Post Reporter: ‘We Are Not Spared’ The ‘Nasty, Vulgar E-Mail’ From ‘Liberal Blog’ Readers
Post Reporter: ‘We Are Not Spared’ The ‘Nasty, Vulgar E-Mail’ From ‘Liberal Blog’ Readers
Last week, both conservative and traditional media outlets did their best to turn some hateful and inappropriate statements about Vice President Cheney by anonymous commenters at liberal blogs into a broad commentary on the left in general. As Glenn Greenwald predicted, Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz devoted his column to the “scandal”:
But as Greenwald (and Arianna) pointed out:
Stray, anonymous comments prove nothing. And those who rely on them to make an argument — especially without bothering to make any effort to prove that they are reflective of anything — should be presumed to have no argument at all. That is why they are relying upon such transparently flimsy and misleading methods to make a point.
During a WashingtonPost.com chat on Thursday, a reader confronted national political reporter Lois Romano about the coverage: “Selectively quoting anonymous posters from any political blog is shoddy ‘journalism’ at its worst. What does Mr. Kurtz have to say to defend himself on this?”
Romano had nothing to say about Kurtz. Instead, she bemoaned the “new viciousness in the process often generated by the blogs,” and likened herself and other reporters to Cheney, complaining that “we are not spared” the “nasty, vulgar e-mail” produced by “liberal blogs.”
Romano: We are watching the blogs, and just this month The Post assigned a young reporter to cover Internet campaigning. There certainly is a new viciousness in the process often generated by the blogs. You need to know that we as reporters are not spared — if we write an article the liberals blogs do not like we will be inundated with nasty, vulgar e-mail — which has no impact on our coverage.
While “liberal blogs” are lumped together with a tiny unrepresentative sample of anonymous commenters, the hate speech by leading figures of the conservative movement is ignored: today’s Post coverage of the Conservative Political Action Conference makes no mention of Ann Coulter’s inflammatory “faggot” remark.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Howard Kurtz is VILE!!!
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:33 pmOne can only conclude that the Romanos and Kurtzes fear that if Dems return to power, their tax cuts will end.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:35 pmI wonder if the comments were vile because the person about whom they were made is vile?? Could be a cause and effect going ton there Howie.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:35 pmAnd did Howie consider Ann Coulters comments about offing members of the Supreme Court to be vile?? What about Pat Robertson’s comments about nuking the State Department. Were they vile? Or is it only vile if spoken by a democrat?
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:36 pmIf reporters would do their job rather than repeating republican talking points, liberal blogs would not be gaining power and would not be so vocal. If someone does shoddy reporting, they should expect to hear a chorus of voices calling them out on their crock of crap.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:37 pmNamed blogger Kevin Good would see a lack of Dick Chaney as a small step in the correct direction.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:38 pmif the liberal/progressive/democratic “side” of the country had the 1/10 of the “mighty wurlitzer” working 24/7/365 on its behalf, manufacturing viciousness and slurs about the vastly more hateful extremist conservatives, we still would not be heard… it would make absolutely no difference… those who supply the electricity to power that enormous noise machine make sure those at the keyboard are fully aware that their playing talents can easily and quickly be replaced… all we can do is whine and i, for one, am no longer willing to do that… ignore them… just ignore them…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:40 pmHoward Kurtz is the MSMs Crypt Keeper!!!! That little piece of sh!t show on CNN where he pretends to keep an eye on the media is a COMPLETE PH*CKING JOKE!!!
Howie!! You’re a loser!@!
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:45 pmI think it’s clear that profanity is infinitely more offensive and dangerous than calling for the execution of liberals. I don’t want future generations of patriots to be cursing, while they are stringing up traitorous liberals.
That would be rude.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:46 pmDance with the devil and what do you expect? A bunch of pissed off people. What goes around comes around.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:46 pmAnd as we all know, the only people who post anonymously on political blog sites are those who agree with the political sentiments of that site.
By that I mean, it would be unthinkable for right wing partisans to post extreme and offensive “liberal” positions on a left wing site, pretending to be one of the gang so that they could be called on it by conservatives later on.
And by the same token, there’s no way lefties would do the same on right wing sites, right?
RIGHT??
Yeah, sure.
Remenber that old New Yorker cartoon — “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog…”
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:46 pmAnd as we all know, the only people who post anonymously on political blog sites are those who agree with the political sentiments of that site.
By that I mean, it would be unthinkable for right wing partisans to post extreme and offensive “liberal” positions on a left wing site, pretending to be one of the gang so that they could be called on it by conservatives later on.
And by the same token, there’s no way lefties would do the same on right wing sites, right?
RIGHT??
Yeah, sure.
Remember that old New Yorker cartoon — “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog…”
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:48 pmWhat do you expect to like and honored by the MSM. That is like CNN wanting to like FOX and getting more ring-winger on their staff.
The rignt-wing will still crap all over you.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:48 pmAnd as we all know, the only people who post anonymously on political blog sites are those who agree with the political sentiments of that site.
By that I mean, it would be unthinkable for right wing partisans to post extreme and offensive “liberal” positions on a left wing site, pretending to be one of the gang so that they could be called on it by conservatives later on.
And by the same token, there’s no way lefties would do the same on right wing sites, right?
That would be like a false flag operation, and those things never happen. RIGHT??
Yeah, sure.
Remember that old New Yorker cartoon — “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog…”
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:51 pmRomano: We are watching the blogs…
Good! Maybe you’ll learn something.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:51 pmYeah, what a shame. Lets forget about the fact that innocents die every day. We should focus on vulgar comments. What about a War on Vulgarity????
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:18 pm#16 Juan C
I’m sure their idea of vulgar also is used to define reality. If its not sanitized and happy, they don’t want to hear about it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:24 pmYes, and neither are we spared nasty and vile comments from right wing wacktoids here on this blog….
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:27 pmAs many of you have seen in this blog regarding the trolls that come in acting as if they’re liberal progressives and call for unspeakable things to be done to the right-wing politicos of the day. I have had my name hijacked many times, and whomever writing inflammatory remarks that I would have never considered writing. NeoCons see blogs and alternative news media as a threat to their lies. If you cannot control what’s being disseminated, then you can’t control disinformation. They can control the media but they don’t control individual websites/blog sites yet. What we are seeing is a precursor to getting free speech banned. We need to stand up to this up front and foremost. The last bastion of free speech is about to be assaulted before the next election.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:27 pmI agree with #19. How can the media prove that the comments are made by liberals and not by conservatives pretending to be liberals? Now there is a real story.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:38 pmIf its not sanitized and happy, they don’t want to hear about it.
Comment by AshenShard
Yeah. Everyone of the stupids that support this war are ok with it as long as they dont see pictures of bodies or coffins arriving at night.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:39 pmTwo things strike me:
1. If they aren’t getting nasty email from the righties, perhaps they’re not pissing off enough people (AKA their job).
2. There’s no way to verify anything about the nasty emailers so it wouldn’t be a huge jump to believe that at least a few are sent by conservative ops to create a “scandal.”
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:42 pmHow do we know it isn’t Howie posting those remarks to make it appear like it’s all of us lefty bloggers?
Get a grip Howie. It’s apparent the RW has nothing better than smear and fear.
Good Luck with that guys! We are on to you and we will keep your feet to the fire.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:44 pmWhy aren’t the Kurtzes, Romanos, and Kristols…
…investigating the real corruption in the Bush administration…
…rather than trying to discredit the left wing blogsphere?
…How’s that TP?
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:48 pmI have notice lately rw bloggers on liberal blogs make a sick inflammatory statement. Then a few post latter another rw blogger (possibly a sock puppet) criticizes the offending post and then makes the outrageous claim that is typical of the left. This whole Kurtzes thing smells of a set up from the beginning of the “under cover” reporting. Almost a fabrication maybe?
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:55 pmWhat is actually wrong about being happy that Cheney almost bit the big one? If he would have went bye, bye, the world would be a better place, wouldn’t it? He IS the man behind bush, and if he was out of the way, bush would collapse like a house of cards.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:58 pmMaybe then we could get our soldiers back home, since we all know bush has no spine.
The most vile blog commenters in the entire blog community belong to FreeRepublic.com, closely followed by LGF and Powerline.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:00 pmThe fact that the Washington Post and other media outlets are focusing on liberal blogs shows extreme bias on their part and should make anyone wonder about what their motives are for attacking Liberal blogs exclusively.
Well, are you saying that NO liberal bloggers actually would make that inflammatory statement? If you read thru most of the posts the day after, it was “man, too bad he didn’t die”, it would seem that is the general consensus on these blogs, Bush Administration bad, anything that happens to them is deserved, since they are a bunch of lying dogs.
The sad part is, they are calling the kettle black.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:03 pmThe only person proved to be a liar is Bill Clinton, and he even did it under oath.
Man, too bad there are so many hypocrits out there, that can’t seem to understand that they are backing the wrong horse.
Comment by Will
This is all neocon op’s. Welcome to the Straussian Nation.
Irving Kristol’s (father of Neo-conservatism) mentor at the University of Chicago; Leo Strauss believed that “those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right – the right of the superior to rule over the inferior.”
Strauss also believed, “The people are told what they need to know and no more.” While the elite few are capable of absorbing the absence of any moral truth, Strauss thought, the masses could not cope. If exposed to the absence of absolute truth, they would quickly fall into nihilism or anarchy.
Irving Kristol has long argued for a much greater role for religion in the public sphere, even suggesting that the Founding Fathers of the American Republic made a major mistake by insisting on the separation of church and state. And why? Because Strauss viewed religion as absolutely essential in order to impose moral law on the masses who otherwise would be out of control. At the same time, he stressed that religion was for the masses alone; the rulers need not be bound by it. Indeed, it would be absurd if they were, since the truths proclaimed by religion were “a pious fraud.”
Strauss believed that the inherently aggressive nature of human beings could only be restrained by a powerful nationalistic state. “Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed,” he once wrote. “Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united – and they can only be united against other people.”
Not surprisingly, Strauss’ attitude toward foreign policy was distinctly Machiavellian. “Strauss thinks that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat,” “Order out of chaos”, “Following Machiavelli, he maintained that if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured. “Perpetual war, not perpetual peace, is what Straussians believe in”. Wolfowitz and other administration hawks who have called for a world order dominated by U.S. military power. Strauss’ neoconservative students see foreign policy as a means to fulfill a “national destiny” – as Irving Kristol defined it already in 1983 – that goes far beyond the narrow confines of a ” myopic national security.”
As to what a Straussian world order might look like, the analogy was best captured by the philosopher himself in one of his many allusions to Gulliver’s Travels. When Lilliput was on fire, Gulliver urinated over the city, including the palace. In so doing, he saved all of Lilliput from catastrophe, but the Lilliputians were outraged and appalled by such a show of disrespect.”. The image encapsulates the neoconservative vision of the United States’ relationship with the rest of the world – as well as the relationship between their relationship as a ruling elite with the masses.
These people truly believe this crap. My point here is that these people will do anything to succeed with their agenda. They have no morals, and use the morals that you and I have against us. It’s all going to come to a head very soon. Either we understand who we are fighting against or we lose.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:06 pm#28 Comment by Me Too
Sure there are idiots on both sides. But the majority of people in her are not making threats as opposed to tongue and check remarks. People are angry. So rhetoric is going to get heated…that’s what debate is all about.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:10 pmMeToo
Just like on newshounds the last two days. You once again failed to actually read the original post.
MeToo = Paid Troll
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:11 pmSure there are idiots on both sides. But the majority of people in her are not making threats as opposed to tongue and check remarks. People are angry. So rhetoric is going to get heated…that’s what debate is all about.
Comment by JTitor — March 3, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
Without a doubt, there are idiots on both sides, but man, I cannot say I see as much vitriol coming from the idiots on the right. Seems like the sheer rage from the far left outweighs the rage from the right, by quite abit actually.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:13 pm[...] Again, traveling on business this week, I seem to have missed a dust-up that involved the Corporate Media finding a few “I wish Cheney had died” comments randomly posted on random blogs among about a zillion other comments and posts [...]
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:15 pmAnonymity is one of the keystones of blogging and the blogosphere provides a place for people of like mind as well as those who oppose each other viciously to exist in the same place without punches being thrown. Nobody knows where the “vicious” quotes came from and this smacks of disingenuousness.
When Howie Kurtz can prove that “hate” posts are coming from legitimate progressive sources (which seems counterintuitive to begin with, it’s the right that uses hate as a tool), then he can feign disgust. Until then, he undermines his already thin credibility.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:15 pmWhy are we forgetting about O’Reilly who still hasn’t apologized to the kidnapped child? If you care, place your vote and read the post: http://prouddemocrat.dailykos.com/
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:16 pmStray, anonymous comments prove nothing. And those who rely on them to make an argument — especially without bothering to make any effort to prove that they are reflective of anything — should be presumed to have no argument at all. That is why they are relying upon such transparently flimsy and misleading methods to make a point.
Yes, well us “liberals” should have remembered that three weeks ago when Amanda Marcotte did the exact same thing. Used disgusting emails in an attempt to distract us from the real problem, that she is an offensive smear artist.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:17 pm#33, Me Too,
Surely you’ve heard the term “ignorance is bliss”? Or, “if you’re not outraged you’re not paying attention”. Take that bs somewhere else.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:17 pmAnd besides, how can a statement be any more vile than the vileness about which the vile statement was made?
If the current vice president is not the embodiment of vile, I don’t wish to know of anything viler.
How about the axis of vile?
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:17 pmAny nominations? (other than the aforementioned miserable excuse for a human being…)
Comment by Me Too #s 33, 30, & 28
MeToo = Paid Troll
Comment by theroachman #32
…They actually PAY schizophrenics/multiple personality disorder sufferers?
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:19 pmRe:#31
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:20 pmyou must be new to liberal blogs…?
