The Foley Claimstorm
Joshua Micah Marshall has sunk his teeth into the contradictory statements being made by the House Republican leadership regarding what they knew and when they knew it about Rep. Foley’s improper activities with teenage pages: Early this evening I was starting to think that Foleygate might truly be…
I’ve been at this blog racket for almost six years. And usually you’ve got to really pore over the details to find the inconsistencies and contradictions. So I’m not sure I’ve ever seen this big a train wreck where leaders at the highest eschelons of power repeatedly fib, contradict each other and change their stories so quickly. It’s mendacity as performance art; you can see the story unravel in real time. Just consider, Denny Hastert has repeatedly said he didn’t know anything about the Foley problem until Thursday. But two members of the leadership — Boehner and Reynolds — say no, they warned him about it months ago. Hastert got Boehner to recant; Reynolds is sticking to his guns…
These fibs and turnabouts amount to a whole far larger than the sum of its parts. Even the most cynical politicians carefully vet their stories to assure that they cannot easily be contradicted by other credible personages. When you see Majority Leaders and Speakers and Committee chairs calling each other liars in public you know that the underlying story is very bad, that the system of coordination and hierarchy has broken down and that each player believes he’s in a fight for his life.
Well, I’m sure they got their story together in time for today’s talk shows. Say what you will about how the US has lost its edge in any number of areas, there’s one area where we definitely still lead the world: Our politicians can figure out the best way to spin an inconvenient set of facts, and get that version of reality surgically implanted in the collective hive mind, faster than you can spell hypocrite.
October 1st, 2006 at 10:12 am
At this late date before the election (raising a suspicious eyebrow), Democrats might finally have an issue they can use to sway some voters from the Right.
If Republicans lose control the House, or even lose both houses because of this, that cost will have been worth it to get the pervert out of my party, out of Congress, and hopefully out of society.
October 1st, 2006 at 11:20 am
The timing of the expose is certainly suspicious. But it raises the question: If the Republican leadership in Congress knew about this almost a year ago (which I think the evidence presented so far tends to suggest, though clearly this is going to be the focus of a furious partisan rugby scrum over the next few weeks), what does that say about the moral compass they’re using in their running of the country?
While it would be comforting for me to believe that the Democratic leadership would have behaved differently if they were running the circus, I don’t actually believe that. But that’s kind of a moot point: The Democrats _weren’t_ running the circus. Still, I’m sure Ann Coulter (or someone) will have an explanation soon for how this alll was the logical end result of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s lax morals.
October 1st, 2006 at 11:37 am
Agreed, 100%. cya is the expected norm.
As teachers, my wife and I have involved ourselves in exposing child abuse situations of our students to the proper authorities. On two of those occasions the child was placed in our home, once for two years, until the situation was resolved, and a third resulted in the adoption of our daughter. Understandingly (I hope), we take this situation personally, and politics be damned.
October 2nd, 2006 at 9:03 am
btw what does GOP stand for again?
Greedy Olde Perpetrators?
Gormy Old Pedophiles?
Grasping Obstreperous Page-chasers?
Gay Overbearing Perverts?
The Foley mess is disgusting on a number of levels, but the worst of it seems to be this: that the man who helped write child protection legislation was breaking the law for years with the knowledge of the GOP ‘leadership’.
Par for the course with the most corrupt administration in US history.
I am waiting for someone to make the connection to the whole Guckert/Gannon GayOP cover up. Hypocrits one and all. Sick, sick, sick.
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:32 am
Predictably, enkidu, you finally have evidence of something that might give you “a leg to stand on,” with a situation that could actually sway some Rethuglican wingnuts, and you find it necessary to continue alienating those who might begin to have self-doubts by putting them on the defensive. Great move.
I agree that the Foley mess is disgusting. I’m glad he did the right thing by resigning – typical of Rethugs when caught in something – and I hope he’s put away forever, but you might consider the wisdom of letting some investigations play out before coming to reckless conclusions… thinking of the Plame “outing” situation. Of course, that incident has essentially been ignored since all the attacks have proven false, so there have been no consequences for those false accusions.
You said “I am waiting for… the connection… to the Guckert/Gannon…” The wait is over – you just did it. If you don’t like hypocrits, don’t be one; Foley’s alternative life-style is typically defended by liberals (political agendas notwithstanding). I seem to remember a Mr. Studs (d) who received a standing ovation from his colleagues after having sex with a 17-year-old page, with WaPo defending him, saying he should not lose his job over the situation. Hypocrits?
Some guy in Lancaster, PA just took care of some of your enemy Christians, those horrible Amish 6 to 13-year-old kids. Happy yet, or is this only the beginning? When does the celebration of a victorious battle begin?
My wife’s maiden name was Yoder, her grandfather Simon Yoder, an Amish minister, so perhaps you can figure out why we tend to take the situation personally.
Hatred is contageous, even attractive to many, as the 6-year campaign has already illustrated on the political front. A murderous act of hatred against Christians was almost destined to happen, and how appropriate for it to begin against perhaps the most devout sect of believers in our society. Yes, I assign part of the blame to those who poison society by encouraging hatred.
October 2nd, 2006 at 1:17 pm
I think everyone can agree on the central core of the issue, involving Foley’s unseemly and disgusting IM’s to these under-age kids, and the ugly irony of his position of power being a supposed advocate for protecting children from exploitation.
But another form of moral scumminess is developing which threatens to cover a lot of people on both sides of the congressional aisle and maybe even the media.
Lots of questions still to be answered here: Did Republican leadership try to tamp down a scandal by doing a half-hearted self-investigation and then hope that Foley would hold to a promise to be good? Did Democratic leadership and/or activist groups come across information and documentation of this activity occuring and hold off for months on releasing it, for better political effect? Did some media outlets conspire in withholding publicizing proof of such activity going on, for maximum effect?
It will be interesting and maybe further discouraging, to see if and how a congressional pedophile and his victims may have been played like chess pieces by the current political atmosphere.
October 2nd, 2006 at 1:55 pm
Well said, Craig. People who are represented by both sides of the aisle want a thorough investigation, although with differing hopes/expectations.
October 3rd, 2006 at 9:21 am
brilliant!
I can see the right wing(nut) response taking shape already. Just to make this clear in small words even Macaca-san doesn’t have to look up: being gay isn’t a crime (in most states ;-). Soliciting sex from minors (and apparently consumating these icky, sick and illegal yearnings) is a federal crime. A further crime (crimes really) was/were committed by the House ‘leadership’ by trying to cover this up. The ‘leaders’ knew this anywhere from 5 years ago to as recently as 11 months (depending upon sources etc). Saving a R seat was more important to shrubco. than protecting 15 year old boys. And you folks want us to trust you with protecting the country?
I know you and the rest of wingerville are frantically searching for some Dems to smear this shit all over, but it is too little too late. If the ‘leadership’ had truly ‘led’, they would have launched an investigation long ago, found any (repeat that for the short bus crowd – any) pols that were making inappropriate contact with minors and censured, removed or jailed (after a proper trial, etc). As an non-aligned non-partisan voter, I find your BlameDemocratsFirst! campaign to be partisan and hateful. Who Would Jesus IM?
The ‘investigation’ Hastert called won’t look into ‘leadership’ failures. The target of the ‘investigation’ is who leaked this. Were they dems/libs/enemies of the state? Can we GOOPers pin it on someone else? Part and parcel for the radical right: their power above all else. Above God, above Man, above Science, above the Law. Beyond belief (there are facts). If there were Dems IMing these pages, let them be brought out into the light, as well as any Republican).
And Macaca-san as a Christian I find your making political conclusions from the Amish country shootings to be stereotypical wingnut fantasy. Let the bodies at least cool before you blame it on Clinton/gays/libs/etc. Perhaps let the investigators do their job eh? When he turns out to be a registered Republican will it change your mind? Probably not. He had an awful lot of guns and ammo for a evil(* see Macaca-san’s screed above) Dim.
It is to laugh that the Foley situation was the leg that I might stand on to tip your vote into the Dhimmicrat column. Macaca-san wouldn’t vote Democrat if it turns out Bush, Cheney and the lot of the GOP used the page program like some modern day seraglio. Only gay-er. And more hypocritical.
October 3rd, 2006 at 9:36 am
Took me a bit to find out what you were babbling about with regards to the Studds point you make. You misspelled his name. google helped me in record time (lol)!
“If you want one clue about the political fallout from all this, you can look back more than 20 years ago.
In 1983, the House Ethics Committee revealed that two House members had been sexually involved with pages: liberal Massachusetts Democrat Gerry Studds and conservative Illinois Republican Daniel Crane. Crane was involved with a female, Studds a male; both pages were over the legal age of consent. Both Studds and Crane were censured by the House, but their responses — and their political fates — were very different.
Crane was repentant; tearfully apologized to his wife and family, asked for forgiveness. As the rules require, he stood in the well of the House to receive his censure and faced his colleagues.
By contrast, Studds was unrepentant. He said the relationship was legal and consensual, talked about the difficulties of being a gay man in America, and when the House censured him, he turned his back on his colleagues, as if to reject their censure.
The next year, Crane, who had been an outspoken advocate of “family values,” was soundly defeated by voters in his conservative district. Studds was re-elected handily, and served in the House for more than a dozen years, until his retirement.”
See there are these things called facts… perhaps you may have heard your ‘debate’ opponents mention them? The fact is being gay is only a crime to the wingers, you know them as the the sharp edge of the bell curve as it slims down toward the really radical hard core rightwingnuts – you know the radicals, neocons, nazis, skinheads, kkk types. TV and his merry crew.
Fact is Mr Studds stood up and received his censure (not sure what you are saying about his standing ovations). I don’t think making improper advances to ‘adults’ half your age is appropriate (even if technically legal). Other than the crime of gay-ness, Mr Studds seems to have gone on to a successful political career representing his district and being re-elected over and over again. Honesty hurts as TV and Mr Foley know.
As the God-parent to an adopted child of two happy and healthy gay parents, your blinkered partisanship reveals a very nasty underbelly to your side of the bell curve. sick, sick, sick indeed
October 3rd, 2006 at 5:34 pm
Wingnut Monkey-boy here.
As I said in my initial post, if Republicans lose control of the House, or even both houses of Congress because of this, it will have been worth that cost to get this pervert out of my party, out of Congress, and out of society.
I’ll go another step. Hastert, along with anyone else in Congress who had prior knowledge of Foley’s perversion, should be forced to resign.
Yes, I later drew an analogy with Stubbs, who actually had sex with a 17-year-old (high school student) page. I drew the analogy to illustrate the double standards of the Democrat party, and enkidu reinforces my point with his detailed story of the misadventures of Crane and Studds. Thanks for the facts, which bolstered my own memories.
There is some evidence that leaders on both sides of the aisle knew of Foley’s sexually explicit IMMs to former pages and failed to come forward in a timely manner. Whether they sheltered the info to save a seat or to use it at a later date, they left high school kids in a vulnerable position and should be removed if either situation is proven. Period.
October 4th, 2006 at 9:56 am
Are you asking that we all call you monkey-boy now? I though that Macaca was perfect: Patriot Sen George Allen says that the definition is buffoon not baboon (tho macaques are indeed monkeys). It is wonderful that you are embracing your heritage as the highest evolved primate species on the planet. Mr Darwin would be proud of your change of heart to be sure. Change your handle to testify to your enlightenment brother!
