USD
I-MATE Smartphone2..$180USD
TOM TOM GO
GARMIN 396..$235USD
Tom Tom RIDER..$250USD
TOM TOM GO 300..$160USD
Tom Tom GO 500..$180USD
Tom Tom GO 510..$210USD
Tom Tom GO 700..$230USD
Tom Tom GO 910..$240USD
And many more..
GAME
Xbox 360..$250USD
Nutendo wii..$280USD
Play station 1..$150USD
Play station 2 .$200USD
Play station 3..$300USD
And many more..
IPOD
Apple Ipod video 30GB..$150USD
Apple Ipod video 60GB..$190USD
Apple Iopd video 80GB..$200USD
Apple 30 GB iPod Photo..$110USD
Apple 40 GB iPod photo..$150USD
Apple iPod Mini 4GB Pink MP3 Player..$50USD
Apple iPod nano 4GB Black MP3 Player..$55USD
And many more..
Contact us through our
E-mail
telecomplc@hotmail.com
telecomplc0@yahoo.com.au
By
telecom0, at 2:13 AM
You know Clif, a few days ago FF had the nerve to demand I show him just ONE poll where the Iraqi's want us to leave.
Then, when I showed him not one, but TWO polls, BOTH of which were almost 2 years old, showing an OVERWHELMING majority of Iraqi's wanted us out WAY BACK THEN, he ran and hid from me. He did not have the decency to even admit I had once again proven him wrong.
...Don't let him fool you Lydia.
Freedom Fan openly lies, and openly ignores each time he is proven wrong. He hides from the truth, and pushes lies to perpetuate bloodshed. Bloodshed he is busy cowering from.
Don't by his bullshit. Cause thats all it is. Bullshit.
-anonypuss
Q27 How long do you think US and other Coalition forces should remain in Iraq? Should they leave now, remain until security is restored, remain until the Iraqi government is stronger, remain until Iraqi security forces can operate independently, remain longer but leave eventually, or never leave?
A: Leave Now- 35%
Remain Longer/Never Leave: 65%
Source: BBC Iraqi Opinion Poll conducted between 25 February and 5 March 2007
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/19_03_07_iraqpollnew.pdf
By
Freedom Fan, at 12:16 PM
Brand new unlock original mobile phones with complete accessories in sealed box with 1 year international warranty
Contact us through our
Skype: manuel_mike
TELL: +447024017519
FAX:: +447006088504
EMAIL: linktechltd@gmail.com
EMAIL/MSN: peacestore@hotmail.com
Website:
Apple iPhone 4GB..260usd
Apple iPhone 8GB..300usd
Apple iPhone 16GB..380usd
Apple iPhone 3G(8GB)..320usd
Apple iPhone 3G(16GB)..400usd
Nokia N96..400usd
Nokia N95..300usd
Nokia N85..350usd
Nokia N79..320usd
Nokia E90..400usd
Nokia N82..280usd
Nokia N78..290usd
Nokia N76..230usd
Nokia N93i..280usd
Nokia N81 8GB..260usd
Nokia N95 8GB..350usd
Nokia 8800 Carbon Arte..430usd
Nokia 8800 Sirocco Gold..450usd
Nokia 8800 Sapphire Arte..500usd
Motorola Q..300usd
Motorola Z9..290usd
Motorola Q8..250usd
Motorola ZN5..320usd
motorola Q9h..300usd
Motorola Q q9..350usd
Motorola Q 11..320usd
Motorola RIZR Z8..280usd
Motorola RIZR Z6..230usd
Motorola ROKR E8..250usd
Motorola RIZR Z10..250usd
Motorola Sidekick Slide..280usd
Samsung U700..260usd
Samsung F520..350usd
Samsung G800..250usd
Samsung G600..230usd
Samsung F700..270usd
Samsung i600..280usd
Samsung F500..250usd
Samsung D980..380usd
Samsung F480..300usd
Samsung Armani..300usd
Samsung Serenata..550usd
Samsung i900 8GB..320usd
Samsung i900 16GB.350usd
Samsung U900 Soul..300usd
Samsung M8800 Pixon..350usd
HTC S630..260usd
HTC S740..600usd
HTC S620..250usd
HTC shift..500usd
HTC P3450..220usd
HTC P3300..280usd
HTC P3600..300usd
HTC MTeoR..250usd
HTC TYTN II..300usd
HTC Touch Pro..400usd
HTC TyTN P4500..300usd
HTC Touch Cruise..340usd
HTC Touch Diamond..400usd
HTC Advantage X7500..420usd
HTC Advantage X7510..650usd
Sony erricson P1..280usd
Sony Ericsson K770..170usd
Sony Ericsson T650..200usd
Sony Ericsson K850..280usd
Sony erricson P990..220usd
Sony Ericsson G705..320usd
Sony Ericsson G900..280usd
Sony erricson W950..270usd
Sony Ericsson G502..320usd
Sony Ericsson W902..370usd
Sony erricson W960i..320usd
Sony Ericsson W910i..210usd
Sony erricson K550im..350usd
Sony Ericsson C905 8MPs.450usd
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1.400usd
Contact us through our
Skype: manuel_mike
TELL: +447024017519
FAX:: +447006088504
EMAIL: linktechltd@gmail.com
EMAIL/MSN: peacestore@hotmail.com
Website:
By
RUBEN, at 8:17 AM
WE SELL AND SUPPLY NEW AND LATEST MUSIC AND DJ INSTRUMENT AT THE BEST PRICE.