I think it’s time to storm the conservative blog comment pages with anti-liberal hate speech and death threats against Hillary, Obama, Murtha, and Pelosi. Oh wait, they already do that themselves.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:20 pm@ 39 I think it’s time to storm the conservative blog comment pages with anti-liberal hate speech and death threats against Hillary, Obama, Murtha, and Pelosi. Oh wait, they already do that themselves.
RWers also do that to liberal bloggers they do not like.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:23 pmjay severin hasp,
Love the name, that guy’s a total fraud. Don’t you love that he’s a “libertarian” to shore up his populist credentials yet he worked as a Republican political strategist for 20+ years. There’s Severin fallacy #1.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:24 pmIt’s been said before, but it bears repeating: the media needs to stop whining and do their freaking jobs.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:28 pmSeems like the sheer rage from the far left outweighs the rage from the right, by quite abit actually.
Comment by Me Too
First educate yourself in what political sides in the spectre mean. Just dont use left and right freely and easily to avoid insightful analysis. There is no left in the US. You will have to go to Europe in order to know the true meaning of left. US has a moderate centre and a fanatical right. The fanatical right -the political group in the current government- has almost nothing to do with conservadurism. What you have is a national extremist corporate government. Pretty much like the Nazis. Just look all the signs.
Now about your statement: That is probably one of the lamest, empty, corny comments I have read. If your country would have suffered 650,000 civilian casualties due to a never-ending occupation, based on lies as big as a house (yes, buddy, no matter what you say about Clinton, I couldnt care less about him, but Bush lies has killed more civilians and destroyed more countries than any blowjob could do) by, lets say China, and a chinese guy comes with: Hey, why so much rage? This chinese president have to fight american terrorists there so we dont have americans here. Lighten up. I would assure you that you would be mad. Think about it.
There are a lot of reasons to be mad. Just imagine your little brother turn to shreds by a cluster bomb, burned with White Phosphorous or killed by a religious terrorist from another sect, that the invading army are supporting with money and weapons.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:32 pmWithout a doubt, there are idiots on both sides, but man, I cannot say I see as much vitriol coming from the idiots on the right. Seems like the sheer rage from the far left outweighs the rage from the right, by quite abit actually.
Comment by Me Too
I would disagree. Ann Coulter’s remark wasn’t vitoral and purely baseless? Again you have many people coming in here posing as liberals making inflamatory remarks…happens here all the time. The locals are here for the debate, and to vent. The majority are good people in here.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:33 pmFannie/Sutra,
While I agree that there are those on the Left who would post comments on RW blogs to get those blogs in trouble if they could, the simple fact is that most RW blogs don’t allow comments.
The major exceptions are Free Republic and LGF. And if you’ve been around the Internet for any length of time, you know that Free Republic has always been that vile, long before Liberals had a serious Internet presence.
So while you have anonymous posters, with unverified credentials, posting nasty stuff in the comment sections of liberal blogs, on the Right you have the actual “leading lights” making the vile comments. The same people held up by the likes of CPAC and Howie Kurtz as people worthy of invitations and fawning profiles.
It’s not even a close comparison.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:34 pm42 Sap
Hah!!!
Not a chance. Come on it is the Washington Post we are talking about. Whose owner thinks he is Jesus and whose primary goal in life is the end America.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:35 pmI think it’s time to storm the conservative blog comment pages with anti-liberal hate speech and death threats against Hillary, Obama, Murtha, and Pelosi. Oh wait, they already do that themselves.
Comment by jay severin has a small pen1s
Love the name and the comment….
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:35 pmNot a chance. Come on it is the Washington Post we are talking about. Whose owner thinks he is Jesus and whose primary goal in life is the end America.
Comment by theroachman
And don’t forget the Moonies are one of the biggest contributors to the republican party.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:39 pmWhy are they singling out liberal blogs as the source for the hateful words? There are certainly plenty of them on the right wing blogs as well. I can’t get too excited about this because it seems that since Cheney was the victim of the recent comments, it is just another attempt to smear the liberals by the right wingers and the msm.
Liberals are subjected to hate, slander, ad hominem attacks and outright lies all day, every day on Fox TV, on conservative radio and on the blogs, and these are committed by those who own the blog, or “star” on the program — the reports that has the right’s panties in a bunch are by anonymous posters like most of us here. We are just ordinary people writing our thoughts and opinions.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:40 pmJTitor = Paid Troll
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:42 pmAnd don’t forget the Moonies are one of the biggest contributors to the republican party.
Comment by JTitor — March 3, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
just to be clear:
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:48 pmmoonies = washington TIMES
Yep, our sons and daughters are coming home from Iraq, missing limbs or dead, and the BIG problems is harsh language by anonymous commenters on blogs.
Way to keep the focus on the core issues, MSM! (Idiots.)
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:53 pmalong the same lines:
Victimless
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:57 pmBy: John Amato @ 3:30 PM – PST
The right wing nutosphere is world renowned for playing the victim card, but today they reached new heights in wankerville. They are calling Mike Stark a stalker because he went to the CPAC convention and took a photo with Michelle Malkin
[...]
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/03/victimless/
.
Kurtz is a faggot.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:01 pmFunny… I’m sure that these very same people relish talking about how much they enjoy the killing of Muslims.
What a sad world we live in.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:04 pmI think most of the folks that are paying attention realize that the lefty blogs are threatening the cozy relationship between the MSM and the entrenched/establishment politicians. They’ve been working toward common goals for some time and sadly there are a lot of Dems that aren’t interested in too much truth either, wouldn’t want to derail a perfectly good gravy train.
The lefty blogs threaten to empower the common folks, give them a voice, aid in attempting the actual practice of democracy. The Establishment can’t allow this medium to evolve much further (net neutrality battle)….truth in the people’s hands can really hurt profits. Conservatives despise an informed public. Witness where the “regular folk” red-staters they get their facts!
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:07 pmThe Saturday Cartoons (via C&L)
http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com/2007/03/saturday-cartoons.html
all great… my favorite is the 2nd… apropos to this thread…
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:15 pm.
It’s becoming easier and easier to i.d. the Republicans at these big newspapers!
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:17 pmHarsh language has always been a problem with the anonymous internet. Go to a MSN or AOL chat room (non-political) and it becomes readily apparent. I can find harsh language here, there and everywhere on the net.
They are only creating another controversy. Phhhbbbtttt.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:17 pmAnd if these emails are anonymous, how does one know if they are liberal, conservative, independent etc.. or just spoofed emails to make it appear otherwise?
Politicos could have a field day with such juvenile ruses.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:21 pm“We Are Not Spared”
Nor should you be, ye vile, hatefilled, lying scum!!!!
Since the MSM won’t call you out, someone MUST.
All hail freedom of speech on the net!
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:34 pmWell put #55.
The Conservative far right want ultimate power over all and don’t care how to achieve it, be it lies, hate, loss of life.
The American people are finally waking up to this, therefore, the far right have notched up their attacks via tv, radio, blogs, any means necessary, and by doing so by hiding behind religion.
I am a liberal, and honestly, I feel that the GOD that I have learned about and love, would never do what these groups are doing. That’s my opinion.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:38 pmWe got vicious words, Cheney’s got vicious policies that result in the death and maiming of hundreds of thousands.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:38 pmWhich one’s worse?
Tangent to harsh language;
Backlash: Dean, Edwards campaign, Malkin blast Coulter
for referring to Edwards as ‘faggot’ during CPAC speech
(Rawstory)
Ya know, I don’t put much into Malkins writings, she is free to post her views. However, I tend to agree with her when it comes to Coulters latest vomit comet.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:45 pmNico – I’m sure you’ll agree that c*nt is as, if not more offensive than fagg*t. But a “favourite” aspect of left wing blogs, is the generous use of descriptive venereal diseases.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:47 pmAs T.S. Eliot so POETICALLY observed in his classic THE HOLLOW MEN(tm):
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:48 pm“Mistah Kurtz – he dead. A penny for the Old Guy.” A PENNY TO PUT ON EACH OF HIS COLD SIGHTLESS ORBS, THAT IS!!!!! That vile sell-out Howard Kurtz is DEAD as far as I am concerned for his SICKENING, NASTY, VULGAR, ONE-SIDED, VITUPEROUS, SLANTED, BIASED ATTACK on the PATRIOTS OF THE BLOGOSPHERE, namely my colleagues and I of Think Progress(tm) and other Voices of Freedom like The Huffington Post(tm), Salon.com(tm), et cetera. When a KNOWN MOUTHPIECE for Bushland Uber Alllies like Howard Kurtz DARES TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE RIGHTFUL FLAK THAT WE SHOWER UPON SUCH VILE CREATURES LIKE Torticola Cheney, CHIMPya, Bushland Uber Allies and its media supporters like Coulter-GEIST, Malkin, O’LIE-lly, Limburger and OH YES, Kurtz, that miserable piece of hyena-shit, YOU KNOW THAT FREE SPEECH and DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA IS BEING ASSAILED BY THESE SCUMBAGS, AND WE, THE PATRIOTS OF THE BLOGOSPHERE, ARE NOT GOING TO STAND IDLY BY AND TAKE IT FROM JERKS LIKE Kurtz–BE WARNED, Kurtz and Bushland Uber Allies, THE KID GLOVES ARE OFF–PREPARE TO TASTE OUR E-MAILED FISTS!!!!!
Margaret Cho’s hate mail from the Bushistas.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:57 pmI didn’t realize Malkin had denounced Coulter’s latest nonsensical bleat. I suppose there’s always been some natural tension between the two of them, they’re competing for the same audience and they’re using the same character to do it.
I propose a ‘Rightwing Celebrity Deathmatch’ between the two whackos. Coulter may have some masculine characteristics but would you really want to f*c* with Michelle Malkin? That one strikes me as batshit crazier than all of them.
BTW, Firedoglake has an excellent thread up right now on the msm and and how things got so out of hand.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:58 pmPREPARE TO TASTE OUR E-MAILED FISTS!!!!!
Comment by Raymond Funamoto — March 3, 2007 @ 8:48 pm
YEA !!! TAKE THAT!!!
that was great…
i think jay said it well, and i agree, that the MSM feel threatened by the blogs, and the bloggers, and commenters, feel empowered, and strengthened and heartened (mostly) by this, finally, truthful information…
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:03 pmhttp://www.savetheinternet.com/
.
Poor babies.
They can dish it out but they sure can’t take it, can they? The strategy all along has been to get liberals to hold to a higher standard than they do. “I’ll agree to play fair, but then I lie. If you trusted me, you’re just stupid.”
It’s the Lucy, Charlie Brown, and the football strategy. You know: Lucy says, “Charlie Brown, let me hold the football for you to kick. I PROMISE I won’t yank it away at the last minute like I’ve done every other time.” Charlie Brown reluctantly agrees, because he wants to believe in people, then lands flat on his back when Lucy once again plays him for a fool.
These conservatives are whining because some liberals are playing the game by conservative standards.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:06 pmComment by DeCon — March 3, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
that needs to be forwarded to howie…
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:07 pmAl Gore is full of BULSH*T, read it here:
http://newsbusters.org/node/11122
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:10 pmI didn’t realize Malkin had denounced Coulter’s latest nonsensical bleat.
Malkin, I think, has realized that political hate speak has reached it’s zenith and can only now freefall to earth. I expect Coulter will soon follow suit.
I think it’s about time we return to civil discourse as it only serves to divide our nation at a time when it we need to stick together like a band of monkeys on a reed raft.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:10 pmBlogs-smogs. No one is generating the realistic anger people feel about this administration because of many things: stolen elections, the war in Iraq, torture of prisoners, the damage done to our international reputation, our economy, the national debt, the tax cuts for the rich during a war and many other things they have done. This is the real feelings that are out here. That is what happens when the people in the WH refuse to listen to the public.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:11 pmHey DeCon,
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:16 pmI just read those e-mails that Margerat Cho was inudated with. If any more evidence is needed to show who’s more hateful than the repugs on the blogosphere then I don’t know were to find it. Really incredible and vulgar stuff that they hit her with.
Harsh emails are usually just round filed.
You catch many more flys with honey than with shedds spread.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:19 pmA good one, is go check out the hatemail page on democraticunderground.com talk about hate speech.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:22 pm[...] “Liberal Media”: Post Reporter: ‘We Are Not Spared’ The ‘Nasty, Vulgar E-Mail’ From ‘Liberal Blog’ Reader… • • [...]
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:22 pmI didn’t realize Malkin had denounced Coulter’s latest nonsensical bleat.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
At her blog, Malkin wrote, “…Crickets chirping.”
oooooh… that’s pretty harsh…
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:24 pmi will not go to malkins blog, but what i read at rawstory didn’t sound like much of a denouncement… but probably as much as she could muster…
#71
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:25 pmThis Russian scientist has done this before. I would not put any stock in what he says (although you do, clown). If he is willing to put it up for peer review then lets see if it holds up. Or is he (and you) afraid to be shown the charlatrans that you are?
Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet’s recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist’s controversial theory. -The Truth.
Mars doesn’t have billions of people with cars exacerbating the problem. Mars has a very weak magnetic field. Mars does not follow Earths orbit nor procession. It is true, we do have solar cycles. If I follow the logic of that article then Earth will as well dry out as Mars did. (hmm)
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:29 pmThe debate on whether or not burning fossil fuels is causing global warming is over. Even the Cheney administration has acknowledged this. You should let it go.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:33 pmoooooh… that’s pretty harsh…
i will not go to malkins blog, but what i read at rawstory didn’t sound like much of a denouncement… but probably as much as she could muster…
Comment by katy
For Malkin its something. She didn’t have much to say when the AP shot her down either. =)
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:37 pm#71 – Will man ever learn from his or her mistakes? I sure hope so. Thanks Mr. Gore.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:42 pmUh, guys? #71, 78, 79… aren’t you whoring on the wrong thread? Is this a hamfisted attempt at getting us off topic, or are you just in the wrong neighborhood? Either way, you just don’t come off looking very smart.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:44 pmHave a nice day!
Here is a collection of right remarks I copied in a single day. I call it “brownshirt rants.”