I am sure you would love to make it all about how the evil* Democrats are the root problem. Ding it! if Al Gore hadn’t invented the internets, this would never have happened!
I am shocked to find out that there are different ages to consent, majority, adulthood, drinking etc. I always thought it was 18 = adult for the vote and the draft (plus draft beer in some states?), 21 for liquor. While Mr. Studd’s affair was technically legal (ick), the immorality of an older man or woman making advances on a much younger quasi-employee are obviously wrong (see B. Clinton). But considering my experince in corporate Uhmerka, this kind of crap does not surprise me.
And just to be clear, I know lots of good Conservatives and Republicans. I wasn’t trying to paint them all with the Foley goo. Just the ‘leadership’, the ‘regime’, the ‘congress’ and that sorry failure of a misleader, the ‘president’.
Better get those Diebold machines revved up boys!
October 4th, 2006 at 4:18 pm
By answering with Monkey-boy, I’m going with the definition you originally gave for your consistently repeated racist term. You know, the one before giving changing to the definition you “always knew.”
It seems that the age of consent in D.C., and maybe in Florida, is possibly 16. Was that the case in 1983 (Studd time)?
Vacillate all you want, but you’ve always stereotyped all Conservatives and Republicans with your goo. You especially enjoy falsely applying the racist label, not only generally, but to me specifically, with no evidence to back it up. I simply consider the source, and you inflict no damage with such nonsense.
October 6th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
I use the affection term “Macaca-san” (loosely translated buffoon-friend) as per the definition that the Great Senator from Virginia George Felix Allen has provided as an explanation. I had never heard the term until Sen Allen used it as a slur (twice – on tape) to demean a Webb staffer who trails the Senator videotaping his campaign events). I use it repeatedly to make a point: the GOP is full of not-so-closested racists and reprobates. Yet you deny this and call me the racist. If Senator Macaca’s definition is false, I suggest you go to Virginia and campaign for Jim Webb (D). Webb is a former Republican, served for many years, decorated war hero and still has the shrapnel to prove it (good luck mit der swiftbooting of Webb!) Reagan had some nice things to say about Webb by the way (youtube?). Jim Webb’s son Jimmy is serving in Iraq right now, and Jim Senior is wearing his son’s combat boots on the campaign trail (instead of Allen’s $1000 cowboy boots for the boy who grew up in Southern CA, quite near to the dread Hollywood! lol!)
I don’t know the age of consent in DC in 1983 and I don’t care to google it: if it had been under the age of censent, then Mr Studds (great name btw, too funny!) would certainly have gone to jail.
I am not vacillating at all bub, tho it is funny to hear the hordes of Republicans suddenly discovering their Libertarianism! Yeah, I am lookin at you TV (oops Macaca-san).
Now a few points to pop some more rightwingnut spin:
1 the initial page who came forward was Republican
2 Melanie Sloan of CREW on CNN claims that she sent the entirety of all the emails etc that she received to the FBI to 3 separate contacts in July… the SAME DAY they received them and nothing happened! The CNN footage is on eschaton, but this is her appearance on hardball
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS0OD4MdRtM
3 Three more pages (all R’s) have come forward with similar claims. I expect the IMs and email trail will back them up – if the week long delay in securing Foley’s comp and server records didn’t let Rove’s black ops team get there first (or maybe the delay is an FBI sting to lure them into further shenannigans?)
;-)
4 The GOP ‘leadership’ knew about this for years and did nothing.
sick sick sick!
5 I have no idea when any Democrat was finally informed about any of this – so there is still hope you can pin it all in the evil* Dems
6 Clinton and Monica had an improper relationship between adults (despite Sean Bloviatrix Hannity’s claims that Monica was a teenager – that is just a plain old fashioned Lie). Monica was 22 when she met Clinton and probably 23 when she met The Clenis ;-)
ps – TV, you must pick up the latest TIME magazine! The lead is an article about how close genetically humans are to other primates. For example humans have 98.77% the same exact genes as chimps. Of course its all in the proteomics, so… Monkey-boy isn’t quite accurate, as humans are descended from the great apes (we are closer to chimps and the bonobos – read up on the bonobos, fascinating creatures. If they survive another century, perhaps we will Uplift them)
October 6th, 2006 at 1:59 pm
I’ll go with the definition given originally by you, and verified as a racial slur, rather than the one you supposedly “knew all along.” Obviously, you’ll continue to use the racial slur… no harm done here.
Evolution – and perhaps someday we’ll unearth unmanufactured fossil evidence of our direct descendancy from apes (and plants, since all living organisms share a high degree of DNA). Until then, I’ll believe that the lack of such physical evidence disproves such evolutionary conclusions.
Time magazine, CNN, Hardball and a CREW spokeswoman – your sources are impeccable!
I wonder if ABC will question the “three new ‘R’ pages” as to why they didn’t report their emails from Foley to the “R” House leadership at the time.
The initial Republican page “came forward”? He was apparently 18 years old when the IMs were sent?
Nancy Pelosi marched in the North American Man-Boy parade, but she’s disgusted with a gay man communicating with an 18-year-old former page?
Is this now becoming a gay-bashing affair by Democrats?
Only Republican leaders knew of Foley’s perversion (gayness) until one week ago?
Rove is now implicated?
So many questions… I think I’ll wait for more investigation before coming to all-encompassing premature conclusions. I’m happy that the pervert is gone, and still hope that everyone who allowed underage kids to be subjected to advances by the perv are all punished accordingly.
October 10th, 2006 at 10:12 am
My dear deluded Macaca-san… Go dig in your backyard or the edge of a creek, any place where you can get some vertical access to the compressed history locked up in those mute stones. When you dig up a trilobyte are you ‘manufacturing’ it? Or does the baby Jeebuz come down and transmogrify the 6000 year old stone to suddenly have impressions of life that evolved millions of years ago, just to fool with you? Or is that Satan? (no not Hillary Clinton, the other one) There is zero debate about evolution by scientists in the field of biology: evolution is a theory backed by every empirical experiment to test it. I am not aware of a single instance of a experiment that shows divine intervention to adjust the genome.
Nancy Pelosi didn’t march with NAMBL (or as most regular folks call it: the GOoP Congress), though I would bet she has marched in many a gay pride parade. Try searching google before you spew, as it would cut down on the clearly erroneous bile that you call ‘debate’ and others would call ‘lying’.
Perhaps you are unaware of the internets iconography like =) (smile) or ;-) (wink). My comments on Rove are clearly labelled with a ;-) implying I am using a mocking or humorous tone. The fact remains that Foley’s computer(s) were unsecured for a WEEK.
Please share with us your web sources if the BBC, CNN, .gov, DoD, .mil and CREW are too left wing for you.
Have you made your reservations to help Jim Webb defeat Senator Macaca? I donated some money to Webb, so when you go there and help him toss yet another racist Rethug out of office, perhaps I will have bought you lunch or helped print the signs or voter info etc. Who knows I may even register as a Democrat before the 08 elections if they actually do some decent work cleaning up the bush cesspool. We shall see.
October 10th, 2006 at 2:11 pm
here is the latest on the whole “Foley was set up by CREW and George Soros!” meme (via rawstory.com):
A non-profit group at the center of the Foley scandal has responded to a report in the American Spectator that it held and released the story for political gain by Democrats by issuing a summary of what they contend are media misrepresenations of the group’s involvement.
A number of CREW’s contentions can be verified as true. Others, at this point, cannot be verified or refuted.
The list, as released by CREW, follows:
LIE:
The email messages between Rep. Foley and a former page have been in CREW’s possession as far back as April.
FACT:
CREW received the emails on July 21, 2006 and promptly sent them to the FBI, and no one else, that same day. CREW did not discuss the email messages or their content with anyone else. The only call CREW’s Executive Director Melanie Sloan made regarding the matter was to the Washington FBI agent to whom she sent the emails to confirm receipt of the messages.
LIE:
CREW provided the FBI with incomplete information and heavily redacted emails. CREW refused to disclose the page’s name and contact information to the FBI.
FACT:
The emails Ms. Sloan sent to the FBI were not edited or redacted in any way. The page’s full name and email address were in the emails, as was the name and email address of the Congressional staffer to whom the page was sending the emails.
LIE:
The FBI investigation into Rep. Foley was hampered because CREW refused to comply with the agency’s request for additional information.
FACT:
After CREW sent the emails to the FBI, CREW’s only subsequent contact with the Bureau was one telephone call from the special agent to whom CREW had sent the material confirming that the emails were from Rep. Foley. CREW had no further contact with the FBI.
According to several government officials, the FBI sent the emails to three squads: a public corruptions squad, a criminal squad and a cyber-squad. After reviewing the matter, the FBI determined that there wasn’t enough evidence at the time to suggest any criminal activity and did not move forward with an investigation.
LIE:
Fox News’ Sean Hannity said on October 5, 2006 that CREW had “been bragging about [the emails] on its website as early as July 21st.”
FACT:
CREW first posted the emails to http://www.citizensforethics.org on September 29, 2006, one day after ABC News reported them.
LIE:
CREW has been working with ABC on the Foley story and was reporter Brian Ross’ source for the emails.
FACT:
Ross told The New York Times he received the emails from Republicans. CREW was not involved in the broadcasting of his story. In fact, Ross didn’t even know that CREW had the emails until after he broke the story.
LIE:
Rep. Mark Foley resigned from Congress after CREW posted some of his email exchanges with a former page.
FACT:
Brian Ross has reported that Foley resigned hours after ABC questioned him about the sexually explicit internet messages.
LIE:
The blog Stop Sex Predators is owned and operated by CREW.
FACT:
CREW does not own, operate, or have any connection or involvement with the Stop Sex Predators blog. CREW first heard of the blog in media reports after the Foley scandal broke.
LIE:
One of CREW’s funders, George Soros, was behind the Foley scandal and has been directing CREW’s involvement in the case.
FACT:
George Soros had no knowledge that CREW had the Foley emails, nor does he have any input over CREW’s day to day activities. CREW has not discussed the emails with any donors or Democratic operatives, strategists or staffers. All CREW did was send the messages to the FBI. After ABC broke the story, CREW posted the messages to its website.
LIE:
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) called CREW a “partisan 527 organization” on the October 8, 2006 edition of Fox News Sunday.
FACT:
CREW is a nonpartisan and nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization.
And no TV, I have not googled every point and sifted the diamonds from the dross, but let us hear the winger response by all means. =) sure to be a doozy!
October 10th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
Hmmm :)
All of the “facts” are true, of course, because CREW says they’re true. No more questions allowed! – Investigation completed!
Strangely, the copy of the Foley email on the Stop Sex Predators site differed in many ways from the supposed original (which, btw, CREW has apparently refused to give the FBI). I smell another Rather-type fraud.
Would liberals prefer that Foley’s correspondences had been “tapped” after he asked an 18-year-old former page for a current photo? Yes, I know, we tap calls that involve known al Qaida phone numbers, so this would have been no different. Huh?
Your last “fact” is at least partially correct. CREW is funded with my tax dollars as a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization – but nonpartisan? Hardly, since their history of past “outings” casts a different light. Again, of course, if they claim to be nonpartisan, it must be accepted as “fact,” and as always, no other evidence is admissable.