WE ARE REGISTERED COMPANY AND BELOW IS OUR COMPANY NAME WITH REGISTRATION NUMBER.
CONSULTANTS SUPPLY LIMITED
Registered No.05213855
TELL: +447011135544
EMAIL: music_instrument@consultant.com
EMAIL/MSN: link_technology@hotmail.com
Pioneer DJM 909..650USD
Pioneer DJM 800..800USD
Pioneer DJM-700..700USD
Pioneer DJM-600..500USD
Pioneer DJM-400..300USD
Pioneer DJM-1000..1500USD
Pioneer CDJ 400..400USD
Pioneer CDJ-800MK2..400USD
Pioneer CDJ-1000MK2..700USD
Pioneer CDJ-1000MK3..750USD
Pioneer EFX-500..$350usd
Pioneer EFX-1000 Pro-Effector..780USD
Pioneer VSW-1 Video Switcher..550USD
Pioneer CMX-3000 Dual Rackmount..400USD
Pioneer DVJ-X1 DJ Video Player..1600USD
Pioneer DMP-555 MultiMedia Player..670USD
Pioneer DJ DVD TURNTABLE DE DVJ-X1..1,120USD
Pioneer MEP-7000 Professional Media Player..1200USD
Pioneer DVJ-1000 Professional DVD Turntable..1300USD
VESTAX VCI 300 DJ..600USD
VESTAX PMC-280 PRO..270USD
VESTAX PMC-580 PRO..1,200USD
Vestax PMC-500 DJ Mixer..600USD
Vestax PMC-05PROIII DJ Mixer..200USD
Vestax PMC-05PROSL DJ Mixer with Sampling..300USD
Vestax VCI-100 Tabletop DJ MIDI Controller..250USD
Vestax PMC-08Pro Professional Hybrid Digital Mixer..450USD
Technics SL-1200MK2..600USD
Technics SL-1210MK2..300USD
Technics SL-1200GOLD..550USD
Technics SL-1210MK5 Pro Turntable..350USD
Technics SL-1210M5G Pro Turntable..450USD
Technics SL-DZ1200 Digital Turntable..500USD
Technics SH-MZ1200 4 Channel DJ Mixer..600USD
Numark DVD01 Dual DVD Player..300USD
Numark DXM09 Digital DJ Mixer...200USD
Numark CDX Direct-Drive CD Turntable..350USD
Numark iDJ 2 DJ Console for the iPOD..300USD
Numark 5000FX 12" 5-Channel Tabletop Mixer..300USD
Numark AVM02 Audio/Video Mixer with Effects..500USD
Numark X2 Pro Hybrid Turntable And CD / MP3 Player..500USD
Numark HDX CD and MP3 Player with Removable 80GB HD.. 850USD
Denon DN-D9000..700USD
Denon DN-D6000..850USD
Denon DN-HD2500..700USD
Denon DN X1500s (Mixer)..600USD
Denon DN S3500 (CD player)..500USD
Denon DN S5000 (CD player)..700USD
DENON DNHS 5500 DIGITAL DJ TURNTABLE..500USD
Denon DN-D4500 Pro DJ Dual CD/MP3 Player..300USD
Denon DN-X900 Professional 19" Analog/DigitalMixer..300USD
Roland Fantom-XR Sound Module..700USD
Roland V-Synth XT Synthesizer..1100USD
Roland VK-8M Organ Sound Module..400USD
Roland SP-555 Creative Sampler Workstation..300USD
Rane TTM 57SL Mixer..850USD
Rane MP44 DJ Club Mixer..800USD
Rane MP 4 Rackmount DJ Mixer..300USD
Rane TTM 56 Performance Mixer..400USD
Rane Empath Touring/Club Mixer..500USD
Rane MP 2016a 6-Channel Rotary Mixer..650USD
Allen & Heath Xone:02 Battle Mixer..280USD
Allen & Heath Xone:92 Fader DJ Mixer..850USD
Allen & Heath Xone:464 16 Input Pro Club DJ Mixer..800USD
AKAI 2000XL.. 650USD
AKAI MPC 2500..700USD
AKAI MPC 4000..1100USD
Akai MPC1000 Music Production Center..500USD
Akai MPC2500 Music Production Center..800USD
Akai MPC5000 Music Production Center..1200USD
Akai MPC2000XL-MCD Production Station..800USD
Akai MPC500 MIDI Production System/Sampler..300USD
Korg ZERO4 Live Control Mixer..700USD
Korg KM-202 2-Channel KAOSS DJ Mixer..220USD
Korg KM-402 4-Channel KAOSS DJ Mixer..350USD
Korg ZERO8 Live Control Console Mixer..1000USD
Urei 1605 DJ Club Mixer..600USD
Urei 1601S Digital DJ Mixer with Sampler..450usd
Serato Scratch Live..300USD
Mackie d.2 2-Channel DJ Mixer..400USD
PCDJ DAC-3 Digital Audio Controller..280USD
Ecler EVO 5 DJ Mixer & Full MIDI Control..1000USD
Stanton CM.205 CD / MP3 Player with Mixer..300USD
Stanton M.505 12" Club Mixer with 5 Input Channels..300USD
By
RUBEN, at 8:19 AM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home