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Howard Kurtz is an intellectual coward and a disgrace to journalism.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pm#71
[1997] “A magnetic field shields a planet from fast-moving, electrically charged particles from the Sun which may affect its atmosphere, as well as from cosmic rays, which are an impediment to life,” Acuna said.”If Mars had a more active dynamo in its past, as we suspect from the existence of ancient volcanoes there, then it may have had a thicker atmosphere and liquid water on its surface.”
“Mars Global Surveyor has been in orbit for only a few days, yet it already has returned an important discovery about the Red Planet,” said Vice President Al Gore. “This is another example of how NASA’s commitment to faster, better, cheaper Mars exploration that began with Mars Pathfinder is going to help answer many fundamental questions about the history and environment of our neighboring planet, and the lessons it may hold for a better understanding of life on Earth.”
So, The Truth, when our planet cools, and the Earths dynamo of molten metal cools (we still have volcanoes) the magnetic field dissipates. Mars should be looked at, I think, as to what Earth MAY become in the future and should not be used for comparisons today or to PROVE that AL Gore is lying about global warming.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:49 pmMarch 3rd, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Without a doubt, there are idiots on both sides, but man, I cannot say I see as much vitriol coming from the idiots on the right. Seems like the sheer rage from the far left outweighs the rage from the right, by quite abit actually.
Comment by Me Too — March 3, 2007 @ 7:13 pm
Looks like somebody is off their meds.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:50 pmUh, guys? #71, 78, 79… aren’t you whoring on the wrong thread? Is this a hamfisted attempt at getting us off topic, or are you just in the wrong neighborhood? Either way, you just don’t come off looking very smart.
Have a nice day!
Comment by SKdeA
If you prefer not to debunk falsities before they grow feet, fine. I prefer to shoot them down before they gain altitude.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:53 pm#87 – Jim
That wasn’t “ForTruth,” it was “The Truth.”
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:53 pmI don’t believe it. CNN is covering Ann Coulter’s “faggot” comment as their lead story. What’s this world coming to?
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:55 pmClair Voyant, Whoops! My bad!
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:59 pmBasically, with the assessment of our Director of National Intelligence this week that Iran is not going to develop a nuke before 2015, these joker Republicans running America are ZERO FOR THREE ON THE AXIS OF EVIL:
1. Iraq. Didn’t even have a nuke program. Yet we rushed to INVADE because of an IMMINENT THREAT. Okay that was smart.
2. Iran. Our wonderful Republicans basically destroyed our intel on Iran by outing Plame. Then they cried nukes nukes nukes. Now it’s no nukes until 2015. Sheesh. We almost went to war again over this crap.
3. North Korea. Again, our genius Republicans cried wolf over a uranium enrichment program that we now know may not have existed. In the process they caused NK to quadruple their plutonium arsenal.
And while they obsessed over the Evil Axis, the Republicans didn’t pay nearly enough attention to eradicating al Qaeda or to all the BS going on in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:05 pmThese Republicans are the gang that couldn’t shoot straight. I can’t believe Bush called himself a “Wartime” President. What an embarrassment. It would be a hoot if it weren’t so tragic in all the lost lives.
No worries, Jim.
ForTruth is nutty, but not certifiable.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:06 pmRAPE LIBS’ KIDS UP THE BUTT!
by: steveshawaproudamerican
This one is truly demented. Become a pedophile and sodomize innocent children because an American doesn’t agree with their view so he can get his salad tossed in prison.
I wonder if this twisted little thinker would also want to rape the children of log cabin Republicans.
Mr Cheney, Sir,do you see the problem with this type of thinking? Your daughter is likely a good person and will soon be raising your grandchild, surely, sir, you find this divisive political vernacular dangerous.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:07 pm“Comments posted following an attempt on Vice President Cheney’s life were nothing short of vile.”
***********************************************
Oh, puh-leeeeeeeeeeeeeeze! As if nobody at Free Republic or Red State ever posts vile comments about Democrats! I myself wish that I had a dollar for every time that I’ve seen a conservative/Republican post a message proposing that all liberals/Democrats be arrested, stripped of their citizenship and/or constitutional rights, imprisoned without trial, exiled for life, eviscerated, and/or simply pulled from their homes and shot in the streets…I’d be set for life!
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:08 pmAnyone else notice that the Washington Post, since the beginning of the year, has hired many more political writers, most of them fairly young, unknown, and of a decidedly right wing bent? Even their daily political chats, which I love reading, seem to be run by more of these conservative unknowns ( unknown to me, anyhow ). I have been reading the Post online for a couple of years now, and I read everything, everyday. What I have seen over the past couple of months shows me that, instead of taking criticism positively and disregarding the nut commentors, the Post’s management is in somewhat of a bunker mentality, especially the mainstream status quo defenders such as Kurtz. This does not bode well for those of us who care about getting the facts straight, and who need the Post to help in that regard.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:29 pmOn Nov. 22, 1994, Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina, slated to be the new chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Clinton is so unpopular on military bases in North Carolina that “he better watch out if he comes down here. He’d better have a bodyguard.”
Helms made this astounding threat to Clinton in a Raleigh News & Observer interview. The newspaper was questioning Helms about a statement he made Nov. 18 on CNN’s “Evans and Novak” program. When asked then if he thought President Clinton was “up to the job” of Commander in Chief, Helms stated: “No, I do not. And neither do the people in the armed forces.”
While Helms’ threat created nothing less than a worldwide sensation, it was written off by Republican leaders as “That’s just Jesse.” Helms later said his statement was unwise, and that he “should have said it better.”
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:34 pmCrazy Eduardo~
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:34 pmIf StevieWonderShaw is the best these clowns can do, I don’t have any worries, sleeping tight, etc.
I’d certainly like to see Mr? Shaw try sodomizing my daughter. He’d have whatever dinky penous he could get up shot off in a heartbeat.
Anyone else notice that the Washington Post, since the beginning of the year, has hired many more political writers, most of them fairly young, unknown, and of a decidedly right wing bent?
I quit reading Kevin Drum sometime back. They play both sides of the fence for greenbacks. The thought process, I think, is one of littering.
So what if I, one person, materially greedy, lie to the public? One litterer is not a problem, but when you get many litterers following the same bent it becomes a problem. Sadly they haven’t yet realized what they are doing.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:39 pminstead of taking criticism positively and disregarding the nut commentors, the Post’s management is in somewhat of a bunker mentality,
The WaPo is a bastion of center-right cowards who definitely feel threatened by the truth.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:44 pmMeanwhile, ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus has been posting on the Griffin thread a valiant defense of his use of the word “c*nt” to describe another poster.
Those sort of posts give “liberal” blogs a bad name.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:45 pmI wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for the MSM to do their job. If CNN is covering the Coulter remark, they probably called her to ask her permission. They probably followed it with a 30-second spot on her upcoming book “Sodom: How Liberals Corrupted Ted Haggart”.
I never post anonymously. Don’t believe in it. You can click on my link to watch my films and learn more about my work as the anti-conservative. They can all rot in hell. They’ll enjoy it there. The government privatized it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:49 pmhttp://newsbusters.org/stories/maher_sorry_cheney_assasination_attempt_failed.html
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:52 pmWhats your point Tracy? Do you have one?
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:57 pmAs for the anti-global warming crackheads let me offer you this.
I grew up trained in science and then decided against it. I’m not a global warming freakazoid. It’s a theory. I can assure you that an increase in the world’s population has an effect on the quality of life. Just think about where you grew up. It’s probably doubled or tripled in size. You have more people you don’t like. You have more cultures that have intertwined. There’s more conflicts, less parking, higher taxes, more problems. Now extrapolate that over a global community and throw in a variety of religions, cultures, languages, and capitalism. I’m not saying that capitalism is bad. I am saying that everyone being a capitalist is bad. Industrialized countries use more resources and then competition for those resources causes problems. We’re seeing that with oil with China and the US. What do you think the stock market hiccup was about the other day. But do you really think we shouldn’t make any adjustments to how we live based on the state of the world? By developing alternative energy we could actually be ahead of the competition. Will our economy be ruined by these changes? Some say YES but that’s just a theory…like global warming. Can we make some adjustments without hurting our economy? Absolutely. We are the greatest nation EVER on the face of the planet. I bet we can make some changes and turn a profit doing it. Keep that in mind when you see $5/gallon gasoline this summer. Standing behind the oil companies NO MATTER WHAT does only one thing…leave you behind the oil companies. Record profits during a crisis should be a telling signal.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:02 pmBill Maher is a perfect example of a hate filled liberal.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:02 pmMeanwhile, ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus has been posting on the Griffin thread a valiant defense of his use of the word “c*nt†to describe another poster.
Those sort of posts give “liberal†blogs a bad name.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 10:45 pm
Thin skinned fcukheads like yourself that think vulgar words by private citizens give people a bad name, are why people make fun of you Tippers of the world. Why don’t you stick to banning rap videos, and get a grip on what battles are worth fighting.
I’m not a public spokesman, and if you think my private words as a private citizen represent any political movement, you don’t understand the first amendment, or what the fcuk you actually think progressives stand for. Do everyone a favor Tipper, and buy a clue!
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:04 pmThose sort of posts give “liberal†blogs a bad name.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
Valiant Venus is likely Jason Hendler (aacording to moniker link).
I grow weary of man and his armageddonish ways BNF.
I have seen the man of light,
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:06 pmand battled the black knight.
knowledge of the equilibrium
and thoughts beginnings
from the fish Zeus Split
and filled with his wisdom
to the chimneys of Earth
Walls and objects pop quite loudly.
Air Eggs, Socrates spake of.
I have seen thru the mirror darkly
And thru mirror of light forwardly
I have peered into Lucifers eyes
I have seen the writing on the wall
and the hand that guides it all.
Oh man, why for cannot you see?
I bring truth unto thee.
Crazy Eddie, I must be.
http://newsbusters.org/ stories/ maher_sorry_cheney_assasination_attempt_failed.html
Comment by Tracy — March 3, 2007 @ 10:52 pm
The title of your link, and your posts are inaccurate and a smear. You’re a fcuking lying fool Tracy.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:06 pmBill Maher is a perfect example of a hate filled liberal.
Comment by Tracy — March 3, 2007 @ 11:02 pm
Not true – but you are the perfect example of a hate filled conservative. Hypocrite.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:06 pmAnd Coulter, Hannity, Savage et, al are not? Get a grip please.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 pmPot, Meet Kettle. I’d also add Valient Venus to this list. Lady, you need some help.
#106 jay severin hasp
Good points. Can also add to that the reasons we are losing jobs in this country. Good, high paying industrial jobs, with great benefits are greatly reduced in this country because companies refused to spend the money to update the technology in their factories. Case in point, the steel industry. How much of that is left in this country? Much of it is gone because we continued to use inefficient, 19th century technology while Europe, especially Germany, was using top of the like equipment and thus could produce a higher quality, cheaper product.
Companies have to invest in improving their industrial infrastructure, not in 400 million dollar retirement packages for their CEO’s.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 pmBill Maher is a perfect example of a hate filled liberal.
Comment by Tracy
I don’t Maher nor mimick him, he speaks for himself and not for me.
Should I think you are hateful, like Coulter, for she claims your political ideology?
I should not.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:08 pmValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
It seems to me that if someone is offended by your language, it’s easy enough to respect that.
It doesn’t appear that your vocabulary is limited. Maybe try being more creative?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:10 pmValiant Venus are you JMH or not?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:11 pmBill Maher is a perfect example of a hate filled liberal.
Comment by Tracy
TV is not me.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:14 pmIt seems to me that if someone is offended by your language, it’s easy enough to respect that.
It doesn’t appear that your vocabulary is limited. Maybe try being more creative?
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:10 pm
I respect that they have a right to be offended. If the language were aimed at them, or if I were a public figure that would be relevant. Me, I’m more offended by passive aggressive hypocrites that criticize selectively, like BNF. The ‘girls’ trueblue and zooey say they were offended by coarse language – yet I presented links showing both had used that language themselves.
Sorry, but there’s lots posted here that offends me far worse than coarse language. And the same should be true for everyone!
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:15 pmValiant Venus are you JMH or not?
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
Nope, he’s a fool.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pmCrazy Eddie,
I’m sorry, who is JMH?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pmComment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — March 3, 2007 @ 11:04 pm
When you post here, you are no longer a private citizen writing private words. You’re in a public forum, and your words are out there for the whole world to view. And it’s a safe bet to say I understand the First Amendment far better than you.
Let’s face it, the more you write, the worse you appear.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pmCrazy Eddie,
I’m sorry, who is JMH?
Comment by Clair Voyant
Jason Hendler, as Venus’s moniker directs one too.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:19 pm109 – interesting poem. How do I know you?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:19 pmWhen you post here, you are no longer a private citizen writing private words. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
No, I’m a private citizen exercising my first amendment rights.
You’re in a public forum, and your words are out there for the whole world to view. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
That’s true, I’m a private citizen speaking as a private citizen.
And it’s a safe bet to say I understand the First Amendment far better than you. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
This is a private forum – there are no first amendment rights here – so I question your assumption.
Let’s face it, the more you write, the worse you appear.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
You’re entitled to your opinion – which is usually quite good. Exception when your ‘emotion’ and ‘irrationality’ gets involved like this. Use your ‘brain’ and not your ‘heart’ on this issue. Stop trying to be the big bad dragon slayer, it’s derogatory to trueblue and zooey. They aren’t your damsels.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:20 pm“The ‘girls’ trueblue and zooey say they were offended by coarse language – yet I presented links showing both had used that language themselves.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus”
I see. Maybe you just have a problem with women.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:21 pm“Jason Hendler, as Venus’s moniker directs one too.
Comment by Crazy Eddie”
Still confused, but it’s possible that it’s unimportant. Thanks.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:23 pm#120 – Clair Voyant,
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:23 pmJMH is a 39 year old going on 40 who lives in his mother’s basement in Melborne, FL. Also known as Jason or Jason M. Henley(sp?).