The similarities between the “proof” offered in this situation and the “proof” of the government sanctioned religion (evolution) are endless; especially the State Scripture mandating that no one is allowed to question the authorities. They say, “It’s true, because I said it’s true,” and that’s the only evidence necessary/allowed in the debate. It doesn’t matter that the fossil evidence Darwin promised has never materialized – because it doesn’t exist.
Teachers have been fired, and schools sued, when doubt has been voiced about the mysterious Cambrian Period, or about the complete void of evidence to support Darwin’s theory/dream.
Should students not be taught the truth, even if it violates the Official State Religion? Evolution is a make-believe story, based solely on sequential drawings and guesswork opinions, with no proof in scientists’ laboratories or the fossil record. The drawings and opinions are the only required scientific proof needed – no questions, now, or we’ll take you to court!
– The fossil record shows a complete void of any Darwinian progression.
– With “random selection,” there should be huge numbers of fossilized genetic losers, but there is no evidence of any transitional species – where there should be “gigatons” of fossil evidence if the State God (Darwin) was right.
– All animal phyla appeared suddenly in the Cambrian Period, with no Darwinian predecessors.
– Many species appeared suddenly, remained unchanged for millions of years, then suddenly became extinct simultaneously – as if there was a big flood or something.
– Evolution of the eyeball is a mathematical impossibility, as is evolution of a cell, and scientists have been unable to even generate computerized simulations.
– Out of desperation to prove themselves correct, evolutionary biologists have manufactured fake evidence, then kept the discounted fake evidence in their Scripture (textbooks) to be treated as truth/fact in the Official State Temples (schools). They hold onto their “religious beliefs” in defiance of facts.
– The Piltdown fossil was a proven fake, but was maintained in Scripture for decades anyway.
– Archaeoraptor was exposed as a fake, but still maintained in Scripture.
– The Galapagos finch theory was completely dispoven, but remained in Scripture.
– The peppered moth theory was proven to be a fake, but continued in Scripture.
– Haeckel’s embryos were a fraud espoused by a German eugenicist, but kept in State Scripture.
– The Miller-Urey experiment was based on false premises, but it still used in State Scripture as “proof” of the State Religion.
Anyone who questions any of the fake proof is demonized, and immediately accused of rejecting “science” and believing in a flat Earth (no, enkidu, that isn’t original with you. It’s been the only snide response evolutionary biologists have had to offer for many years running).
The only “evidence” that has stood the test of time has been the consistent muting of questions by the State High Priests (the court system).
No, there can be no evidence to support Creationism or ID, but there is also no evidence that it is a false belief, unlike evolution. The only purpose of Darwin’s dream and the eventual ACLU-sponsored sham in Dayton, TN was to disprove the existence of a supreme being. That goal failed, but at least the foundation for the Official State Religion was cemented.
I have no doubt that the Earth is millions of years old, and, having flown above it, personal experience provides the knowledge that it is not flat (I’m not among those who were polled on the streets of NYC). I’m allowed to question facets of the Bible, such as Earth-age derived from written genealogical data; I wish I was likewise allowed to question assertive “scientific assumptions” made by the Official State Religion. If allowed to do so, maybe Randi Rhodes could provide the answers.
In light of the insurmountable evidence that Darwin’s theory is fatally flawed, I submit that devout belief in evolution requires more blind “faith” than I’m capable of mustering.
Speaking of “LIE:’s,” where are the dozens of Bush-generated hurricanes that “environmental scientists” promised us this year? Perhaps GWB decided to postpone them until after the mid-term elections, eh – or did those trustworthy scientists LIE to us?
October 10th, 2006 at 6:10 pm
I have nothing really to say about the Foley scandal. However, it seems TV has changed the topic to evolution. So I would like to point out:
Evolution is a fact. Don’t believe it? Perhaps you’d care to visit the Grand Canyon. From what you have said above, you are not one of the Young Earth Creationists, and aware that the canyon was formed over a long long period of time. I’m sure you’ll agree that older layers of earth are on top of older layers. So, in regards to the Grand Canyon I’d like to make the following statements:
1. All living creatures have one or more parents
2. Simpler creatures exist in the older layers of the Grand Canyon, while more complex creatures are absent from these old layers. As you move up in time to the newer layers of strata of the Grand Canyon, creatures get more complex.
3. Therefore, since all living things must have a mommy or a daddy, complex creatures are descendants of simpler creatures.
Evolution is a fact. If you want to debate HOW evolution takes place, that is another matter. Insert God there if you like. Thanks.
October 10th, 2006 at 6:54 pm
I neglected to mention my primary reason for responding to your post, enkidu.
You said, “There is zero debate about evolution by scientists in the field of biology.” Oh, really.
After some groups of evolutionary proponents (“scientists”) became honest enough with themselves to realize this flaws outlined in my above post, they have split into at least two other groups. All, of course, do everything possible to advance the only sworn purpose of all evolutionary biologists, denial of God.
Hoyle (a highly acclaimed Cambridge astrophysicist) determined that the mathematical probability of cells arising by random processes were 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000 (keep adding zeros until they total 40,000), “so utterly minuscule” as to make Darwin’s theory of evolution preposperous. He said that “a common sense interpretation of the facts is that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology…” He and Wickramasinghe (equally acclaimed) arrived at a theory called “panspermia,” in which life was spread to Earth via comets. A neat way to exclude any possibility of God, I guess.
Francis Crick, co-discoverer of DNA, also was aware that evolution could not be reconciled with known facts. He said, “The probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd,” dismissing any possibility of God’s existence by theorizing that highly intelligent extraterrestrials sent living cells to Earth on an unmanned spaceship.
The more we learn about actual science, the less credible Darwin’s theory of evolution becomes, so evolutionists have to bring lawsuits to prevent kids from hearing that the natural selection notion has fallen apart. We are barred from questioning the assertion that DNA, for example, exists simply due to millions of mathematically impossible random accidents… with no physical evidence (except, of course, “Because we said so”)… and they want us to keep faith out of the classroom. If we don’t believe that, we must believe in a flat Earth – the most scientific response they can offer. Right!
When studying Darwin, should I assume a particular physical position appropriate to worship and face to the East? If I doubt his theory, is it blasphemy, or simply a violation of government mandates? Will my expression of doubts result in anti-religious hysteria? Is it still a misdemeanor, as during the Scopes fiasco, or a more serious offense against the government religion (as evidenced by High Priests’ [judges’] rulings in recent years – see: Dover, PA, where the High Priest ordered the school district to pay $1 million in legal fees for planning to include ID in their curriculum in the Government Temple [school])?
Btw, the Dover case wasn’t decided with science, persuasion or evidence, but with the only method liberals can use – finding a court to enforce belief in the State Religion. Most liberals would call that “science.”
October 10th, 2006 at 7:29 pm
Thanks, Sven, but that is unrelated to Darwin’s theory of evolution: (1) Random mutation and (2) natural selection, leading to (3) the creation of a new species. Hence, the title of Darwin’s book The Origin of Species.
After 150 years of frantically searching for evidence, and even resorting to hastily/frantically/sloppily manufacturing fake fossil evidence, there is absolutely nothing to support the theory – except belief. If that constitutes fact, the existence of the Easter bunny has been equally substantiated. Even evolutionary biologists refuse to call it “fact,” although they wish for us to accept it as such. After all, their God (Darwin) told us it was true, so no contrary evidence is allowed, even (especially) if it completely disproves the theory.
I changed the topic? Repeat “TV has changed the topic to evolution” 3 times, click your heels 3 times, then go back in this string to Oct. 4 at 9:56 am (first paragraph) and Oct. 6 at 12:40 pm… then repeat the same exercise. Of course, as always, it’s true because you have now declared it so, and no contrary evidence is admissable :)
October 11th, 2006 at 5:29 am
Don’t you think if there was such a thing as God, that he would have came down from the heavens after his servants starting molesting little boys? Serioulsy, if God is real and approves of the type of behaviour displayed by many of his servants than I am glad I don’t believe.
But that’s where you will usually find a difference between evolutionists and creationisits; evolutionists will allow people to freely beleive whatever they want, and worship whomever they want. Whereas creationists just seem to be totally preoccupied with trying to belittle others more proven beleifs and trying to convert people to beleive as they do. Or else they burn in hell forever. Wow.
October 11th, 2006 at 8:01 am
TV: Yeah. The Grand Canyon is an irrelevant hole in the ground. Click your heels 3 times and see if it goes away.
October 11th, 2006 at 9:18 am
treehugger, those comments don’t reflect the deep thought usually evidenced in your posts. God never promised to immediately punish misdeeds, and my own misdeeds do not indicate his approval. I don’t buy into the burning hell theory that was developed in Dante’s Inferno, since the literal translation of “hades” is simply “death.” I was taught, and continue to believe, that failure to accept the message of Christ forfeits the promise of an eternity in heaven, with eternal death (hades). Immediate punishment would contradict His promise of opportunity for forgiveness.
Applying Darwin’s own stated standard for consequent efforts to disprove his theory, it is impossible to disprove any theory, including creationism. His theory is likewise based purely on allegiance and belief, although he expected physical supporting evidence to emerge rapidly. He was aware that the fossil evidence of 1859 didn’t support his theory (opponents of his theory at the time were paleontologists, not fundamentalist Christians), so he blamed the void of supporting fossil evidence on the “extreme imperfection of the geological record,” challenging paleontologists to “start looking” and they would “soon” find it. After 150 years of desperate looking… nothing.
You said, “evolutionists will allow people to greely believe whatever they want, and worship whomever they want.” I wish that was so, but the opposite is obviously true, based on all well-documented court rulings. On the other hand, I can’t think of any recent court proceedings in which creationists successfully forced non-believers to be mute, so I’m unable to find evidence to support your statement of that “difference between evolutionists and creationists.” Free societies are given opportunities to choose between various beliefs, not of which can be proven in this life, and I think that’s as it should be. When fundamentalist Christians begin forcing conversion in court or at the point of a knife/gun, I’ll accept your contention.
Maybe I’ve missed something, but I’m compelled to ask: When did his servants start “molesting little boys”? Was it when Foley asked an 18-year-old former page for a current picture?
October 11th, 2006 at 9:28 am
Sven, your analogy with the Grand Canyon has only to do with “change over time,” which no one disputes. It has nothing to do with Darwin’s theory of evolution: (1) Random mutation and (2) Natural selection, leading to (3) the creation of a new species. Your reponse was a diversion – “click 3 times” was used in regard to your contention that “TV has changed the topic to evolution.” My discussion of evolution was a reaction to enkidu’s repeated introduction to that subject.
October 11th, 2006 at 10:22 am
so isn’t this thread about Foley and the GOoPer coverup?
I didn’t espouse ‘worship’ of darwinian ‘scriptures’ just the fact that change over time (evolution) is on the same order of ‘theory’ as that of ‘gravity’ (which btw scientists do not have an adequate explanation for right now, but that doesn’t stop gravity from working its ‘magic’ on us all).
But please do continue your absolutely batshit crazy rantings about evil*ution in a thread about Foley and the GOoPer meltdown. Makes total sense (if you are a religious fanatic and extreme fundamental nutjob like Macaca-san). Hilarious stuff Mr. Ape-Man! Put down the sterno and rejoin reality.
October 11th, 2006 at 10:47 am
Um…TV, I was referring to priests.
And just because most of us believe, as our forefathers believed, that there should be a fundamental separation of church and state, does not mean that anyone is trying to block your right to worship. I mean, I don’t go in to your church and start screaming about how there is no God, so people should be able to go to a public place without being forced to accept someone else’s beliefs, sounds reasonable to me, and not an attack on anyone’s beliefs. Try to rememeber that they are all sorts of beliefs out there, not just one.
But yeah, we should get back to discussing that diddler and how the GOP leadership is lacking, um, anything resembling leadership.
October 11th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
That’s funny, enkidu. Chronologically, (a) You venture outside of the topic, twice, (b) I respond, (c) treehugger says I changed the subject from Foley to evolution, (d) I predict that his charge will be believed simply because “he said so,” then (e) you actually believe that I changed the subject, not you. Predictable? Heh. But congratulations; you managed to include your usual racial slur!
treehugger – Priests? In the Grand Canyon?
I agree that a few of our forefathers (not an acceptable PC term, btw) voiced their desire for separation of church and state, but it is a very loose (liberal) interpretation of the First Amendment, which seems only to disallow endorsement of any particular religion by Congress, while allowing speech by anyone supporting any religion.
I’m well aware of liberal’s propensity to ignore specific questions, but please respond to three of them:
(1) Who forced anyone to accept their beliefs in a public place? I drove through a neighborhood yesterday in which the message of Islam was blasted through loud-speakers and could be heard throughout 16 square blocks. Strangely, I didn’t feel threatened or forced to accept the message – I ignored it, and it was not an attack on my own beliefs – although that’s the nearest example of being forced to accept someone else’s beliefs in a public place I’ve ever encountered… except for the forcing of beliefs in biology classes and courts.
(2) When did Foley “diddle” a former page?
(3) Should the GOP leadership have tapped the “diddler’s” communications after learning he had asked for a picture 3 years ago (even prior to the practice of tapping communications to/from known terrorists, if that is somehow related)? If so, under what law?
October 11th, 2006 at 3:37 pm
“Priests? In the Grand Canyon?”
Wtf do you mean? Are you like in total denial about the scandal involving preiests (God’s servants) molesting little boys for years, and the church’s systematic attempt to cover it up? Are you on crack?
“Priests? In the Grand Canyon?”
Seriously, that’s something I think a crack-head would say.
October 11th, 2006 at 6:23 pm
Sorry for the misunderstanding, treehugger. You criticized me for somehow changing the topic from Mark Foley’s perversion, then intermingled comments (on a string about Foley) about child molestation and change over time in the Grand Canyon somehow proving Darwin’s theory. Next thing I know, you’re alluding to priests – that’s wtf, trouble following the uncharacteristic rambling or reading your mind. I have no reason to be in denial; I’m not Catholic, and their problems don’t apply to me or occupy my thoughts.
That answers your first 2 questions. Your third: no, I’m not on crack.
Nice diversion, though. My 3 questions?
Allow me to qualify my 2nd inquiry: Were you referring to priests diddling someone? If you were alluding to the Foley perv, the question stands as asked.
October 12th, 2006 at 6:17 am
TV: Treehugger and I are two different people. I’m the one who brought up the Grand Canyon and pointed out that the topic seemed to have changed momentarily from Foley to Evolution. I was not, however, “criticizing” you for it, as you put it — I mearly meant that I had nothing to contribute in the name calling and finger pointing in regards to Foley, but was interested in commenting on Evolution from your previous post.
As to Evolution: if I understand you correctly, you actually don’t have an issue with Evolution itself (i.e. “change over time” as you seem to prefer calling it), and actually claim that no one disputes this? Actually, there are LOTS of people who dispute Evolution. And from the conspiratorial theories regarding scientists you’ve been presenting, it certainly sounded like you were one of them. But whatever.
October 12th, 2006 at 9:16 am
Sven, you’re right, I had confused posters. Apology offered to both of you.
Darwin’s theory of evolution is not “change over time,” which, I repeat, no one disputes – influences of diet, environment, etc.
His theory of evolution has to do with the 3 steps I outlined, concluding with creation of a new species. We are not allowed to question the theory, taught as fact to our students, and indeed will be bankrupted by the courts via ACLU litigation if we dare to question the sacred government belief. It is based purely on belief in the word of Darwin, and is not based on any “facts” that can/have been successfully tested with the scientific method. It is simply a faith-based religion, and if taught in the schools, it should at least be recognized as such.
October 12th, 2006 at 12:54 pm
http://mediamatters.org/items/200610110009
Of course mediamatters draws conclusions and states facts that are contrary to TV’s precious belief in a super-duper-competent GWB regime, completely innocent of any wrong doing, ever. Foley? Just some single deviant GayOPer. Move along nothing more to see.
The problem is that GOP ‘leaders’ knew that something disgusting was going on, should have investigated and didn’t, just to hold another GOP seat. Rove got involved to keep Foley in his seat.
Go campaign for Jim Webb, he’s a decent guy and would make a better (less corrupt and racist) Senator.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:51 pm
From the mediamatters website:
“Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
[snip]
“… systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation — news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda — every day, in real time.”
They don’t even pretend to be anything but a taxpayer-funded arm of the left wing. They could be given some degree of credibility and impartial respectability if the word “conservative” had been omitted. Good, deceptive info, complete with selective, partial, out-of-context quotes – they’ve done exactly the things of which O’Reilly has been accused by Olbermann. Get’em, Keith.
Please identify the instance in which I ever expressed a “belief in a super-duper-competent GWB regime, completely innocent of any wrong doing, ever.” If you can point it out, I’ll switch my political allegiance immediately and forever.
Perhaps I could go campaign for Jim Webb, but I’d first have to know some things about him – 1st question, his stand on abortion. 2nd, his agenda for national defense. 3rd, does he have a well-defined agenda, or is he campaigning solely on anti-administration memes. If he passes the test on those three, I have many follow-up inquiries, including some about his past racism and the charges of racism against his opponent. (e.g., Does he consider Allen’s “Macaca” utterance to be evidence of racism?)
My 3 previous questions stand unanswered – especially the last one, after having read the mediamatters list of supposed conservative falsehoods.
October 12th, 2006 at 8:51 pm
Where in that did you get “taxpayer-funded”?
October 13th, 2006 at 6:59 am
Simply (not), jbc. I use the common liberal redefinition practice of substituting words with near relation by common characteristics and effects to deduce that since:
(a) an incorporated 510(3)(c) is tax-exempt, and
(b) is eligible to receive tax-deductable donations to fund expenses, and
(c) those donations and expenses would otherwise the taxable, and
(d) the govt will recover the “lost taxes” elsewhere, and
(e) “elsewhere” means other forms of taxes, …
a 501(3)(c) is, in essence, taxpayer funded.
Confused? I understand. I experience the same phenomenon often when I see non-synonymous terms or phrases used interchangeably. Mistake=lie because they both infer “wrong” comes to mind, and I’m just following the same rules. Hehe.
Is that the only offensive “lie” in my post, and does my last paragraph not beg a response?
October 13th, 2006 at 10:10 am
OK fine Macaca-san, you never answer any questions the dang evil* libs pose (over and over again *cough*WMDz!*cough*), yet I will attempt to ‘answer’ your burning questions from 10/11 @ 1:40.
1)
Forced to hear the hideous call to prayer? How about the ringing of church bells? The ubiquitous “Gawd save D’uhmerkkkah!”? The constant bleating of the misleader’s fanatical faith? God talks to him? That is psychosis, not divine revelation. Talking to God=healthy, God talks to you=needs help with reality. You know, I volunteered for service in the XXXX (or was it the XXX XXXXX?) in ‘XX and spent a lot of time in X (I’ll cut this down to one X per variable to make this a bit harder for you Macaca-san). I fell in love with the most beautiful, most cultured woman I have ever met, a middle of the road moderate Muslim. We had a long and healthy relationship that only ended when I left X and went to X (most of the planet away, alas). So yeah, you could say I have seen other cultures and other religions up close and personal, but I don’t fly into a rage like you do when confronted with others that simply disagree as to which holy book reflects the true message of God. Or stand on the other side of the aisle in the hideously partisan politics that you, Newt, shrubco and the Gipper cooked up. Heck of a job bushie!
btw – since you bring up not wanting to offend the ‘worship’ of Darwinian ‘scripture’, could you please inform us as to your particular bloodthirsty diety? Wouldn’t want to offend! Is it Allah? Yahweh? Bismat? Cthulhu? Zeus!? Ishtar? Rah? Spirits in the trees? Funny rocks? Toasted cheese sandwich with a vaguely human visage? Mormon? Flying sphaghetti monsterism? Celestial teapots? Elves? Fairys? Do tell! I see you as a Cthulhu kind of guy (talking in tongues, the obliteration of all other lifeforms, etc)
2
I don’t have any concrete proof of this and I don’t think we will have any sworn testimony or evidence (like motel receipts, email or IM logs etc) prior to the election. Sure seems like a man who spent 10 or more years chasing underage page tail might eventually catch what he was chasing? You were so disgusted with Mr Studds’ gayness, but if it was consensual and the pages were technically adult, I guess it was just icky. Similarly if Mr Foley carefully waited until they were 16, then there may not be any crime there either. But it does seem like he may run afoul of the very laws he helped write: you can’t solicit anyone under the age of 18 over the internet (or via phone etc) for sex.
Note that you continue to ignore (dis-believe) the enormous implications and mountain of evidence that GOP leaders covered this up for over a year and ignored/failed to investigate serious misconduct and not so subtle emails/IMs for much longer than that. It was their duty, they failed. Lesson? GOP political gain supercedes all other concerns: law, morality, logic, God, anything.
3
I don’t know what the protocol is for investigations of a house member. They should have quietly opened an independent investigation while informing the Democratic members of Congress. They didn’t. Instead they covered it up to save a safe seat. If the preliminary investigation (which never happened) had found cause (definitely would have cause to continue even from the ‘naughty’ emails/IMs) to pursue further sources of data (phone, IM, emails, banking etc). This is called obtaining a warrant. I can see how the neocon worldview would consider this irrelevant.
finally
You feel the need to spew a bunch of nonsense about evolution because I mocked your self-proclaimed Monkey-boy label. Technically we are much closer to the chimps and other great apes. Why does this simple fact send fundies into such a rage? Do you have to have your special place in the Universe handed to you from some magical mumbo jumbo being? (take your pick there have been thousands throughout human history) Can you explain to me why every religion preaches peace but their adherents spend most of their religious energies making war on unbelievers?
reality
We are an insignificant young race of carbon based lifeforms circling an unremarkable star in a universe chock full of the potential for other lifeforms. We hurtle along on our little mudball arguing about the few scraps of real knowledge we have discovered, killing each other with abandon. Our technology is laughably primitive, our social systems a nightmare of cruelty and repression. Yet we yearn for something greater, some purpose or meaning to life in the utter void. In ages past we had no explanations for lightning, fire, day, night, water, land, love, hate or hope. So we anthropomorphized these natural phenomena and the first gods or spirits were born.
It is impossible to ‘argue’ with a fanatic like Macaca-san as belief trumps any empirical repeatable scientific explanation. Facts cannot pierce the armor of the zealot, for all knowledge comes from God (which one?) not Reason. And there you have the hardcore GOoPer: angry, intolerant, spiteful, full of hubris and hate. In a word: Macaca-san.
October 14th, 2006 at 8:59 pm
enkidu, you’ve lapsed back into incoherency again.
I’ve answered your “*cough*WMDz!*cough*” question repeatedly. Your clumsy goofyness doesn’t warrant another response, so go back and read previous posts.