I see. Maybe you just have a problem with women.
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:21 pm
Nope, I like women. I even like trueblue and zooey. They’re smart capable women. I just disagree with them on this issue. They/BnF and some others have a different opinion. That’s fine, but I don’t have a problem with that. They have just as much of a right to complain and belittle my language, as I do to use the language to belittle valiant venus & Tracy. That’s my opinion – and last time I checked I was still entitled to that.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:23 pm109 – interesting poem. How do I know you?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
If you were half the shaman you wish you were, you’d realize the absurdity in that question! Ah, the irony ;)
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:24 pmIt came back – Jason M Hendler.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:25 pm“That’s my opinion – and last time I checked I was still entitled to that.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus”
So you wouldn’t mind being called a c*cksucker?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:27 pmIt came back – Jason M Hendler.
Comment by WaltTheMan — March 3, 2007 @ 11:25 pm
I hope not ;) Sorry, the alias makes fun of the two most annoying trolls, hope that explains this.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:27 pm“It came back – Jason M Hendler.
Comment by WaltTheMan”
I don’t have enough history here. Thanks, anyway WaltTheMan.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:28 pmI might add that anyone living in a basement in Florida is certifiably insane.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:28 pmIn other news:
Iran, Saudi heads vow to work for unity
The Shi’ites and Sunnis are starting to figure out they’re being played against each other by the United States.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:30 pm109 – interesting poem. How do I know you?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
You do, but not.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:32 pmYou are one of few
who has broken thru
entropic thought
Now you’re just being stupid.
The internet is a public forum. And, if there were no first amendment rights, the government could censor every post.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:32 pmComment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — March 3, 2007 @ 11:24 pm
And if you were a student of shamanism, you’d know that shamans are not omniscient. Ah, the stupidity. :-P
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:34 pmSo you wouldn’t mind being called a c*cksucker?
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:27 pm
Actually calling me a fcukhead is probably more appropriate – because that would deride me as a person, without trying to smear gay people. Calling me a *d*ckhead* is a more closely related term – and ironically one that I believe it was trueblue that used.
But if you did that – even in a passive aggressive manner as you just did – that would make you exactly the kind of passive aggressive ann coulter figure that people are deriding here. After all, she didn’t ‘call’ him that term, she indirectly implied he was one – as you did with me.
I always find this sort of hypocrisy interesting – and unfortunate – in progressives.
And to answer your question, no, if you called me a -d*ckhead-, that would be your right and your opinion. But I’d appreciate if you would call me that ‘honestly’, instead of the passive aggressive dishonesty of the other progressives that have committed the same sins, but only implied it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:34 pmNow you’re just being stupid.
The internet is a public forum. And, if there were no first amendment rights, the government could censor every post.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
Now you’re just being stupid. If the blogmaster decides you can’t post anymore you can’t. You have no first amendment rights here, only the blog master and owner of the site has that.
For a lawyer, I’m shocked you failed to understand such a simple principle.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:36 pmAnd if you were a student of shamanism, you’d know that shamans are not omniscient. Ah, the stupidity. :-P Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:34 pm
Who said omniscient? We were referring to whether you ‘know’ someone – ironically the same st*pid comment you made to me about my comments to zooey! Ah, the stupidity – and ironically from a man I generally find quite intelligent! Thanks for demonstrating how allowing your emotions to destroy your reason can turn even a super bright person like yourself, into a valiant venus!
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:38 pmIf you were half the shaman you wish you were, you’d realize the absurdity in that question! Ah, the irony ;)
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus
It’s probably better that you didn’t know V V
It would cause you much grief.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:39 pm136:
Now, when the darkness greets light
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:39 pmAwakening the spirit so dim within
Man-unkind will be put to flight
And rest in pieces therein
Surrendered the hate
To little, to late
Eternity didn’t wait.
#140 – ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:40 pmYou were the first to bring your privates into the debate (in #118, I believe).
Who said omniscient? We were referring to whether you ‘know’ someone – ironically the same st*pid comment you made to me about my comments to zooey!
it was in reference to a poem V V.
Down past the madness of the march hare
etc. If you know you know, if you don’t
forgeddaboutit =)
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:42 pmIt’s probably better that you didn’t know V V
It would cause you much grief.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 11:39 pm
Then you can count your blessings, and live in that belief with my blessing. But the ‘it would’ is interesting for someone responding to Shamans not being omniscient. Sounded suspiciously like you were implying you had it!
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:43 pmI am wondering if all this you said, she said debate will lead to something fruitful, as all debates should head to.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:43 pmValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
Well, this certainly has been an interesting evening, not what I thought I’d find here.
Later, f*ckhead.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:44 pm#140 – ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
You were the first to bring your privates into the debate (in #118, I believe). Comment by WaltTheMan — March 3, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
Yep, and as a private person I have a right to call a c*nt a c*nt – which by the way means a ‘generally disliked woman’. Yet you people call her haggette – which defines her as ‘completely evil’.
Who’s being a hypocrite with the ’slurs’ – BnF maybe?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:46 pmMan-unkind will be put to flight
And rest in pieces therein
Surrendered the hate
To little, to late
Eternity didn’t wait.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:39 pm
So tell me, when did you surrender to your hate of me? When zooey or trueblue attacked me?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:47 pmI am wondering if all this discussion will lead to a fruitful result as all debates should head to.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:48 pmWell, this certainly has been an interesting evening, not what I thought I’d find here.
Later, f*ckhead.
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
So because I call a right wingnut troll a c*nt, I’m part of the problem. Because I feel I have a right to do that – you call me a f*ckhead.
Yeah, no hypocrisy there.
So BnF, you didn’t condemn trueblue or zooey for their language – do you feel that only ‘liberals’ like me shouldn’t use foul words to describe conservatives? Or do you think Voyant demonstrates the hypocrisy I was referring to?
You people are super smart, and I really do like all of you, including you BnF. But you really don’t get the difference between coarse language, and what these fcukheads on the rightwing are doing. Sad – that’s why they get better press coverage too.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:50 pmJuan, It has two chances – little or none.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:50 pmThen you can count your blessings, and live in that belief with my blessing. But the ‘it would’ is interesting for someone responding to Shamans not being omniscient. Sounded suspiciously like you were implying you had it!
I dont have any tarot cards or crystal balls if thats what you mean. What you forget is that thought is only energy and that you are only a speck, an Atom, if you will.
I can tell you where to look to find the pillar of light, yet you, likely, would deny it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:50 pmI am wondering if all this discussion will lead to a fruitful result as all debates should head to. Comment by Juan C — March 3, 2007 @ 11:48 pm
I hope so. Because I’m debating BnF, who’s a bright a capable person. He’s just too mad at me right now to realize that he’s treated me unfairly, and inconsistently.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:51 pmSlightly OT, but how long before the right starts labeling us as related in ideology to the anarchists causing the riots over in Denmark?
Article
I can just hear them preaching that this is the result of liberal leftist ideology and that is what our side will do if not controlled.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:51 pmOops, sorry for the double post.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:53 pmI dont have any tarot cards or crystal balls if thats what you mean. What you forget is that thought is only energy and that you are only a speck, an Atom, if you will. Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
So many words, so little understanding of any of their meanings…
I can tell you where to look to find the pillar of light, yet you, likely, would deny it. Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
Yeah, says the person that judges me for using foul language, by using foul language against me. I can tell you that based on this interaction, it’s you that just missed the light, and denied it.
I was honest and consistent with my attitudes about foul language, and in fact I’m still not upset that you called me that. But you showed that you don’t have consistent values, as most on this blogs can be shown on this matter. The fact is most of us use foul language in our lives to describe the most foul people we interact with. I’m just honest about it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:54 pmJuan, It has two chances – little or none.
Comment by WaltTheMan — March 3, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
I hope you’re wrong. But considering how emotional BnF and many are about this topic – you may be right.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:55 pmhttp://www.peace-action.org/
———————————————————————————
To: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
cc: Chairs of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Committee on International Relations
We, the undersigned, vehemently oppose any U.S. military action against Iran. Such military action would inevitably kill large numbers of innocent people, foster even more hatred and international condemnation of the U.S., and dramatically increase the instability of the region. Our own intelligence agencies have concluded the Iraq war has worsened the terrorist threat, and a war against Iran would add immeasurably more fuel to the fire.
Even if Iran decided to build a nuclear weapon, experts agree that it would take several years. There is no crisis, and our government should not create one with inflammatory rhetoric or military threats. The U.S. has both the time and obligation to work with the international community to fashion a diplomatic resolution to the situation, and the current refusal of U.S. officials to talk directly with Iranian officials cannot possibly help resolve the nuclear standoff, nor contribute to peace in Iraq and the Middle East.
Therefore, we urge you to take all steps necessary to reach a peaceful resolution to the current situation, including direct negotiations without pre-conditions. This is the only way to prevent yet another war, one that would be a calamity of truly global proportions.
———————————————————————–
No War with Iran!
President Bush is now regularly accusing Iran of supporting attacks on U.S. troops, without any evidence, – remember the WMD’s in Iraq, anyone? – adding that “we will seek out and destroy†these networks. Bush has authorized U.S. forces to kill Iranian “operatives†in Iraq, and he is sending nuclear aircraft carriers and missile defense batteries to the Persian Gulf. The unthinkable – a wider war in the Middle East – is unfolding.
John D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that any U.S. military move into Iran would be “catastrophically stupid†and “unleash a conflagration like we’ve never heard of before.†We could not possibly agree more.
Resistance to a Bush planned military strike on Iran is growing in Congress, but it needs your help! Sign the petition to Congress below – No War with Iran! House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said recently that she would introduce legislation to stop such a strike, so our demand is beginning to get through. But the pressure needs to be much, much stronger to stop a President who has apparently gone mad with war and his own power.
Please know that your email address is for internal purposes only; we will not send it to the petition recipients nor share it with any other organization for any purpose. Thanks also for forwarding this to your friends, colleagues and listserves. We need everyone who wants to bring peace to the Middle East and prevent a war with Iran to join the effort now!
———————————————————————————–
http://www.peace-action.org/
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:58 pmJuan,
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:58 pmThat pegs with my two chances.
“So because I call a right wingnut troll a c*nt, I’m part of the problem. Because I feel I have a right to do that – you call me a f*ckhead.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus”
No dear, I’m not in that fight. I simply wondered at the beginning if it might be respectful of your fellow liberals to find another word for this troll.
You said it would be appropriate to call you a f*ckhead, and I always try to be appropriate.
I’m wondering what you might be like around this mysterious troll. I’m not sure I want to find out.
I heard this was a good blog, with excellent commenters. Perhaps another night.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:59 pmJuan, It has two chances – little or none.
Comment by WaltTheMan
It depends, Walt. If both are too stubborn it will be as you say. If one of them, has the brilliance of being humble, it will makes us all grow as humans.
BTW, I kind of agree with betruthful (VV), but I am really unaware of what really happened here.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:00 amSo BnF, you didn’t condemn trueblue or zooey for their language – do you feel that only ‘liberals’ like me shouldn’t use foul words to describe conservatives?
I don’t think foul words, no matter your position, are helpful.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:02 am12:00 AM! Yikes, its bedtime! Night-night everybody.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:03 amNo dear, I’m not in that fight. I simply wondered at the beginning if it might be respectful of your fellow liberals to find another word for this troll. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
Sure you are, according to BnF.
You said it would be appropriate to call you a f*ckhead, and I always try to be appropriate. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
Yet, it’s an offensive word, which according to BnF makes you the same as me.
I’m wondering what you might be like around this mysterious troll. I’m not sure I want to find out. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
That’s your choice.
I heard this was a good blog, with excellent commenters. Perhaps another night. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
Perhaps you just aren’t up to the task to discuss this topic. Do you think your use of language that will offend some is appropriate just because I don’t care if you use it? That’s my point. Someone is always offended with coarse language – yet you had no problem using it on a fellow liberal.
Ironic.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:03 amI heard this was a good blog, with excellent commenters. Perhaps another night.
Comment by Clair Voyant
Who lied to you? :)
March 4th, 2007 at 12:04 amI don’t think foul words, no matter your position, are helpful.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 12:02 am
That’s your opinion, and that may be true for you and how you communicate. But sometimes foul language can be quite helpful in expressing things as they truly are – foul.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:05 amWhat fowl words? Chicken. turkey, capon, cornish game hen, duck, goose?
March 4th, 2007 at 12:06 amValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
You’re too full of yourself for reasoned discourse, and you’re projecting your emotions onto others. And so I drew a Rune for you. You may call it “quantum engagement” if you will. I call it “metaphysics.” Others call it “magick.”
But, for whatever it’s worth, this is the message from the Universe to you:
Wynn: Joy: Reversed.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:07 am
“So because I call a right wingnut troll a c*nt, I’m part of the problem. Because I feel I have a right to do that – you call me a f*ckhead.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranusâ€
SIGH. Ya know, V V, I use foul words, when I smash my finger with a hammer, or bust my knuckles when my hand slips off a wrench causing bloody knuckles, mostly I am angry at myself.
I think foul words are pretty useless towards other humans.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:08 am“Who lied to you? :)
Comment by Juan C”
Actually, Zooey sent me here. Now that’s ironic.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:09 amValiantVenus GFU
I think the point people are trying to make is you use profanity in almost every post you make, which is way too often. If you are making an actual point it takes away from that point which you are making. People will focus on your use of profanity and not the actual idea you may have or point you are making, which does not help you in the least.
Yes, people here use profanity, but only when they are making certain points. Throwing around the word c*nt in almost every post you make does not add to the discussion, and it gets old. You should not come out of the gate thrashing every time, but make every attempt to engage in conversation in a civilized manner.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:10 amAnd coincdentally, the same thing happens when you post a conservative POV on a lefty site. It happens to me every time I post here. hmmmmm. I just report them as spam.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:11 amWho lied to you? :)
Comment by Juan C — March 4, 2007 @ 12:04 am
Oh, shame, shame!!!