1
I don’t know what kind of “hideous call to prayer” you’re talking about, but the ringing of church bells is the only example you have of having been forced to accept beliefs in a public place? You might try ignoring the ringing bells – it’s called “tolerance.” The rest of the xxxx paragraph can’t be deciphered – talking in tongues?
2
You said, “I don’t have any concrete proof of this, but…” That phrase could have been used to preface any subjective contention you’ve ever made on this site.
“sure seems like,” “might,” “if,” “there may not be,” “sure seems like,” “enormous implications” — now you’re using Darwin’s scientific terms!
3
You said, “I don’t know…” Correct, and again, that phrase could have been used to preface any subjective contention you’ve ever made on this site.
“finally”…
I discussed evolution because you specifically brought it up on two previous posts, not because of your racial slurs. Our DNA is 35% identical to the poppy plant – we’re poppies! No more questions!
You said, “Every religion” spends “most of their religious energies making war on unbelievers.” Please cite your source as regards the Amish? The Baptists? Presbyterians? etc.?
“reality”…
Your command of [even] the language of science is astounding. Our universe is “chock full of the potential for other life forms” – and there is concrete evidence that none have ever evolved, despite the “potential.”
“In the past we had no explanations… the first gods or spirits were born.” True, until actual science was able to determine the answers. When the first evidence surfaces that Darwin’s theory of new species’ creation, it will lead to fulfilling his only goal – proving there is no God. As of today, no such evidence exists, unless you can point me to the “empirical repeatable scientific explanation.”
It appears that we are both zealots, each with our own set of contrasting beliefs founded only in faith – but your beliefs require faith in something that has essentially been proven to be impossible. If my faith makes me angry, intolerant, spiteful, full of hubris and hate, I’ll accept that – considering the source.
October 16th, 2006 at 10:15 am
funny stuff Macaca
so chock full of craziness and righteous anger that it is a wonder to behold.
You are the one who launched into a 10,000 word denunciation of evil*-ution when the topic is Foley and the Gay Olde Predator cover up (have you been able to pin it all on Nancy Pelosi yet? Just Blame Clinton when all else fails). I mentioned that homo sapiens shares 98.7% of the exact same DNA as the chimpanzee in response to your embracing your evolutionary heritage. Perhaps you should lay off the poppy juice (or is it the meth that makes you so Crank-y?)
You are so fuckin nuts that you think the Amish, Baptists and Presbyterians are their own religions (psst – hey dumbass, they are all part of the Christian religion). But do put whatever wacky beliefs you may hold on display for others to laugh at. You didn’t answer any questions about where the WMDz really are, your sterling sources for information (since the .gov, bbc, DoD IAEA and other sources are all liberal mouthpieces by your reckoning) nor have you declared which sky god you hold allegiance to (wouldn’t want to offend…)
As to all your bullshit about evolution having no proof to back it up, you are just hilariously wrong. Sure science doesn’t have all the answers (far from it), but the very idea of science is to question how things work in the natural world and empirically test hypotheses. The supernatural world is your department. Believe whatever crazy shit you like, but it isn’t going to magically make the Sun circle the Earth. I have no ‘faith’ in science because science is about things you can prove (repeatedly). Scientists continually question the foundations of knowledge while religions preach that there is no higher truth than their particular book of mumbo jumbo. Extremists like Macaca-san are not the majority (thank God), but they are particularly well represented in the Gay Olde Pedophiles. Evil*-ution ‘impossible’? Whatever you say… just keep it in the pews or the pulpit: the classroom is no place for religion and superstition (unless you are in a parochial school).
So are you going to campaign for Sestak? Or Santorum? With Democrats leading in some races by as much as 25% to 30% it will be especially tricky to steal this election. I know Rove and the rest of those jackals are up to it (see previous bushco ‘elections’). Maybe you should head to Florida and help Clint Curtis? He is the guy that blew the whistle on Feeney-gate, and now he is running to replace that R-scumbag. Will they use Diebold machines to ‘count’ the votes? Or manufacture them?
How in the world are you freaks going to hold on to power? My guess is they fake an Iranian attack on a US ship in the Gulf before the election.
As always, I look forward to your Christmas Eve rant of reich-wing fury. Keep up the good work! bush is at 33% and falling (and falling and falling)
October 16th, 2006 at 11:59 am
Poor guy – nothing but insults to back up your “argument.” Pity.
You (twice) brought up evolution on a post about Foley; I eventually responded, therefore you say I switched the subject. Sighing, grinning, shaking head…
The Amish and Presbyterians have very little in common in their worship of God – but how could you possibly know that. Your statement that “every religion” spends “most of their religious energies making war on unbelievers” was all-encompassing, making no mention of Christian beliefs. Since you apparently meant “peaceful religions except Islam,” I’ll rephrase the question: When was the last time a Christian religion forced their beliefs on you? Oops, I forgot about those threatening church bells… and your lack of tolerance.
– Meth use? No.
– WMD? Answered previously (repeatedly). If you need, I can copy it to Word & paste it in each time you forget.
– Religious allegiance? God, through his Son, by choice.
– Evil*-lution impossible? Yes.
– Polls? Why bother to have elections?
– Going to campaign for Sestak? No.
– Going to campaign for Curtis? No.
– Going to campaign for Santorum? No.
– …use Diebold machines? Probably, in some precincts.
– Manufacture them? Hope not, but don’t know.
– Freaks holding onto power, making excuses otherwise? See the next paragraph.
– Diebold machines, punch cards, hand count? I don’t care, as long as they count them all in an identical manner. As I’ve stated repeatedly, if the Democrats take both houses as a result of Foley’s behavior, it will have been worth it to get rid of the pervert.
– The Nazi reference? I can’t imagine anything more hateful.
Darwin’s theory of evolution has proven false by the complete void of evidence Darwin predicted and required, and should not be taught exclusively as “fact” in public schools. If “biological evolutionists” have proven evolution by successfully testing of hypotheses, they need to share that scientific proof with the world. Beliefs are tough for some to deny, eh, even in the face of conflicting evidence.
See you on Christmas Eve.
October 16th, 2006 at 1:49 pm
wow, I was going to add something but TV/Macaca has beaten me to it.
how many times a day do you mash down the refresh button here?
talk about spooky web stalker crank heads…
I am not intolerant of church bells, but you deemed the Muslim call to prayer an “attack”. I simply pointed out that the Christian religion also has public displays of worship (visual, auditory, plus those hallucinations you seem prone to). Perhaps I need to sprinkle my comments with winks and parentheticals to clearly convey the humor or all consuming rage (hehe). Almost forgot the ;-)
You choose not to believe in evolution or Darwinism or whatever… fine. That is your perogative to be ignorant and foolish.
So you worship a god. And his son. That doesn’t narrow it down much at all (for example most of the greek gods were incestuously related). Are you sure it isn’t Cthulhu? Cthulhu had some offspring if I recall correctly.
Insults? I have been over polite if anything. The time of GOP rule, a time of corruption, sleeze, greed, war, incompetence and failure is drawing to a close. There isn’t enough time in the day to list all the failures of bushco and the Greedy Obstreperous Pedophiles, so I will list their successes for my dear friend Macaca: Sam Alito on the Supreme Court. And tax cuts we can’t afford.
What a legacy!
So how is the whole “blame Clinton/Pelosi” thing going with regards to the Foley scandal? (which is much more about GOOP leadership than Macaca-san would ever admit) And do tell who are you volunteering for this election cycle?
Will we ever return to the thread topic?
October 16th, 2006 at 3:13 pm
I posted once on the 13th, once on the 14th, and now twice on the 16th.
– Q/A – How often do I mash down the refresh button here? Never, although I do return sometimes after visiting other sites. And you?
You cited church bells as the only source of your religiophobia, and it evidences your lack of tolerance. Would you have us tear down steeples and build privacy fences to protect your sensitivities… assuming the sight of a church is also a threat to you?
I called the Muslim call to prayer an attack? Sorry, but I actually said, “I didn’t feel threatened or forced to accept the message.” Instead, I tolerated it. Misquotes are typical of the far leftwing bunch, but I don’t see how it’s possible to misinterpret that statement.
I’m one of those dangerous fundamentalist Christians. I worship the God of the Holy Bible and His Son, Jesus Christ. I don’t believe humans are an accident that occured against impossible odds with no physical evidence. I’m beginning to doubt that you’re only pretending ignorance with your hateful rhetoric.
– Q/A – “How is the whole ‘blame Clinton/Pelosi’ thing going.” I don’t have any idea. I repeat, again – anyone who allowed a pervert to remain in Congress, for any reason and for any length of time, should be removed, tried, convicted and jailed for contributing to the delinquency of a minor – if the page was a minor and it is revealed that sexual contact resulted or was pursued. With your penchant for preconceived prejudices, I hope you’ve never served on a jury panel. If Foley wanted to get away with such actions, he should have stayed with the Democrat party; they seem to be “tolerant” of deviant behavior.
Please cite the example of your having been “over polite” – I missed it. Perhaps it was disguised as “spooky web stalker crank heads.” Or “ignorant and foolish.” Or “TV/Macaca.” Or “Greedy Obstreperous Pedophiles.” Or your consistent intolerance of First Amendment rights. However, I must admit that your last post is surely not your best effort at childish insults. Along (exactly) the same lines, please cite evidence of your tolerance.
– Q/A – Will we ever return to the thread topic? That’s up to the poster who led us astray.
I’m going offline now, but I might check back in a couple of hours. Okay?
October 20th, 2006 at 11:15 am
Not much of a ‘debate’ where your belief in *whatever* trumps everything else. All that gibberish about evolution being a belief is just too kooky to knock down point by point, easy tho it may be to find reputable sources to demolish your dis-belief in evil*-ution.
I have read your screechy angry reichwing screeds for many months (years?) prior to answering your bullshit on WMDz. You believe a bunch of lies. I enjoyed knocking your ridiculous claims into dust, but you continue to claim you have proof of WMDs… on Al Gore’s moonbase? Syria? Narnia? no wait, they sent em to Iran! Pretty important stuff, yet you can’t offer a shred of proof (like DoD, IAEA, BBC, or anything close to a legitimate source of factual real world information).
As to being polite, you are the only one who claims to be polite (yet swears, talks nonsense, says outrageous lies about Dems/Libs/anyone to the left of you, not to mention pathetic grade school trash talk about my father – you sure are raising the level of discourse – to the decibel level of a jackhammer). If you can’t take a f-bomb on the Internets, please stfu and go back to whatever right wing nutjob site that feeds your need for hate, destruction and stupidity. In the immortal words of Darth Cheny “go fuck yourself!” Of course you can’t believe that actually took place so its just one more example of a evil* Dem/Lib making shit up. Enjoy your fantasy island of intolerance Macaca-san.
October 20th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
No more more unanswerable questions for now. Have a nice weekend!
October 25th, 2006 at 9:58 am
Thanks for the gratuitous nazi slur. I can’t imagine anything that could be said by one citizen to another that would possibly be more vile, but I suppose when you have no basis for debate, the most despicable rhetoric is the only tool available. Is everyone labeled a nazi if they disagree with you, or is an individualized honor? In my posts, what have I said that would infer naziism, or is it only a sophomoric retort in lieu of any viable argument?
Can you please identify an instance in which I claimed to be polite. I’m quite certain that I’ve never done so, so I can only assume that it’s assumed, inferred by the nature of my posts. On the other hand, you have certainly forfeited any right of passage on the high road; it’s really quite funny to hear you complain of anyone swearing.
You state that I continue to claim that I have “proof” of WMD? I have certainly offered scenarios, distinct possibilities that would explain the absence of weapons that were sworn to exist for a decade by leaders on “both sides of the aisle,” but I challenge you to identify the occasion that I claimed to have any “proof.”
Do you always adopt the inappropriate language of your adversaries (Cheney, Allen, etc.), or was it always central to your vocabulary?
As regards references to your father: You brought him into the conversation, and I’ve merely credited him with having been a very effective teacher, as evidenced by your vitriol. Doing so might have been wrong; if so, I apologize.
I also apologize for asking so many questions, knowing they will not be answered; appropriate responses, sans hate speech, would require too much analytical thought.
October 26th, 2006 at 10:00 am
Your welcome! The PNAC patriot’s New American Century sure is off to a bang! The only difference between the hard core ‘reich wingers’ and the brownshirts would be that you speak English. Don’t forget the ;-)! I generally don’t mock Craig or others who have more than two brain cells to rub together. I mock you because you continually espouse the most radical extremist ‘reichwing’ agenda I have ever heard. With all due respect (meaning I have none for you), your irrational hatred and despite with regard to anyone who doesn’t agree with you is abhorent. But do rave on!
As to being polite, I don’t claim to be polite (note that the lies.com manifesto uses lots of swear words! oh my!) but I note that you whine about others being impolite to you. Perhaps you could recall all the name calling and sliming you have engaged in over the years? Easy enough to dig back in the comments and see your repeated references to libs and their nazi eugenic agenda (blah blah blah too much to dig up and document really). TV believes libs or dems (esp enk!) are creatures, commies, craven cowards, foul and disgusting agents of violent repression. It is to laugh! And you do provide many laughs Macaca-san, bravo!
You continue to state that Iraq had significant, USA threatening amounts of WMDs. There are no facts to support your fantasy, just some wishful magical thinking on your part. Hilarious, if it weren’t so tragic for the 3000 dead US troops. And our significantly damaged position in the world community.
I do indeed adopt the recorded utterances of right wing nut jobs like Darth “go fuck yourself” Cheney and George “Macaca!” Felix Allen as a simple way to mock your precious ‘belief’ in the purity and nobility of one side of the isle while demonizing and despising your fellow Americans that don’t agree with your misinformation and magical thinking.
I do hope you are campaigning for Jim Webb. He faces an uphill battle against racists, corporate interests, entrenched corruption and dangerous incompetence from the George “Macaca!” Allen (gwb) crowd. Jim Webb is exactly the kind of middle of the road man we need in Washington. You asked about his position on women’s rights and reproductive choice. I am no expert but I think he supports choice. As in you make your choice and I make mine. Please keep your bible out of my wife’s uterus. I’ll do the same for you and your wife. But you can’t accept my choice and so seek to impose your choice upon me and all others. This is wrong. You don’t like abortions? Fine, don’t have one. Work to prevent the causes and there will be little to no need.
See you at the ballot box!
October 26th, 2006 at 12:41 pm
Tolerance?
Still stuck on a WMD issue to which I conceded long ago?
The mean the Jim Webb “everybody in the South used that word” guy?
My Bible in your wife’s uterus?
Did you omit any cliches?
Have you ever had an original thought?
October 27th, 2006 at 8:51 am
The above is your response to my answers to your questions? Did you run out of sterno to huff? Can’t afford those meds the doc urges you to take? (the anti-psychotic ones? and yes I do have an M.D. attached to my name) Macaca-san you need professional help (with removing your head from your ass).
You cling to a fantasy that Iraq had gigatons of gigadeath – they didn’t. Get over your desire to see gwb as some sort of brilliant leader: he’s a nasty, venal, narrow minded asshole. And I know someone who directly worked with gwb 1 on 1. He worked with the regime on medical policy… eventually resigned because he just couldn’t stand the pig headed partisan stupidity of these crooks. I also have a good friend who is a Arabic translator working for the gov, his opinion is we are in deep deep deep shit.
Is it possible for you to stop harping on SenByrd’s (repudiated btw) racism? Or that Webb acknowledges that 30-40 years ago the N word was far more common than today? So how about it Macaca? Will you ever admit the Grand Olde Pedophiles are full of the worst sort of racism and greed, stupidity and arrogance? nah, you are very comfy in your decades-long hatred of anything that doesn’t goosestep to your reichwing drum beat.
Plus your post is a disgrace for a teacher. Surely you don’t teach English… or Science… or (big laugh) Debate. “The mean the Jim Webb…” wtf does that mean? Can we get a freeper in here to translate from Dumbass into English?
Clichés? At least I am not full of lies, misinformation and GOOPer talking points.
I used my old pal “the Google” to search for the phrase “please keep your bible out of my wife’s uterus”. Zero results. When I take the quotes off, the only result that matches is my comment post to lies.com. I would call that original.
And speaking of “the Google” on “the Internets”, I searched for “teachervet” and found your web site! http://www.teachervet.net
Good to see you putting your Christian teachings to work stopping this travesty of a mistake. So maybe mocking you has had the desired effect: you have seen the error of your hateful ways and are now working to bring my brothers and sisters in arms home.
October 27th, 2006 at 10:28 am
Ah, enkidu had an original thought about his own personal uterus. Congrats!
Oh, you mean the Jim Webb whose family values are represented in his novels by a father having oral sex with his son. I see. Of course, he blames his writings on KKKarl Rove.
Sorry, but your Google-discovered link is not to my web site(!). I served in the USAF 1968-72, and have been a teacher since 1974.
You’re an M.D.? Scary! Do you profit from the abortion industry?
You are unable to “debate” my statements without rewording, distorting, and ignoring them, therefore having to resort, falsely, to typical liberal personal attacks. You state, “You continue to state that Iraq had significant, USA threatening amounts of WMD.” Huh? Re-read, doc! Did I mention Sen. Byrd’s “repudiated” racism, or are you still living in the past?
Tolerance?
While we’re off-topic, where are the many devastating hurricanes that were predicted with such surety? Did GWB call them off for the mid-term elections, perhaps at the same time he intervened to put global warming on a temporary hold and lowered the OPEC price demands?
October 28th, 2006 at 8:50 am
for a “teacher” you have the reading comprehension of a 5 year old
please keep your bable out of my wife’s uterus
unless you are saying that to a true GOOPer women are property?
that is sick
Too bad you haven’t followed Jesus’ teachings and struggled for peace instead of wallowing in the jingoistic pap that feeds your hatred of libs/dems/others.
I have no association with abortions (other than my wife’s ultra-reichwingnut grandmother having had an abortion decades ago – the cognitive dissonance there could power a small city). In response to your slur, is it now fair to ask if you profit from bombing abortion clinics? Or should I ask if you enjoy killing doctors?
Speaking of Jim Webb, I can see how you might prefer a convenient fiction (his fictional books) to reality/facts. So I the googled this (only took a moment! ;-) on the internets. Here is his official citation for the Navy Cross (which he has refused to use in his campaign against Macaca Allen, mores the pity). This is FACT, not FICTION (see dictionary, F section).
Jim Webb, First Lieutenant, U.S. Marine Corps
Company D, 1st Battalion, 5th Marines, 1st Marine Division (Rein.) FMF
Date of Action: July 10, 1969
“The Navy Cross is presented to James H. Webb, Jr., First Lieutenant, U.S. Marine Corps, for extraordinary heroism while serving as a Platoon Commander with Company D, First Battalion, Fifth Marines, First Marine Division (Reinforced), Fleet Marine Force, in connection with combat operations against the enemy in the Republic of Vietnam.
On 10 July 1969, while participating in a company-sized search and destroy operation deep in hostile territory, First Lieutenant Webb’s platoon discovered a well-camouflaged bunker complex which appeared to be unoccupied. Deploying his men into defensive positions, First Lieutenant Webb was advancing to the first bunker when three enemy soldiers armed with hand grenades jumped out. Reacting instantly, he grabbed the closest man and, brandishing his .45 caliber pistol at the others, apprehended all three of the soldiers.
Accompanied by one of his men, he then approached the second bunker and called for the enemy to surrender. When the hostile soldiers failed to answer him and threw a grenade which detonated dangerously close to him, First Lieutenant Webb detonated a claymore mine in the bunker aperture, accounting for two enemy casualties and disclosing the entrance to a tunnel. Despite the smoke and debris from the explosion and the possibility of enemy soldiers hiding in the tunnel, he then conducted a thorough search which yielded several items of equipment and numerous documents containing valuable intelligence data.
Continuing the assault, he approached a third bunker and was preparing to fire into it when the enemy threw another grenade. Observing the grenade land dangerously close to his companion, First Lieutenant Webb simultaneously fired his weapon at the enemy, pushed the Marine away from the grenade, and shielded him from the explosion with his own body. Although sustaining painful fragmentation wounds from the explosion, he managed to throw a grenade into the aperture and completely destroy the remaining bunker. By his courage, aggressive leadership, and selfless devotion to duty, First Lieutenant Webb upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and of the United States Naval Service.”
Just to return the thread to its beginning, how is your effort to pin this whole Foley/GOOP ‘leadership’ cover up debacle on Speaker Pelosi going?
October 29th, 2006 at 12:27 pm
Even teachers have difficulty unraveling meaning from statements that are so poorly written; and when did your wife get a “bable” in her uterus?
Yes, questions are fair to ask. No, I’ve never even known anyone who bombed an abortion clinic or killed a doctor, and I condemn anyone who would participate in either activity.
Jim Webb was a war hero 37 years ago, and deserved the Navy Cross. If that instance somehow qualifies him for public office, he later disqualified himself with use of the “n” word in his literature. Keith Olbermann (much respected on this site) said that an author’s true nature can be elicited from his fictional literature (as with Scooter Libby). The Left set the bar, and they can live with it when the tables are turned.
As I have stated emphatically and repeatedly, if Republicans lose the House, or even both houses, it will have been worth it to get the pervert (Foley) out of my party, out of Congress, and out of society. I wasn’t aware of any efforts by me to pin the blame on Speaker Pelosi, unless you’re somehow misreading my comment that “Hastert, along with anyone else in Congress who had prior knowledge of Foley’s perversion, should be forced to resign.” MY reading comprehension is faulty?
Your penchant for misquoting and misinterpreting supports the consistent evidence of your dishonesty.
November 3rd, 2006 at 10:05 am
Ted Haggard
bwahahahahahahahahahahaha!
November 3rd, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Ted Haggard – he’s running for what office?
John Kerry
bwahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Ted Kennedy? Nancy Pelosi? Harry Reid? John Murtha? Where are you? Hiding under a rock, thereby admitting that your liberal message is detrimental to the efforts of those who are dishonestly pretending to be conservative to pander for votes? The deafening silence and lack of visibility speaks volumes.
I would welcome those great spokespersons for the extreme Left to meet me in a central Tennessee forum this weekend for a little public discussion.
November 5th, 2006 at 11:03 am
Laughing at a hypocrit shit head like Mega-Pastor Tim Haggard and his millions of fundie fools is a big tall glass of Schedenfreud. More revealing is your response and the responses I heard on the radio from his followers.