Even at their worst, BnF, trueblue and zooey are heads and shoulders above valiant venus on her best day. Everyone has a blind spot, and something that takes them into an irrational place. This is one of those places for all 3 of them – and they’re not alone apparently.
I understand it, I can even relate to it, but the difference is I see it for what it is. I also see the unintentional hypocrisy, and they can’t without what seems to be a great effort.
It’s OK for me, because I don’t and won’t hold a grudge against them. They’ll have to speak for themselves and find their own willingness to accept common ground or not.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:11 amI heard this was a good blog, with excellent commenters. Perhaps another night.
Comment by Clair Voyant
Tonight the topic is vulgarity (which is not a great subject for debate, due to it’s foul nature, and well it’s non factual and is simply he said she said this or that. Not a good nite for articulation)
March 4th, 2007 at 12:12 amIm gonna butt in.
Valiant called Roger Roger a c*nt. I know it´s an insult, but as far as I have read, it should be an insult to c*nts. Roger Roger, by promoting the bombing of Iran, as he probably cheered the invasion of Iraq, deserves to be called far worse things than that. The amount of atrocities happening over there should shake our good consciences a lot more than simple, foul words.
Now, if some people here, like Zoo and true, asked me to stop the foul language, I would do that, of course.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:12 amYou’re too full of yourself for reasoned discourse, and you’re projecting your emotions onto others. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:07 am
Nope, that’s what you’re doing.
And so I drew a Rune for you. You may call it “quantum engagement†if you will. I call it “metaphysics.†Others call it “magick.â€
But, for whatever it’s worth, this is the message from the Universe to you:
Wynn: Joy: Reversed.
Wynn reversed indicates problems between people, changes that bring unhappiness and a warning to look at possibly troubling situations.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:07 am
You can wish as much evil on me as you like – that’s your baggage not mine, Shaman.
As for me not being able to reason – I’m still waiting for you to explain to me why I have first amendment rights to post on a private blog? I’ll accept your non-response as your ‘unconscious’ recognizing it is you that is joy-reversed.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:13 am“That’s my point. Someone is always offended with coarse language – yet you had no problem using it on a fellow liberal.
Ironic.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus”
Actually, I don’t have a problem with the word c*nt. But if I used the word and realized someone was offended, I wouldn’t have a problem finding another way to express myself.
You seem very determined to call someone a c*nt, if they appear to be behaving like a c*nt, but are quick to condemn my use of the word f*ckhead — and blame it on BNF. As far as I can tell, you certainly are behaving like a f*ckhead. But if you’re offended, I will not continue the use of the word in your presence.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:14 amActually, Zooey sent me here. Now that’s ironic.
Comment by Clair Voyant
Tonight seems to be AOL chatroom antic night. But then again I think how sas we are when TV, and Pundits, and bloggers of all stripes has devolved into nothing more than foul linguists.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:15 amAnd coincdentally, the same thing happens when you post a conservative POV on a lefty site. It happens to me every time I post here. hmmmmm. I just report them as spam.
Comment by ballbuster
Ya know BB, I wouldn’t talk to anyone face to face as people do over the internet. Why is it that people become so brazen when they can’t see one another?
I wonder.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:17 amI think the point people are trying to make is you use profanity in almost every post you make, which is way too often. Comment by AshenShard — March 4, 2007 @ 12:10 am
Have I used that language an well – pretty much any – of my posts tonight?
You may not like profanity, but I do censor it, and I do it on topic and related to what the person posts.
If you are making an actual point it takes away from that point which you are making. Comment by AshenShard — March 4, 2007 @ 12:10 am
I save making a point, with people like you that are capable of comprehending it. Most of the rest of you don’t need me to make a point for you on most topics ;)
People will focus on your use of profanity and not the actual idea you may have or point you are making, which does not help you in the least. Comment by AshenShard — March 4, 2007 @ 12:10 am
That’s why we need people here like you that don’t use it :)
Yes, people here use profanity, but only when they are making certain points. Comment by AshenShard — March 4, 2007 @ 12:10 am
So am I.
Throwing around the word c*nt in almost every post you make does not add to the discussion, and it gets old. Comment by AshenShard — March 4, 2007 @ 12:10 am
So are the same old talking points that illicit that response from me.
You should not come out of the gate thrashing every time, but make every attempt to engage in conversation in a civilized manner.
Comment by AshenShard — March 4, 2007 @ 12:10 am
And what exactly am I doing here? Do you really believe that venus, michael or Roger_Roger can debate, or come here to do it? Nope.
Please read my posts to hacker_bob. He’s on occasion capable of debate – and I respond to him in that manner when he exhibits it.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:18 amhere’s an example of insanity:
hahaha
March 4th, 2007 at 12:18 amAn argument of foul words
March 4th, 2007 at 12:21 amnever has a winner
only two angry losers
Actually, I don’t have a problem with the word c*nt. But if I used the word and realized someone was offended, I wouldn’t have a problem finding another way to express myself. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:14 am
Someone is *always* offended by foul words. Many are offended because you made the effort to post your opinion. That’s how things work in a public forum.
You seem very determined to call someone a c*nt, if they appear to be behaving like a c*nt, but are quick to condemn my use of the word f*ckhead — and blame it on BNF. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:14 am
I suggest you either re-read my posts, or pull your head out of your *ss, whichever works for you. I don’t have a problem with you using that word, but the point is that BNF said that the use of ANY vulgarity demeaned us all. He’s been debating this for 2 days, I’m sorry if you’re not catching up quickly.
So lets be clear, I *commend* you for your use of that word – but it does make you a hypocrite for attacking me for using foul words.
As far as I can tell, you certainly are behaving like a f*ckhead. But if you’re offended, I will not continue the use of the word in your presence. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:14 am
No, help yourself. You can call me a f*ckhead, and continue acting like one at your leisure.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:22 amI don’t think foul words, no matter your position, are helpful.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 12:02 am
To my knowledge, no one complained about their choice of words. And, no, I did not condemn them either. However, someone (I think it was trueblue) did raise an objection to the use of the word “c*nt” and VVGRU became highly defensive. I pointed out that often when someone is apprised of an error, they respond by attacking, as VVGRU did. VVGRU then turned on me.
And I have worked with Zooey off board with her anger. She has made great strides in a short time.
I support reasoned discourse. It is not for me to say whether you should, or should not, use foul language. Neither did I say VVGRU should not use foul language. I did suggest a Thesaurus, and the creative use of multisyllabic insults, if one must insult. But to me, the use of crude language merely suggests the writer is adjective deprived.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:23 amNow, if some people here, like Zoo and true, asked me to stop the foul language, I would do that, of course.
Comment by Juan C — March 4, 2007 @ 12:12 am
I understand why you might do that, and I respect your choice. What I’m hearing is that many people don’t have a problem with me using those words, only the ‘frequency’. Still hypocrisy.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:24 amAn argument of foul words
never has a winner
only two angry losers
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 12:21 am
Says the person that just lost the argument ;)
March 4th, 2007 at 12:25 amSays the person that just lost the argument ;)
What argument?
Cunt is more powerful than dickhead?
How can you compute that?
March 4th, 2007 at 12:27 amI am reminded of the time I went to jail and listened to the drunks shout foul language at one another thru the bars all night long.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:30 am“I don’t have a problem with you using that word, but the point is that BNF said that the use of ANY vulgarity demeaned us all. He’s been debating this for 2 days, I’m sorry if you’re not catching up quickly.’
Pardon me, but this is my first time here.
“So lets be clear, I *commend* you for your use of that word – but it does make you a hypocrite for attacking me for using foul words.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus”
I made no such attack on you. I simply stated that if someone is asking you stop using certain language because it’s offensive, it seems reasonable to accomodate them.
How does BNF saying the use of any vulgarity make ME a hypocrite?
This is a ridiculous conversation.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:33 amComment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — March 4, 2007 @ 12:13 am
sigh…ok…here it is, again:
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
The First Amendment applies to Federal Government actions, not the actions of private citizens. The Federal Government cannot come here and censor every post because of the First Amendment. The First Amendment does not restrict the owner of the blog from censoring every post, however, because, as I said earlier, the First Amendment applies to the government.
Because the First Amendment prohibits the Federal Government from censoring this blog, you have First Amendment rights in this forum.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:33 amAn argument of foul words
never has a winner
only two angry losers
Comment by Crazy Eddie
I disagree. People care too much about words. Too little about actions.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:34 amTo my knowledge, no one complained about their choice of words. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
So that’s your measure of someone not being a hypocrite? You previously argued that all liberals using foul words demeaned the blog. Yet I posted links showing that both of them had in fact used the equivalent of the words I posted.
And, no, I did not condemn them either. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
Exactly, making you a hypocrite.
However, someone (I think it was trueblue) did raise an objection to the use of the word “c*nt†and VVGRU became highly defensive. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
You mean you, trueblue and zooey became highly offensive that I used a word they didn’t like – despite them using words others obviously wouldn’t like. I pointed this out.
Now you’re highly defensive on this issue – hypocrisy?
I pointed out that often when someone is apprised of an error, they respond by attacking, as VVGRU did. VVGRU then turned on me. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
Actually trueblue accused me of having Aspergers, after having previously said that Aspergers isn’t a disease or something to be used to attack others with. I apprised you of your error in how you critiqued my response – by saying your reading comprehension had left your building. I repeat that response.
Just because I won’t do what you and Zooey want, I’m to blame? Sad.
And I have worked with Zooey off board with her anger. She has made great strides in a short time. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
I’m to be responsible for her anger? Wow, it sounds like both of you need work with your ‘emotion-issues’.
I support reasoned discourse. It is not for me to say whether you should, or should not, use foul language. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
Yet, that hasn’t stopped you from attacking me for using it, and in this very thread tell me not to.
Neither did I say VVGRU should not use foul language. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
Now who isn’t earning their own words:
Those aren’t instructions for me to not use those words? Counselor, I suggest you stop instructing the witness.
I did suggest a Thesaurus, and the creative use of multisyllabic insults, if one must insult. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
Blah, Blah, Blah, sorry, but I’ve done quit fine in destroying both your argument, and exposing your own hypocrisy on this issue without the aid of either a Thesaurus or foul words.
Get another talking point.
But to me, the use of crude language merely suggests the writer is adjective deprived. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:23 am
And yet, I’ve proven otherwise in smashing your hypocrisy without any of it – meaning that ‘to you’, you’re wrong.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:34 amI disagree. People care too much about words. Too little about actions.
But thats what I said, in my way =)
An argument of foul words that none win.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:38 amLike the drunks behind the bars.
They speak much but do little.
I dunno, they’re chickenshits perhaps. I’d ask you the same questions face to face. I’m not afraid of where I am.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:38 amI know what’s right, and I’m grounded in that. I don’t to INVENT reasons in my head as to why things are. Liberal pussies live for the gray area.
The First Amendment applies to Federal Government actions, not the actions of private citizens. The Federal Government cannot come here and censor every post because of the First Amendment. The First Amendment does not restrict the owner of the blog from censoring every post, however, because, as I said earlier, the First Amendment applies to the government.
Because the First Amendment prohibits the Federal Government from censoring this blog, you have First Amendment rights in this forum.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 12:33 am
Whatever. When you aren’t so emotional, re-read the interaction, and see why your posts on this are irrelevant to what I posted. I don’t have to instruct you on reading comprehension tonight counselor.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:38 am(Jailer) Okay, you guys, if you don’t pipe down were gonna strip you naked and take away your blankets and mattresses. =)
March 4th, 2007 at 12:39 amThere is, but you can’t use the word, faggot. Thats hate speech, cuz liberals said so.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:39 amPardon me, but this is my first time here. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:33 am
Yet you felt sufficiently enlightened to instruct me on a topic you didn’t have all of the facts on.
I made no such attack on you. I simply stated that if someone is asking you stop using certain language because it’s offensive, it seems reasonable to accomodate them. Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:33 am
Missing the point that someone always finds foul words offensive. What you find reasonable is your ‘choice’.
How does BNF saying the use of any vulgarity make ME a hypocrite? Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:33 am
What makes you a hypocrite is the use of foul words, while criticizing others for using them.
This is a ridiculous conversation.
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:33 am
It is ridiculous, as is your inability to grasp your own hypocrisy.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:41 amValiant, you are a smart guy. Im sure you understand that victory is not about winning, its about peace.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:42 amI dunno, they’re chickenshits perhaps. I’d ask you the same questions face to face. I’m not afraid of where I am.
I know what’s right, and I’m grounded in that
You know whats right? How so? Mankind doesn’t even know where the hell he came from, much less how the universe works.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:43 amI think I understand now. It seems to be important to ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus to win any given argument, at any cost.
It’s simply not that important to me.
ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus, you win. You are right. I am wrong.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:43 amThere is, but you can’t use the word, faggot. Thats hate speech, cuz liberals said so. Comment by ballbuster — March 4, 2007 @ 12:39 am
You’re a fcukhead – and that’s an appropriate description.
Actually any public figure must be cautious of using bigoted words, liberal or conservatives.
The issue I have with zooey, bnf, etc., is that they can’t distinguish the difference between foul worlds, and words of oppression and bigotry. Yet they use the word ‘Hag’, which has a history of oppression of women priestess and Shamanistic females. How ironic bnf, don’t you think?
March 4th, 2007 at 12:44 amThere is, but you can’t use the word, faggot. Thats hate speech, cuz liberals said so.
Comment by ballbuster
No, it’s just dumb for adults to lower themselves to that level. Do you teach your kids to call people Faggot when they have no idea what they are talking about? Anne doesn’t know if Edwards is gay, ergo it’s a lie.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:45 amValiant, you are a smart guy. Im sure you understand that victory is not about winning, its about peace. Comment by Juan C — March 4, 2007 @ 12:42 am
That’s a nice goal – I like it ;) But those that are claiming to be on the higher ground seem to be less clear on this point than I am – another irony.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:45 amIt’s simply not that important to me.
ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus, you win. You are right. I am wrong.
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:43 am
That’s a very interesting passive aggressive response. Do you really think I care whether I have your permission or approval? Do you really think I care whether you believe you’re right or wrong. We both know who’s right – and if you wish to ‘Bush-out’ with a passive aggressive b*llsh*t answer – that’s your right.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:47 amSo is Ted Haggard now a ‘liberal’ puss?
March 4th, 2007 at 12:47 amThat’s a nice goal – I like it ;) But those that are claiming to be on the higher ground seem to be less clear on this point than I am – another irony.
You mean Value voters?
March 4th, 2007 at 12:48 amAnd meanwhile, the NeoCons over at the Post and at other NEO blogs are watching this board like a hawk and watching you all fight amongst the trolls.
And enjoying it I might add!
Everybody take 15 minutes out and breathe deeply and just … forget about it!
People are DYING while these trolls are being entertained.
That just isn’t right. Please kindly refrain from addressing these trolls NO MATTER WHAT they say!
March 4th, 2007 at 12:50 amBut those that are claiming to be on the higher ground seem to be less clear on this point than I am – another irony.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus —
If that is so, let them be, becuz you pointing out the fact that that´s an irony just put yourself, maybe unwillingly, on a tacitly claimed higher ground. ;)
March 4th, 2007 at 12:53 amHow so do people claim Jesus and his words, claim moral majority then denegrate themselves with such foul speak?
How the heck does that work?
March 4th, 2007 at 12:55 am“If that is so, let them be, becuz you pointing out the fact that that´s an irony just put yourself, maybe unwillingly, on a tacitly claimed higher ground. ;)
Comment by Juan C”
Zooey said you were a brilliant one.
Farewell, ThinkProgress.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:57 amAnd meanwhile, the NeoCons over at the Post and at other NEO blogs are watching this board like a hawk and watching you all fight amongst the trolls.
And enjoying it I might add!
Everybody take 15 minutes out and breathe deeply and just … forget about it!
People are DYING while these trolls are being entertained.
That just isn’t right. Please kindly refrain from addressing these trolls NO MATTER WHAT they say!
March 4th, 2007 at 12:59 amI find it hard to believe that any living person honestly finds any comment vulgar regarding the dishonest, money-grubbing, remorseless, heartless Cheney (and not to mention more vulgar in language and action than anyone here).
I don’t recall anyone here being repsonsible for deaths of 100 M innocents for the purpose of war profiteering.
Now that’s vulgar, if not G*Damned treasonous!
March 4th, 2007 at 12:59 amZooey said you were a brilliant one.
Comment by Clair Voyant
Oh, she was just being nice. She lied. She was just describing herself without knowing. :]
March 4th, 2007 at 1:05 amAnd meanwhile, the NeoCons over at the Post and at other NEO blogs are watching this board like a hawk and watching you all fight amongst the trolls.
And enjoying it I might add!
Let them, for I speak truth, and it is the foul mouthed ones whom have done wrongly in the eyes of the Lord, son of God.
For if you have ever seen him you would know that in him is no darkness and that he is like, but unlike man.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:06 amOh ye whom watch, know that ye are watched.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:08 amComment by rachel “the bitch” kinnardi
Rachel you are not a bitch, why do you say such?
March 4th, 2007 at 1:09 amAnd meanwhile, the NeoCons over at the Post and at other NEO blogs are watching this board like a hawk and watching you all fight amongst the trolls.
Fight? Not fighting, they are looking for chinks in Gods armour, they will be sorely dissapointed.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:11 amIf that is so, let them be, becuz you pointing out the fact that that´s an irony just put yourself, maybe unwillingly, on a tacitly claimed higher ground. ;) Comment by Juan C — March 4, 2007 @ 12:53 am
Maybe so, but I wasn’t the one preaching moral superiority, only informing others that if they wish to preach that – they better understand what they preach.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:27 amLet them, for I speak truth, and it is the foul mouthed ones whom have done wrongly in the eyes of the Lord, son of God.
For if you have ever seen him you would know that in him is no darkness and that he is like, but unlike man.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 1:06 am
It’s they hypocrites, the fools and the murderers that do wrongly. What you believe about your ‘lord’ certainly categorizes where you fit in the spectrum. So now you preach that someone that uses foul language is ‘evil’? Yeah, that’s not f’d up Tipper.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:29 amZooey said you were a brilliant one.
Farewell, ThinkProgress.
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 4, 2007 @ 12:57 am
He is. The same can’t be said of you – if tonight is a demonstration.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:30 amSo now you preach that someone that uses foul language is ‘evil’? Yeah, that’s not f’d up Tipper.
I never said evil, I said done wrongly.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:35 amSo now you preach that someone that uses foul language is ‘evil’? Yeah, that’s not f’d up Tipper
for instance, if I called you a drug addict, I have judged you and accused you of things. It is not evil, people do it all the time, judge one another, as you do with the word ‘c*nt’.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:38 amNow, V V show me where I have judged you.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:39 amOff topic, sorry…Common dreams. org…….U.S. to build new H bomb…And so we are going where.?….Blessings
March 4th, 2007 at 1:53 amI never said evil, I said done wrongly.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 1:35 am
That’s what evil means – fool.
Now, V V show me where I have judged you.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 1:39 am
Where you claimed foul language was ‘evil’.
for instance, if I called you a drug addict, I have judged you and accused you of things. It is not evil, people do it all the time, judge one another, as you do with the word ‘c*nt’. Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 1:38 am
Actually that’s a ’smear’, as you have no basis to form that accusation on. Whereas when a troll posts something ‘foul’ in its nature – that does in fact ‘prove’ they’re a c*nt.
Before you lecture others on the evil of ‘judging’, you should refrain from doing it – hypocrite.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:56 amBush is evil and must be removed! At least the deaths and chaos in Iraq are helping us Progressives so we have something to cheer about!
March 4th, 2007 at 2:01 amWhere you claimed foul language was ‘evil’.
Thats all you got? Your opinion of done wrongly?
I did not, as this post proves, claim foul language was evil. I claimed it was accusatory and judgemental, a sin, if you will, but certainly, and you can scroll back, evil.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:04 amYour argument is weak V V and would not hold up under scrutiny.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:05 amcorrection
but certainly, and you can scroll back, *not evil.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:06 amThats all you got? Your opinion of done wrongly?
I did not, as this post proves, claim foul language was evil. I claimed it was accusatory and judgemental, a sin, if you will, but certainly, and you can scroll back, evil.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 2:04 am
Sin is a synonym for evil. Buy a dictionary. In fact according to the definition of ‘Evil’, it’s right there in the first definition.
Buy a clue.
evil: 1 a: morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked
March 4th, 2007 at 2:09 amYour argument is weak V V and would not hold up under scrutiny.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 2:05 am
Your argument is ignorant, and doesn’t hold up to reason or the english language. You sound like Hendler now – what a st*pid comment.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:10 amIt’s nice to see that Washington Post reporters are working hard to monitor liberal blogs.
Now, if only they’d do their jobs as journalists, and actually monitor the WHITE HOUSE, the world would be much better off.
Speaking of blogs using vile attacks against journalists, wasn’t it the right-wing blogs that labelled the Associated Press the “Associated with Terrorists Press”? Don’t right-wing blogs accuse the media of working for our enemies to help defeat our military in Iraq? When it comes to hating the media, nothing holds a candle to right-wing loons.
Even Laura Bush spreads this anti-media message, by saying that Americans only hear about one bad story in Iraq, instead of all the good ones. The First Lady is essentially saying the media is just PRETENDING Iraq isn’t going well. She’s saying the media is painting a false picture which helps our enemies.
But these clowns worry about anonymous posters????
March 4th, 2007 at 2:13 amYour argument is ignorant, and doesn’t hold up to reason or the english language. You sound like Hendler now – what a st*pid comment.
Your argument, against me, includes the word evil, which I never typed.
Be that what you think. It is your opinion, the facts however, what I typed, proves otherwise. =)
March 4th, 2007 at 2:14 amYour argument is ignorant, and doesn’t hold up to reason or the english language
Speaking of english please copy and paste my use of the word evil.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:16 amSpeaking of english please copy and paste my use of the word evil.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 2:16 am
When you described foul language as a ’sin’, a synonym for evil. Take BnF’s misplace advice, and buy a Thesaurus.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:18 amYour argument, against me, includes the word evil, which I never typed.
Be that what you think. It is your opinion, the facts however, what I typed, proves otherwise. =)
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 2:14 am
It’s my opinion, that evil is a synonym for sin? BAAHHAHAA, you’re really st*pid.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:20 amSee V V, I don’t deal in rhetoric, I deal in facts. It is a necessity, for me, to troubleshoot complex problems whereas a lawyer depends on confusing the complex problem.
You deal in rhetoric, I deal in fact
March 4th, 2007 at 2:21 amIt’s my opinion, that evil is a synonym for sin? BAAHHAHAA, you’re really st*pid.
No, thats your interpration of a word.
Interpolate.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:24 amAs I said you deal in BS, I deal in reality.
I think your a weak debator V V.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:26 amt’s my opinion, that evil is a synonym for sin? BAAHHAHAA, you’re really st*pid.
That is you rhetoric, sir, not mine.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:27 amWhen you described foul language as a ’sin’, a synonym for evil. Take BnF’s misplace advice, and buy a Thesaurus.
Actually you have hamstrung your own argument. =)
March 4th, 2007 at 2:29 amGN V V. it was fun while your BS, as a helium baloon, lasted
March 4th, 2007 at 2:32 amSee V V, I don’t deal in rhetoric, I deal in facts. It is a necessity, for me, to troubleshoot complex problems whereas a lawyer depends on confusing the complex problem.
You deal in rhetoric, I deal in fact
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 2:21 am
You think calling something a ’sin’ is dealing in facts? You’re st*pid.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:33 amAs I said you deal in BS, I deal in reality.
I think your a weak debator V V.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 2:26 am
You don’t debate, and there’s no evidence that you think. You do however lack basic language skills that would let you know ’sin’ and ‘evil’ are synonyms.
No, thats your interpration of a word.
Interpolate.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 2:24 am
Actually that’s the definition in the ‘dictionary’, what you posted is your ignorant and wrong interpretation of the word. You also misspelled interpretation – I suggest an electronic dictionary.
GN V V. it was fun while your BS, as a helium baloon, lasted
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 4, 2007 @ 2:32 am
Yeah, whatever fcukhead. You weren’t fun, you were st*pid, and be thankful I had the patience to show you your st*pidity. You’re not worth it, sewer scum.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:37 amYeah, whatever fcukhead. You weren’t fun, you were st*pid, and be thankful I had the patience to show you your st*pidity. You’re not worth it, sewer scum.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus
Besides posting way too much,that statement is just another reason that people are sick of your clutter.What is wrong with you?
March 4th, 2007 at 2:55 amBesides posting way too much,that statement is just another reason that people are sick of your clutter.What is wrong with you?
Comment by troll alert — March 4, 2007 @ 2:55 am
They attacked, I responded. What is wrong with you? Do foul words make you think I’m a *sinner* as well? Or do you just defend every lunatic religious fanatic as a good-american?
March 4th, 2007 at 3:00 amDo foul words make you think I’m a *sinner* as well?
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus
Maybe;but one thing is for sure-your constant clutter makes you a nauseating pest.
March 4th, 2007 at 3:22 amTroll distractions aside, let’s get back to Kurtz. The bloggers (and their commenters) I have read, whom Kurtz insists on labeling as “liberal,” don’t want Cheney dead.
They want him IMPEACHED! If he is found guilty by the Senate, they want him REMOVED FROM OFFICE! Then they want him TRIED IN A COURT OF LAW! If he is found guilty, they want him JAILED! Once he is jailed, they want to FORGET him, just as the prison system forgets minorities and other prisoners deemed “forgettable” by those who label themselves “conservative,” like Limbaugh.
Under the bridge, Trolls! Let’s discuss the issue of this thread—> Kurtz and his fellow bloggers villifying bloggers and commenters they have labeled “liberal” so they feel justified in their villification.
March 4th, 2007 at 3:46 amMaybe;but one thing is for sure-your constant clutter makes you a nauseating pest. Comment by troll alert — March 4, 2007 @ 3:22 am
Another judgmental hypocritical prick crawls out of the woodwork. Tell me, how ‘insightful’ are your remarks, dum bass? Take a punctuation class, and learn some linguistic skills before you accuse others of supplying only clutter. That more accurately describes your snotty remarks.
March 4th, 2007 at 4:50 amBut as Greenwald (and Arianna) pointed out:
Stray, anonymous comments prove nothing. And those who rely on them to make an argument — especially without bothering to make any effort to prove that they are reflective of anything — should be presumed to have no argument at all. That is why they are relying upon such transparently flimsy and misleading methods to make a point.
Stray comments my ass! Those kinds of comments about the vice-president are standard fare on liberal blogs. It’s about time someone called attention to your vicious and hate-filled behavior. You want the right to decry Coulter, yet you yourselves do not decry the vile and hate-filled comments that are posted here every day about the Bush Administration. Hypocrits!
March 4th, 2007 at 7:01 amMaybe Howie Kurtz should head over to free republic and see how they’re reacting to Ann Coulter’s latest vileness – mostly applauding her and agreeing that ‘faggot’ John Edwards had it coming and sharing how much they hate gay people.
Or he could’ve written how they responded when Elizabeth Edwards found out she had breast cancer (HINT: they celebrated).
I guess that wouldn’t fit in the narrative of those “big nasty liberals on the internet” story he’s fabricating..
March 4th, 2007 at 7:17 am… I guess that wouldn’t fit in the narrative of those “big nasty liberals on the internet†story he’s fabricating..
Comment by jen
I guess you’ve forgotten Howard Dean’s and Joe Biden’s anti-Bush and racially inapropriate comments. How about the treatment of the president at Corretta Scott King’s funeral, or the the things said by Rosie O’donnel and every other liberal celebrity when there’s a camera in their faces? An overwhelming amount of hate is spewed from the left on a daily basis, and then you feign outrage when Coulter says something stupid.