On the one hand Macaca-san screams about Ted Kennedy (up for re-election currently campaigning in Mass. up 33% btw). Nancy Pelosi? Sticking close to home as her grand daughter is about to deliver another grandchild (I’d call that real American Family values, not the icky GOOPer kind). Harry Ried campaigning. Murtha campaigning. Hiding? The only folks who are hiding anything are the GOOPer hypocrits and 25%ers who can’t believe anything other than partisan bullshit.
Which brings us to the other hand: I heard 3 different people from pervy-pastor Ted’s (Art’s?) flock of fools. Each and every one of them used a word that I think defines wingnuts in Duhmurkkka: believe. “I don’t believe its true!” “I can’t believe it until Pastor Ted (Art?) tells it to us himself” “I believe he is a good man and this is an election ploy”
It is impossible to ‘argue’ with a strong belief in nonsense. Extremist GOOPers just choose to believe a fantasy rather than face the disasterous reality which they are directly responsible for (Iraq, N Korea, Katrina, energy policy, the environment, crap-i-don’t-have-all-day-to-list-all-their-failures).
Hey how is that hunt for Osama going?
Maybe shrub can make another haha video where he searches for WMDz in the oval office?
I’ll save Macaca-san the electrons and post his response pre-emptively “it is all Clinton’s fault!”
One more haha. MegaWhackjob Teddy Haggard is quoted as saying “the only difference between preznit bush and I is that he drives a ford and I drive a chevy” There you have it: our first gay (closeted) president!
November 5th, 2006 at 11:17 am
I’ve never even heard of Haggard until this election ploy surfaced, but whatever happened to the all-important “alleged” word. Further evidence that allegations are more important than truth.
WMD again? See iraqdocs.blogspot.com and the NYT on Friday.
Q. How is the hunt of Osama going?
A. 20,000 troops in Afghanistan presently on that continuing mission.
If Osama is killed or captured, world-wide terrorism via islamo-fascism ends?
November 6th, 2006 at 9:45 am
Allegations? He admitted the whole thing! After the recordings came out, after the drip of evidence grew to a torrent. He is a gay fundie hypocrit (sounds like most of you tightyrighties have these hidden secrets… anything you need to get off your chest Macaca-san?)
So publishing a nook-u-lar bomb primer is AOK with Macaca-san, but its the evil* NYT that is at fault for getting these docs out of the public domain? Um does nook-u-lar nonproliferation mean anything to you freaks?
20,000 troops in Afghanistan and 150,000 in Iraq.
You were saying Macaca-san?
If we compare the GWOT to say… WWII, we are left with the inescapable (ie factual) conclusion that at this point in the WWII timeline, Hitler was dead and Hirohito was browing his pants on the deck of the Missouri. Osama continues to plot, plan and execute his evil (not like Evil* libs btw). You, your preznit and the corrupt GOOPer congress are all to blame for this magnificent failure.
To quote your dear vice-Führer “go fuck yourself!”
November 6th, 2006 at 9:47 am
btw – you almost set a record there!
14 minutes between my post and your shrieking harpy reply…
how many times a day do you mash down the refresh button here?
November 6th, 2006 at 10:36 am
That was a brief, but surely refreshing, dump. Feel better now?
Q. How many times a day do you….refresh…?
A. None, although I do check in to make shrieking harpy replies after taking my wife for her chemo treatment.
If 20,000 troops is insufficient (plus thousands from NATO & the UN), exactly how many troops would be required to find Osama, and would the capture/death of one helpless cave-dweller end world-wide terrorism via islamo-fascism?
November 6th, 2006 at 10:37 am
Darn it, I missed the record by 49 minutes this time.
November 8th, 2006 at 12:08 pm
Again, thanks so much for campaigning in TN instead of VA!
You wasted your time fighting against the very much outside chance candidacy of Harold Ford.
Ford ran a Repub-lite campaign, heavy on the bible thumping rhetoric, his demeanor is stiff, aloof and patrician (contrast him with Barak Obama). And he ran against the most racist smear campaign in decades (since Reconstruction?) As a black man, how did those racist ads make you feel? How many N-word jokes did you hear while on the campaign trail?
With just 7k or 8k votes between George “Macaca” Allen and Jim “Kickass” Webb, if only you had been able to scream your screed about EVIL* lieberals to more rednecks and reprobates in VA, perhaps that margin would be narrower.
A Dem House and Senate. Well done Macaca!
November 8th, 2006 at 1:20 pm
Congratulations! And, you’re certainly welcome. Do you toss out all election losers? Look out, Gore and Kerry, and welcome back, Lieberman!
Q. How did those racist ads [plural?] make you feel?
A. I failed to see the racism, as did many blacks in Chattanooga. Black/white mixing has long been accepted by most of both races in TN, and we didn’t even see the vague “racism” in the ad.
Q. How many N-word jokes [or utterances of the N-word] did you hear while on the campaign trail?
A. None. I heard no racial slurs, even inferred, until I returned to this site.
Q. [Not asked, but I’ll respond anyway] Do you still stand by your statement that losing both house of Congress would be worth it to remove perverts from my party and Congress?
A. Yes.
I don’t know how the Corker/Ford contest qualified as “the most racist smear campaign in decades.” Please elaborate. Of course, there was that single ad with a white woman asking Ford to “please call me.” That was racism? Or, was there lots more that I somehow missed?
The Virginia race is over, and I’m ready for Allen to do the honorable thing – give a concession speech. Q. When that happens, can you please get off your compulsion for racial slurs? Allen used an ill-advised, vague term toward a stalker/agitator on a single occasion, then apologized, and he paid for it with thousands of endless repetitions.
Q. Where are the allegations of voter fraud, voter suppression, Diebold machine fixing, etc.? We lost, and we can live with it.
Q. When do we get back to the really important issue of punishing Foley and Haggard?
The Democrats ran supposedly conservative people, thereby admitting that liberalism would not win.
Q. When those “conservative” freshmen demonstrate their true colors, will they be appropriately labeled/exposed/castigated/condemned as liars on lies.com and the MSM?
Q. Will Ms. Pelosi be “a uniter, not a divider”? If not, will she be appropriately labeled/exposed/castigated/condemned as a liar on lies.com and the MSM?
November 8th, 2006 at 3:38 pm
Knowing that answering questions is not your forte, and since you’re obviously hung up on the topic, enkidu, perhaps you can help me with a definition of “racism.”
I suppose if Corker had used an ad saying, “If you think busing was bad in the 60’s, imagine if we allow a left-wing black man to take control. The efforts of the KKK, George Wallace, and other good Democrats will be lost,” it might qualify as the most racist smear campaign in history… BUT NO SUCH THING HAPPENED.
Instead, John Eaves approved the following ad featuring Congressman John Lewis, Shirley Franklin, and Andrew Young:
(Lewis) “If you think that fighting off dogs and fire hoses in the 60’s was bad, imagine if we sit idly by and let the right-wing Republicans take control of the Fulton County Commision.”
(Franklin) “The efforts of Martin and Coretta King will be lost.”
(Young) “Unless you want them to turn back the clock on equal rights and human rights and economic opportunity for all of us…”
(Lewis) “Your very life may depend on it.”
Bigots. They seem to share your enthusiasm for keeping racism alive for political gain.
Btw, a Republican has been in control of the commission for years now… and no blacks have been lynched.
Of course, if George Bush was elected in 2000, black churches would burn. Yeah, right. That might need to be investigated and reported on lies.com, since it certainly qualifies.
November 10th, 2006 at 9:00 am
wow
You need professional help.
November 10th, 2006 at 10:27 am
And the definition is… ???
November 11th, 2006 at 9:18 am
professional help – a psychiatrist who can prescribe some anti-psychotics, maybe something to help you with your Duhmerkkka hatin rage?
o you were asking the definition of “racism”? dictionary.com
As to the Ford ad: so a black man runs against a white man (Bob Cracker ) and Mr Cracker (or Ken ‘Barbie’ Mehlman) runs a campaign ad where a white girl breathlessly recounts how she met Ford at a Playboy party (attended by thousands). She is apparently naked (no clothing is ever visible). And at the end of her clip she winks at the camera and says “Harold, call me!”
So a naked white (mexican heritage? she is a blond white girl to all appearances) parties w Harold Ford and she wants him to call her (presumably for more funky hot s e x). Yet you can’t see how this ad might have inflamed racial divides in the great Southern state of Tennessee? Your blind devotion to a failed idealogy seems to mean any sort of slur is OK as long as it serves to further your divisive agenda. I think voters spoke loudly on 11/7: throw the bums out. Just wait until Dem subpoena power uncovers the vast iceberg of Iraq war graft and corruption.
Your repeated assertions that I am some sort of racist are quite hilarious TV. George “Macaca” Allen made that word famous and I still think you tighty righties should use it to identify each other/closeted racists (watch out for all the closeted gay Rs in that very crowded closet). Yeah yeah Byrd used to be a racist (long ago repudiated), and the South used to be full of Dem racists (say about 50 to 150 years ago), but I think any objective observer would say that the shoe is on the other foot now. The KKK started by Dems? Maybe so, but the group is probably 80% Rethuglican today. And today is what matters. Today (actually Jan) we have a Democratic Majority in the House and Senate. Enjoy your crow.
Personally I am glad you wasted your time in TN. Loser.
November 11th, 2006 at 12:05 pm
I, too, am glad I wasted my time in Tennessee, and your contributions were significant in that wasted effort to keep a lying “conservative” out of Congress.
George Allen used a term of questionable meaning on a single occasion to a persistant stalker. He made the term famous with a single utterance? You give him, and the power of his words, too much credit. It became “famous” via thousands of repetitions from the left arm of the DNC, the MSM. You, the MSM, and Virginia voters, got their wish – maybe. His supporters seemed lose their enthusiasm as his acceptance speech progressed. You could almost read their thoughts by their diminishing responses – “Wth have we just done?” He should be interesting to watch come January.
Definition of racism: Many terms have been liberally redefined for political convenience. I’m asking for clarification of your own definition of the term, as habitually used by you, with consideration given to the aforementioned Atlanta ad. Does it actually have meaning for you, or is it just another self-demeaning, childish, personal insult?
The Republican Party has it’s foundations in the anti-slavery movement, and it has never wavered from those principles throughout its history. I compiled a fairly comprehensive list of historical evidence to support that fact last month, and would be happy to share it. It was inherently quite persuasive and enlightening to many TN voters of both races, but I hesitate to post it now because of its length.
You’re surely confused/frustrated by the gracious concessions of Republican “losers.” What are they thinking!
-Why aren’t they investigating the ever-present voting fraud in St. Louis and elsewhere?
-Can’t they find a Kym Cason?
-What about ACORN?
-Where are their lawyers?
-How dare they blame themselves, then look inward for the causes?
-Can’t they “find” another box of uncounted ballots from a rural area of Montana?
-Surely they have their own 66-page mobilization plan stating “If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a pre-emtive strike.”
-What do they mean, conservatism wasn’t defeated, Republicanism was? I can understand why it would all be difficult for you to comprehend.
If you must accuse me of having posted hateful material, please cite the example. I’llbe more than happy to return the favor. Btw, I do like Koop’s mustard with my crow, and it can’t be any less tasty than an MRE.
November 13th, 2006 at 9:24 am
Hey how about discussing right wing terrorist Chad Castagana?