March 4th, 2007 at 7:31 amStray comments my ass!
Just because three or four people post more than one or two times in a comment section on many threads does not make those people more than the the large minority.
No matter how much you want it to be true, the comments are stray – and anonymous.
And let’s not forget those of you neocons who pretend to be liberals…
Those kinds of comments about the vice-president are standard fare on liberal blogs.
So, you want us to say what exactly about a criminal Dick Cheney just because he has a title?
Reality isn’t always pretty. Dick Cheney has earned every criticism he’s ever received. It’s not slander – it’s simply stating the obvious. There is a difference. Sorry if you’re not bright enough to understand it. Lay off the television and try reading some non-fiction books by credible authors for a change.
It’s about time someone called attention to your vicious and hate-filled behavior.
Actually, out comments, by and large, are calling out YOUR hateful behaviour. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
For too long the left tolerated the right’s vitriol. Now that we stand up to you bullies, you simply resort to ad hominem attacks – because frankly, it is all you have…
You want the right to decry Coulter, yet you yourselves do not decry the vile and hate-filled comments that are posted here every day about the Bush Administration.
Pointing out Bush’s criminal actions is not vile. It’s his actions that are vile. We’re just pointing them out. It’s what the Founding Father’s demanded from us.
Hypocrits!
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 4, 2007 @ 7:01 am
How do you expect us to take you seriously when you habitually misspell simple words? There’s an ‘e’ at the end of the word.
March 4th, 2007 at 9:15 amImagine if Bill Clinton was found to be funding the terrorists who, we are told, were responsible for knocking down the World Trade Centers and killing 3000 Americans?
Can you possibly imagine the reaction, and justifiably so, from the corporate media. It would be 24/7 coverage with breaking news breaking into the breaking news. They’d be running pieces calling for his immediate impeachment and possibly stoning to death, and justifiably so.
The newspapers would have 5 inch headline stories calling Clinton the worst president and person in the history of the country, and justifiably so. There’d be entire pull-out sections in the newspaper and every column inch would contain explosive adjectives describing Clinton as despicable and villianous.
Every radio station in the country would interrupt programming and go CNN live. Maybe even the FM music stations.
Schools would be instructed to hold special classes so teachers would have time to hold discussions with students to talk about this very very dark day in history.
And all of it would be justified.
Amazingly, this did happen this week, but the President was George W. Bush, not Bill Clinton.
Sy Hersh provided a bombshell story, an 11 on a scale of 10.
In case you missed it…that Bush is “pumping money, a great deal of money, without congressional authority, without any congressional oversight” into “three Sunni jihadist groups…connected to al Qaeda,”
And the media is silent. Dead silent. Bought off, paid for, scared, corrupt media, SILENT MEDIA.
So terribly frighteningly eerily sad for you, me our country and our world.
March 4th, 2007 at 9:15 amI guess you’ve forgotten Howard Dean’s and Joe Biden’s anti-Bush and racially inapropriate comments. How about the treatment of the president at Corretta Scott King’s funeral?
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 4, 2007 @ 7:31 am
Such as what? Be specific. Your generalizations don’t validate anything.
March 4th, 2007 at 9:18 amAnd the media is silent. Dead silent. Bought off, paid for, scared, corrupt media, SILENT MEDIA.
Comment by Larry from C — March 4, 2007 @ 9:15 am
Larry, do you have the link to the story?
Thanks
March 4th, 2007 at 9:26 am#257: Here’s the link to original article:
http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/070305fa_fact_hersh
Here’s the Think Progress Report from Feb. 25:
Hersh: U.S. Funds Being Secretly Funneled To Violent Al Qaeda-Linked Groups
New Yorker columnist Sy Hersh says the “single most explosive†element of his latest article involves an effort by the Bush administration to stem the growth of Shiite influence in the Middle East (specifically the Iranian government and Hezbollah in Lebanon) by funding violent Sunni groups.
Hersh says the U.S. has been “pumping money, a great deal of money, without congressional authority, without any congressional oversight†for covert operations in the Middle East where it wants to “stop the Shiite spread or the Shiite influence.†Hersh says these funds have ended up in the hands of “three Sunni jihadist groups†who are “connected to al Qaeda†but “want to take on Hezbollah.â€
Hersh summed up his scoop in stark terms: “We are simply in a situation where this president is really taking his notion of executive privilege to the absolute limit here, running covert operations, using money that was not authorized by Congress, supporting groups indirectly that are involved with the same people that did 9/11.â€
Friends, we cannot let this story disappear. This is the biggest revelation since the Downing Street Memos. This is the knockout punch for the Bush administration.
March 4th, 2007 at 9:38 amSuch as what? Be specific. Your generalizations don’t validate anything.
Comment by unbelievable
Oh my god. You guys really are oblivious to your own actions.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:10 amHow do you expect us to take you seriously when you habitually misspell simple words? There’s an ‘e’ at the end of the word.
Comment by unbelievable
My simple misspelling is nothing compared to your turning reality on it’s head. How do you expect to be taken seriously when you act like a petty little twit?
March 4th, 2007 at 10:15 amThanks Larry!
March 4th, 2007 at 10:17 amOh my god. You guys really are oblivious to your own actions.
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 4, 2007 @ 10:10 am
If you actually had anything, you’d post it.
But instead, you fake a temper tantrum.
You have nothing. Figures.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:19 amMy simple misspelling is nothing compared to your turning reality on it’s head.
Actually your refusal to correct the way you repeatedly misspell the word demonstrates your lack of contact with reality. Unlike you, when I find I have made a mistake, I make an effort to correct it.
How do you expect to be taken seriously when you act like a petty little twit?
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 4, 2007 @ 10:15 am
Considering I’m not… I am taken seriously by sane people all the time. I bet you cannot say the same…
So – you you actually have anything? Because this childish tantrum throwing doesn’t work well here.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:22 amWe have to beat back the fringe elements of the left, as well as the right.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:35 amWe have to beat back the fringe elements of the left, as well as the right.
Comment by ForTruth — March 4, 2007 @ 10:35 am
I agree… Otherwise they define us.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:41 amSo – you you actually have anything? Because this childish tantrum throwing doesn’t work well here.
Comment by unbelievable
Most sane people don’t stutter when they type, unless you have some special reason for repeating the word you.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:42 amFor the record, I don’t come here to be taken seriously–I have that need fulfilled in every other part of my life. I don’t even care to have a discussion with you. I’ve seen you in action–I could tell you that the sky is blue, and you would disagree with me. Why go through the arduous task of giving specifics and documentation, when you’ll only deny everything I’ve said anyway? I know that you’ll never agree with me, much less validate any of my points. Your narrow-mindedness doesn’t make me any less right. I threw a rock into this cesspool with my comment, just to see what would float to the surface. Congratulations–you’re the turd of the day.
I can tolerate gluten too.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:44 amComment by 20wordsorless — March 4, 2007 @ 10:42 am
you’ve exceeded your 20 word maximum. And you, like Uranus, made the point of the post reporter regarding nasty and vulgar comments.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:50 amyou’ve exceeded your 20 word maximum. And you, like Uranus, made the point of the post reporter regarding nasty and vulgar comments.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
Ah… look what else floated to the surface…
March 4th, 2007 at 10:54 amDirty politics at its best I would say.
http://www.tekno-world.blogspot.com
March 4th, 2007 at 11:02 amMost sane people don’t stutter when they type, unless you have some special reason for repeating the word you.
I see you aren’t smart enough to get that I should have typed ‘do’…
For the record, I don’t come here to be taken seriously–I have that need fulfilled in every other part of my life.
Obviously not…
I don’t even care to have a discussion with you. I’ve seen you in action–I could tell you that the sky is blue, and you would disagree with me.
The sky is blue… But during the day when there isn’t cloud cover. Otherwise is can be black (at night) or grey (cloudy and rainy days). But, people like you never are willing to think outside of absolutes…
But, okay, you admit you aren’t capable of debating a person with critical thinking skills. So you think that substituting nasty insults is an acceptable alternative? Wow – you must really be a miserable person…
Why go through the arduous task of giving specifics and documentation, when you’ll only deny everything I’ve said anyway?
That’s the point of giving specific and evidence – to PROVE your claim. You give me those things and if they are valid, I’ll concede. The problem is that you cannot – or you would have.
I know that you’ll never agree with me, much less validate any of my points.
You can’t know that. Unless you think you’re a god with omniscient powers.
Your narrow-mindedness doesn’t make me any less right.
I used to be a conservative Christian. Obviously, I am both open-minded and willing to change.
Besides, it would have taken you less time to provide the proof that type this temper tantrum diatribe.
I threw a rock into this cesspool with my comment, just to see what would float to the surface. Congratulations–you’re the turd of the day.
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 4, 2007 @ 10:42 am
Actually, you took a crap into a think tank, and the only turd here is you.
March 4th, 2007 at 11:15 amI see you aren’t smart enough to get that I should have typed ‘do’…
Let’s see, when I misspell hypocrite–I shouldn’t be taken seriously, and when you type you twice–I’m not smart enough to know what you mean. I’m definitely smart enough to pick up the theme here sweetheart—the fault never lies with you.
The sky is blue… But during the day when there isn’t cloud cover. Otherwise is can be black (at night) or grey (cloudy and rainy days). But, people like you never are willing to think outside of absolutes…
To borrow your argument, you should have been smart enough to know that I meant the sky is blue on a clear day, and I’m still certain that you would have argued with that.
But, okay, you admit you aren’t capable of debating a person with critical thinking skills. So you think that substituting nasty insults is an acceptable alternative? Wow – you must really be a miserable person…
Interpret my actions anyway you like, I’m sure you believe that you know me better than I know myself–although it does sound like you’re projecting here.
That’s the point of giving specific and evidence – to PROVE your claim. You give me those things and if they are valid, I’ll concede. The problem is that you cannot – or you would have.
Come on! Is it really necessary for me to remind you what Howard Dean has publicly said of the President? Do I really have to remind you of the racial comments said by him and Joe Biden? You honestly can’t remember what happened during Corrisa Scott King’s funeral? And I’m supposed to take you seriously? I’ve seen you reject valid claim after valid claim when they come from a conservative. I’ve seen you reject valid claims from some of your own liberal friends here. In fact I’ve never seen you concede on anything. You behave as if you are the sole arbitor of what is and isn’t valid, and anyone who disagrees with you is dismissed as being incapable of debating a person with critical thinking skills.
Besides, it would have taken you less time to provide the proof that type this temper tantrum diatribe.
Wrong again sweetheart. Like I’ve said, I’ve seen you in action and this really is the quickest way to interact with you. By the way, I’ve been chuckling to myself this entire time. In fact I’m at work today and have been showing this to some of my coworkers. We’re all laughing and making comments amongst ourselves–interesting that you would interpret this as a tantrum or a diatribe. Kind of makes me wonder how great is the scope of things you’ve misinterpreted in your life.
Actually, you took a crap into a think tank, and the only turd here is you.
Think tank? The guys here at work are rolling on the floor now. I’ll give you this sister—it is hard to throw rocks in the cesspool without getting anything on you. I need to go now and clean up.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:05 pmI need to go now and clean up.
Comment by 20wordsorless
And don’t forget the slimetrail you’ve left; clean that up too.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:11 pmWow, this must be the first time ever that newspapers have received correspondence with curse words in it.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:13 pmThink tank? The guys here at work are rolling on the floor now.
They just mopped the floor, and now they’re rolling around on it; won’t the boss be mad?
March 4th, 2007 at 12:14 pmLet’s see, when I misspell hypocrite–I shouldn’t be taken seriously, and when you type you twice–I’m not smart enough to know what you mean. I’m definitely smart enough to pick up the theme here sweetheart—the fault never lies with you.
The difference is that you do not correct yourself and continue to misspell a word after being corrected – many times. That’s a sign of someone who is full of himself.
I admit I’m wrong when I am. Unlike you, I generally think things through BEFORE I say them. Though maybe just thinking was enough. Therefore, I’m not wrong as often as you are, silly boy.
To borrow your argument, you should have been smart enough to know that I meant the sky is blue on a clear day, and I’m still certain that you would have argued with that.
Actually, I was smart enough to know that you weren’t smart enough to know that. It’s why I corrected you. Because you would have said what you meant if you’d meant it.
Interpret my actions anyway you like, I’m sure you believe that you know me better than I know myself–although it does sound like you’re projecting here.
I wasn’t interpreting. I own a dictionary so I don’t have to speculate. You should buy your own.
Your arguments are’t even logical. Projecting? That doesn’t even fit.
Come on! Is it really necessary for me to remind you what Howard Dean has publicly said of the President? Do I really have to remind you of the racial comments said by him and Joe Biden? You honestly can’t remember what happened during Corrisa Scott King’s funeral?
Would have been quicker to type it. Why do you refuse to do so?
You’ve spend hours avoiding doing the very things you’ve insisted is true. If it’s true – the prove it.
I bet you cannot. Or, as usual, you’re too afraid of being shown how wrong you are.
And I’m supposed to take you seriously? I’ve seen you reject valid claim after valid claim when they come from a conservative.
I’ve seen no valid claims from you conervatives. Again, sweetheart, it’s why I became a liberal.
I’ve seen you reject valid claims from some of your own liberal friends here.
Because they weren’t valid. At least I question everything – unlike you. You just tow party line and don’t bother to actually know what you’re talking about.
In fact I’ve never seen you concede on anything.
Because you haven’t seen it, then it’s never happened? Talk about self-centered!
Or are you saying you have no life, so you’re always here and read every thread every day?
Either way – you’re pathetic. Get a life. It might help with your need to come here and attack people… Nah….
You behave as if you are the sole arbitor of what is and isn’t valid, and anyone who disagrees with you is dismissed as being incapable of debating a person with critical thinking skills.