You know, the guy that has been sending threatening letters with white powder (and pictures of dead people) to Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Jon Stewart, Keith Olberman and other folks? Turns out he is a rightwingnut just like you dear Macaca-san. Strident poster to LGF and a registered freeper to (jack)boot. Brags about being a lifelong Rethuglican.
Or the many reichwing sites that are now calling for a coup?
“I can understand why it would all be difficult for you to comprehend.”
November 13th, 2006 at 12:33 pm
Okay, at your request, let’s evasively change the topic to Chad Whoever. I’m looking for that PC “alleged” term, but don’t see it yet, indicating that he must be a Republican. Apparently both political parties are represented by some violence-obsessed nuts, eh. Try him, convict him if he’s a threat to society, then remove him from society. If I’m “just like him,” give me the same treatment. Of course, I’ve never threatened anyone, or posted to LGF, and I’m not a lifelong Republican, but those minor differences shouldn’t hinder the prosecution.
-Q. Which (many) reichwing sites are calling for a coup? Oops, sorry, forgot – questions don’t prompt responses.
If convenient, you might address my last post. You failed to do so,except for the original thought at the end of your “response.” Your sophomoric personal attacks and ever-present racist labeling are, as always, self-demeaning… but do carry on.
November 15th, 2006 at 11:51 am
You still can’t admit that my nickname for you is entirely due to George “Macaca” Allen’s racism. Fine, I’ll call you monkey-boy from now on (good to see you coming around to the evolutionary point of view).
I don’t think I am required to answer any of your questions: you don’t answer mine, so why should I answer yours? You put ridiculous charges and snips from Drudge or powerline or fdl or whatever hell-hole of distortion and hatred fuels your fury, but I just don’t give a crap that the Iranians think the Dem sweep of Congress is a victory for Iran (who gives a shit?) The Iranians actually endorsed Bush in 2004, and I didn’t give a crap about that either.
You want answers to your questions? Try “the google”
November 15th, 2006 at 6:14 pm
No, you’re not required to answer any question that might require looking inward, and certainly not if you have no basis upon which to defend your allegations. I have answered every question you’ve ever asked, most of them repeatedly.
No, I don’t expect you to “give a crap” that your allies include only those who are sworn enemies of this country; your goals appear to be the same as theirs. Of course, you’re a “patriot” who “supports our troops.” Yeah, sure.
November 17th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
funny… you never answered my questions as to where all them WMDz might be… or where you get your wingnutistan newz… or that hilarious Al Gore joke you heard at his moon base.
Yet you continue to equate the 65% of Americans who oppose Bush’s folly (as opposed to the 35% of Duhmerkkkns) as allies of Iran. Wake up and smell the coffee chump, your island of intolerance and hatred is shrinking to the hard core freaks and reprobates. Pretty soon it’ll be just you and Dick “go fuck yourself” Cheney.
Better hope he runs out of ammo before he learns you aren’t a life long Republican.
November 17th, 2006 at 2:39 pm
Here is a link for you to enjoy:
http://www.spaff.com/mp3/Supertelevangelistic.mp3
SUPERTELEVANGELISTIC SEX-AND-DRUGS PSYCHOSIS
Parody of “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” (Sherman/Sherman)
Lyrics by M. Spaff Sumsion
PERFORMED BY ROBERT LUND
I used to be a master of the anti-gay crusade
Until a butch disaster blew my pastor masquerade
But if it’s true I’m pounding more than pulpits, don’t blame me
It’s ’cause I caught my hooker-tweaker-stud’s infirmity
It’s
Supertelevangelistic sex-and-drugs psychosis
Worse than plague and bird flu crossed with osteoporosis
We were playing doctor and he gave this diagnosis:
Supertelevangelistic sex-and-drugs psychosis
Umm Haggard Bakker Swaggart umm Tammy Faye
Umm Haggard Bakker Swaggart umm Tammy Faye
I found the perfect therapist – the kind that gives massage
I like to drive my Escort and I park in his garage
I swear he only serves me crank when all his Coke is gone
And then he helps me straighten out my Peter, James, and John
Blame
Supertelevangelistic sex-and-drugs psychosis
That’s my greatest guilty pleasure next to Guns N’ Roses
Good thing there’s no ban on it in all the books of Moses
Supertelevangelistic sex-and-drugs psychosis
Umm Haggard Bakker Swaggart umm Tammy Faye
Umm Haggard Bakker Swaggart umm Tammy Faye
It seems all pious public figures bugger on the sly
But Jesus loved republicans and sinners; so must I
Say “Holy moley, Mister Foley! That boy’s underage!”
But I believe the congressman has turned another page
Oh!
Supertelevangelistic sex-and-drugs psychosis
Next time, better cut me off at handshakes and Mimosas
No more meth or men for me – at least in overdoses!
Supertelevangelistic sex-and-drugs psychosis!
(Just a spoonful of crystal helps the prostitute go down…)
November 17th, 2006 at 9:27 pm
enkidu, if you’re actually some kind of physician or shrink (and that’s very doubtful, judging by your lack of maturity and the amount of free time you seem to have on your hands during working hours), can you prescribe some drugs for your own mental illness? Do you actually read the stuff you write?
Funny… I answered your ignorant “WMDz” question repeatedly… I visit ScrappleFace regularly… Al Gore’s joke wasn’t funny. Your rhetoric is parroted by all terrorist leaders who wish to destroy the country you refer to as “Duhmerkkka,” so it is only natural to assume you also share their intentions.
With nuts such as yourself running loose, I certainly hope Bush and Cheney stay in undisclosed locations for at least the next two years. The assassinations of leaders during my lifetime have been traumatic for most, and your obsession with hatred and violence is freaky – sick.
November 21st, 2006 at 11:08 am
Revealing how my repeated questions about your WMDz claimz are “ignorant” yet continue to go unanswered. So wtf ARE these fabled WMDz perfesser?
You are a “teacher” yet you post far more frequently during working hours than I ever could hope to (I visit at tea time or when I read something that would add to the debate here – or helps to mock you as the foolish extremist that you continually reveal yourself to be). I run my own business/practice/keep guessing so I make my own hours, yet you would have to be pounding out your screeds of hatred in the “teacher’s lounge”? (ie your mom’s basement)
I refer to the 25% of fucking morons such as yourself (and the ‘sun goes around the earth’ crowd) as Duhmerkkkuh. While the 75% of America that thinks you are a tool are Americans. I think we will turn the map blue from sea to shining sea in 08. Except the South, where up is down, black is white, and bush is a goodly godly savior and super duper competent!
Have a nice day! Go visit your druggist and ask him why your meds aint working so goodly. ;-)
November 21st, 2006 at 12:36 pm
Hmmm. I took an Excedrin this past summer, the only “med” I’ve taken in a couple of years.
I suspect that the poll reflecting ignorance of the earth’s movement around the sun was taken in very “blue” metropolitan areas, probably the same people who display their ignorance on street interviews by David Letterman.
If I could get your words out to greater numbers of the population, we wouldn’t see blue again for decades.
The WMDz? For the umpteenth time, I don’t know where they are now. Do you? When time allows, I’ll compile a list of the various dates and strings on which I previously gave you the same answer. If it’s really important to you at this date, ask those Democrats who initially made the charge beginning in 1998.
I’m not a “perfesser,” I’m a teacher in a public school that utilizes alternate block schedules, with 105/210 minutes of allotted planning time on alternate days to be used as I see fit.
Was this your contribution to a “debate”? You forgot to include your habitual, self-demeaning racist memes. Surely you’ve been provided new quotable material from Seinfeld’s sidekick, who is probably presentative of those predominant Hollywood Republicans, eh?
November 21st, 2006 at 12:40 pm
Second chance to read my response to the WMD question: I don’t know. If it’s of great importance to you, ask the many Democrats who initially made the charge beginning in 1998, then repeated them in 2002.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:41 pm
Third chance to read my response to the WMD question: I don’t know. If it’s of great importance to you, ask the many Democrats who initially made the charge beginning in 1998, then repeated them in 2002.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:49 pm
Need more opportunities to read it?
Fourth chance to read my response to the WMD question: I don’t know. If it’s of great importance to you, ask the many Democrats who initially made the charge beginning in 1998, then repeated those charges in 2002.
Let’s try rephrasing: I have no way of knowing, but you might try asking Clinton, members of his cabinet, or Congressional members of his party who made the same certain charges in 1998 when UN inspectors were forced to leave Iraq, then repeated those charges in 2002 when UN inspectors efforts were being thwarted by Saddam.
November 28th, 2006 at 10:28 am
I read your ‘response’ but you continue to espouse nonsense like the WMDz are in Syria or that we found teh WMDz… after I slapped your WMD claims to splinters with a minimal amount of effort using (start your stopwatch!) the google. You can blame Clinton all you like (and you certainly do) but it does not change the fact that Clinton did not invade Iraq. He did invade the Balkans and now there are indeed streets named after Wes Clark (haven’t googled whether Clinton has any streets or squares named after him).
So can you explain why Syria and Iran, who possessed some WMD capability already and by your ‘thinking’ received the gigatons of Iraqi WMDz, have not used them against us? Ever. Not even on Israel? How many troops did we lose to WMDz in GulfWar1? GulfWar2? Rummy and the West gave Hussein some WMD capability back in the 80s (which they did use against the Iranians and their own people). Go youtube or the google the video of Rummy’s meeting with Hussien. Amazing how partisan politics makes any stupidity AOK as long as it is YOUR stupidity.
As an Independant voter I thought the Dems followed shrub’s lead in the wrong direction. Afghanistan is slipping back into chaos because we went into Iraq instead of finishing the job. And Osama continues to live. You and your Rightwingnutjobneoconmorons have failed miserably at every significant task you have set your hands to. Please stop ruining my country and Rapture your sorry ass up to Heaven immediately. Thanks!
November 28th, 2006 at 12:44 pm
In case you missed it, I said I don’t know in response to your WMD question. I didn’t “blame” Clinton for anything. If you read, you’ll see that I merely stated that he and his Cabinet made the same WMD claims, based on the same intelligence sources.
Is Wes Clark Street located in the heart of the country that continues to be a cesspool of ethnic cleansing? Are our troops still there?
Yes, we gave Iraq a tiny portion of their weapons to fight Iran back in the ’80s, although we provided much less than many other countries to support their efforts. We also allied ourselves with Russia in WWII – and for the very same reasons – but that necessity did not establish a long-standing friendship with them.
Yes, Osama continues to live. He even makes an audio tape on occasion. Ooooh, scary. At this point in time, he’s about as dangerous as Hitler is today. Yes, Afghanistan is slipping somewhat as terrorists become emboldened by those who aid and abet them in this country. I seem to remember statements made by Vietnamese leaders that their only chance of winning that war was the divide within the U.S., and Osama made reference to our inherent “yellowness” based on that same past situation. As with Vietnam, our troops cannot lose either in Afghanistan or Iraq, but PC cowards in our citizenry can lose it for them/us here at home.
Q. Can you explain… Syria and Iran… have not…, etc.
A. No.
Q. How many troops… WMD… GulfWarI?
A. I don’t know, although lots of troops suffered strange physical maladies after returning from that conflict.
Q. GulfWarII?
A. None that I’m aware of.
Your Independent voter claim is just plain silly. Your inability to take a stand on your voter registration card does not make you an independent voter – your voting habits do. If I change my registration accordingly, would I automatically be classified as an “Independent voter”? Hardly.