Not at all. I’ve had very valid discussions with people with whom I disagree – unlike you. You just admitted that you aren’t capable, so you sling feces at people.
Prove me wrong and make a valid argument instead of hurling things at me that are obviously things that hurt your feelings. LOL
Wrong again sweetheart.
Actually, I was right again, and that’s what upsets you so much… LOL. You’re so silly.
Like I’ve said, I’ve seen you in action and this really is the quickest way to interact with you. By the way, I’ve been chuckling to myself this entire time. In fact I’m at work today and have been showing this to some of my coworkers. We’re all laughing and making comments amongst ourselves–interesting that you would interpret this as a tantrum or a diatribe. Kind of makes me wonder how great is the scope of things you’ve misinterpreted in your life.
You are truly sad if this is true. I hope you’ll seek medical help – and get a life.
People who show up to be jerks are not mentally stable. You know that. And the only way to feel better about it is by pretending that people smarter than you are ‘bad’. LOL
Think tank? The guys here at work are rolling on the floor now. I’ll give you this sister—it is hard to throw rocks in the cesspool without getting anything on you. I need to go now and clean up.
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 4, 2007 @ 12:05 pm
Just because you aren’t smart enough to get it…
Besides, a real intellectual would have actually said something by now. And yet, you’ve STILL said nothing.
Just keep validating your incompetence. It’s so easy to push your buttons and get you to throw your temper tantrums, sweetheart. LOL
March 4th, 2007 at 12:29 pmPeople who show up to be jerks are not mentally stable. You know that. And the only way to feel better about it is by pretending that people smarter than you are ‘bad’. LOL
Comment by unbelievable
There is an old sayin’:
March 4th, 2007 at 1:06 pm“It takes one to know one.”.
There is an old sayin’:
“It takes one to know one.â€.
Comment by just sayin’ — March 4, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
Then you’re saying that you can spot a mentally unstable jerk because you are one… Okay. Then you can also own up to this one:
“A wise man speaks when he has something to say…a fool speaks just to say something.”
Shoo now.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:15 pm…a fool speaks just to say something.â€
Comment by unbelievable
I guess that’s why you’re always so loquacious.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:31 pmI guess that’s why you’re always so loquacious.
Comment by just sayin’ — March 4, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
It’s only funny if there’s an ounce of truth to it. You know you hate me because I not only contribute to these discussions, but because I don’t to post under multiple pseudonyms for the sake of stating my views…
A liberal troll is still a troll… (you).
March 4th, 2007 at 1:39 pm…, but because I don’t [to] post under multiple pseudonyms…
Comment by unbelievable
Sure you don’t.
Next thing you’ll tell us is this wasn’t you on the Coulter thread:
…Comment by Enough Already – March 2,2007 @ 9:31 pm
You’re a slick one alright,but busted none the less.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:57 pmThe guys here at work are rolling on the floor now.
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 4, 2007 @ 12:05 pm
Proof positive we’re dealing with a paid troll. Where else can you get work posting bullsh!t on a blog site while your co-workers look over your shoulder sharing with each other.
How much do they pay you 20turdsorless?? Do you work directly for the Repugniscums, the White House, Fux nOoze? Do you get paid money? Or do you take it out in trade? How many little boys do you get to moleste for an 8 hour day over in troll land? Would you earn more money/boys if you had graduated high school? Just asking…
March 4th, 2007 at 3:36 pmAh Yes, ACRIMONY–The Soul of the Blogosphere! Time to start FLINGING THE INVECTIVE UPON the repugnant-repub rightwingnut cranks and their mainstream media supporters like Mistah Kurtz!!!!!
March 4th, 2007 at 4:21 pmIn the words of the late, great Miss Bette Davis from ALL ABOUT EVE:
“FASTEN YOUR SEATBELTS, IT’S GOING TO BE A BUMPY NIGHT!”
Sure you don’t.
Next thing you’ll tell us is this wasn’t you on the Coulter thread:
…Comment by Enough Already – March 2,2007 @ 9:31 pm
You have to believe that to get off, I know, but I have no problems calling a spade a spade as myself. And I’ve proven that…
But this isn’t about me – it’s about YOU and how you have this alternate persona. It makes you a HYPOCRITE to even accuse anyone else of doing the same thing… Which is simply you projecting…
You’re a slick one alright,but busted none the less.
Comment by just sayin’ — March 4, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
Nonsense, in case you haven’t noticed – I don’t post on Friday nights. Unlike you, I have a life and friends…
March 4th, 2007 at 4:31 pm[...] Post Reporter: ‘We Are Not Spared’ The ‘Nasty, Vulgar E-Mail’ From ‘Liberal Blog’ Reader… [...]
March 4th, 2007 at 4:43 pmhttp://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm
George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography — by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin
————————————————————–
I encourage everyone to download and read this free book about George HW Bush. It explains how George Junior grew up as well as all of his misgivings then and now.
It is available in .htm and .zip format
EVERY dirty little secret is revealed. It is a GREAT recent history text.
March 4th, 2007 at 6:02 pmyou’ve exceeded your 20 word maximum. And you, like Uranus, made the point of the post reporter regarding nasty and vulgar comments. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 4, 2007 @ 10:50 am
Oh grow up. We live in a world with ‘real’ nastiness, including bigoted comments. If you think a little ‘foul’ language is nasty and vulgar, compared to the n-word or the f-word that Coulter used to denigrate an entire segment of the population (not just one person), then you’re a fool. It’s people like you (and Tipper) that really need to pull your heads out of your *sses and figure out what’s real or not.
And if you think a foul word proves the Conservatives right, then you might remember to go – Cheney yourself while you remind them of their hypocrisy? Ok skippy?
March 4th, 2007 at 6:08 pmThe lefty blogs threaten to empower the common folks, give them a voice, aid in attempting the actual practice of democracy. The Establishment can’t allow this medium to evolve much further (net neutrality battle)….truth in the people’s hands can really hurt profits.
Comment by Jay #57
Well put…
March 4th, 2007 at 6:41 pmComment by DeCon #68 — March 3, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
Hey DeCon…
…I forwarded your link to Howie…
…I’m sure he’ll appreciate it…
March 4th, 2007 at 6:52 pmI think Valium Venus is Mighty Aphromite’s new incarnation. S/he (it) has a tendecey to call people -ette’s and bandies about simply legal terminology like it was pretendig to be a lawyer…
back on subject, it amuses me to no end to read these swiftboating, purple heart band aid wearing sh!theads whining and crying about “nasty emails”…ooohh booo hoooo. H-I-P-O-C-R-I-T-E. this from people who have actively supported a party who uses every mean, nasty, dirty, below the belt trick to try and stay in power… they support policies which cause the death, injury, and suffering of hundreds of thousands of people and they whine about “mean emails”..ooohh
what they really hate is the free exchange of infortmation they cant buy and therefore can’t control…
March 4th, 2007 at 9:53 pmProof positive we’re dealing with a paid troll. Where else can you get work posting bullsh!t on a blog site while your co-workers look over your shoulder sharing with each other.
How much do they pay you 20turdsorless?? Do you work directly for the Repugniscums, the White House, Fux nOoze? Do you get paid money? Or do you take it out in trade? How many little boys do you get to moleste for an 8 hour day over in troll land? Would you earn more money/boys if you had graduated high school? Just asking…
Comment by dixie blood
Daggum you dunnit dixie! You done figured it out!…… Not! Proof positive that generations of Southern inbreeding have produced a peculiar race of people. You can survive everything being cooked in bacon grease, and you can make illogical deductions.
If you really must know the answer is no, I am not a paid troll. I work for a defense contractor–building and testing stuff that I can’t talk about (not that you’d understand anyway). It’s not unusual for us to be called into work on a Sunday. Even though you’re not smart enough to spell molest, you might understand the concept of 1. a demanding customer. 2. The notorious delays of obtaining parts in the defense industry, and 3. The decisions of managers who don’t want to appear as if they are the reasons for any holdups. My coworkers and I were called in on Sunday because we were supposed to receive some desperately needed hardware. As it turned out the parts never showed, and we had a lot of down time. You’re not the first to think that I’m a paid troll. I have no idea where that notion even comes from. I do know that paranoia and conspiracy theories seem to go hand in hand with liberalism—so there you go.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:30 am#114
“The title of your link, and your posts are inaccurate and a smear.”
I suggest you look at the video….little man.
March 5th, 2007 at 12:54 pm#115
You obivously don’t know who Bill Maher is or what he said.
March 5th, 2007 at 12:54 pm#118
“I don’t Maher nor mimick him, he speaks for himself and not for me.”
That’s good.
“Should I think you are hateful, like Coulter, for she claims your political ideology?”
She is just like al Qaeda trying to hijack Islam…same analogy. She doesn’t speak for my ideology.
March 5th, 2007 at 12:58 pmHang on one minute, didn’t a Conservative Radio host not that long ago, say that American’s should be taking pot shots at Mexicans as they cross the border?
Anyway, back to the argument currently going…
20wordsorless
Actually, liberalism tends away from conspiracy thinking. You see, we don’t believe there is this wicked conspiracy of enviromental scientists who are blowing up ice sheets to fake global warming, we don’t believe in a conspiracy theory where an all knowing God faked dinosaurs as part of some sort of obscure test of faith, and we don’t believe in conspiracies which claim that there is some sort of all powerful liberal media.
We also don’t believe in some sort of semi-mystical invisible hand directing the economy.
This is because we think critically and for ourselves. We take in data, we process it, and we react to it.
Not every leftwinger is bright, not every leftwinger is correct about everything, and not all leftwingers agree. We are human, and our first reactions are very human, when presented with people who think lying is an apropriate response to a valid point, we get angry.
When people demonise everything to the left of Attila the Hun, we get angry. When people claim that we stand for something which we maybe considered a bit silly ten years ago, we get downright pissed off.
Liberalism is all about doing what works, and not doing what doesn’t. Cutting taxes to bring in higher revenues – doesn’t work. Going to war with people who are sworn enemies with the guy who attacked you, doesn’t work. Heck, war in general is a bit of an iffy proposition.
Relying on people whose interests are best served by ignoring a problem, to solve that problem doesn’t work. Nor does relying on the same people who got you into a mess to get you out of it – work.
And yes, we do vent here. We vent here, because frankly after six bloody years of you wankers calling anybody asking any questions of your lord and master’s bloody policies traitors, we feel a little bit annoyed. You bastards went and ran a smear campaign against a dead soldier’s mother because she said something you didn’t like. You smeared her, you even brought up former communist ties, as if that had anything to do with her kid being dead.
When some pop-stars said something you didn’t like you damned them and told them to “Shut up and sing.”
And when your spokemen, your pundits, the guys who give you your opinions started talking about how the leftwing “Hates America” in those words, you stood there grinning.
You grinned as everything which made America America, leading moral country in the world, got shat on by your president, and Bush is not the true president of America.
If Bush was the true president of America, America wouldn’t still be turning to Clinton, to Gore, to Hillary every time something went wrong. They would turn to Bush and ask him why the hell 3000 people died on 9/11.
He is your president, you will defend him to the death, but he is the president of leftwing America, because ultimately, when Bush screws up it isn’t the rightwing that stands up and says anything. You wankers, you claim to be the party of personal responsibility, yet you cut taxes, start wars and then sneer at anybody pointing out the deficit.
You break oaths. You are oath breakers. When those treaties got signed, when the NPT got signed, it was an oath taken on the behalf of all of America, but of course, oaths are only important so long as they are convenient, and it was much more convenient to sell nuclear technology to the northern enemy of your questionable ally Pakistan, then to keep your word.
You are cowards. You will abandon every single precept you once held sacred, be it freedom of speech or being anti-torture, because you are afraid that one day you might die at the hands of a terrorist. You will abandon your principles of truth and justice, because you are afraid of that random, unknown terrorist.
You are immoral. You will deny gays marriage, and then in the next breath, slam them for having multiple partners. You will champion morality only so long as it doesn’t effect you, but the second someone takes a moral stand which you think might effect you at some point? You will fight against them. This is the truth about global climate change, you know the left is right on this issue, but to you whingers? Better the profit now and damn the future.
And when you cast insults into our teeth, when you lie, when you seek to destroy us because we were right, and when we fight back? You oathbreaking immoral cowards then turn around and whine like little babies at the fact that those of us who do fight for good, who are not about to compromise on that, aren’t terribly nice about it.
Frankly, I am a leftwinger, over the last six years I have seen a president wreck his country’s world standing, divide his people as never before, I have seen him take a economy that was in surplus and give it record breaking deficits. I have seen the aftermath of Katrina, I have seen the aftermath of 9/11. If have seen a president who has kept the wounds of that day open for his own personal gain.
And frankly, I see, that right here, right now, I don’t have the time nor the patience to play nice.
March 5th, 2007 at 3:00 pm#301
“And frankly, I see, that right here, right now, I don’t have the time nor the patience to play nice.”
Too bad all you do is talk.
March 5th, 2007 at 10:40 pm#262
Dean:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_02/005673.php
Biden:
http://www.aim.org/aim_column/5222_0_3_0_C/
March 5th, 2007 at 10:51 pmI work for a defense contractor–building and testing stuff that I can’t talk about (not that you’d understand anyway).
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 5, 2007 @ 8:30 am
So your employer, who holds government contracts, allows its assets (company computer) to be used to promote the policies and political positions of the Repugniscum party. How much of the taxpayers money is being wasted on this effort? How much will we bilked out of for your day of ph*cking off on Sunday? If I knew who you worked for I would be asking for some serious accoutability here. I don’t want my money paying for your ph*cked up opinions. Now I know you are twice as useless as a regular troll.
March 6th, 2007 at 4:24 amSo your employer, who holds government contracts, allows its assets (company computer) to be used to promote the policies and political positions of the Repugniscum party. How much of the taxpayers money is being wasted on this effort? How much will we bilked out of for your day of ph*cking off on Sunday? If I knew who you worked for I would be asking for some serious accoutability here. I don’t want my money paying for your ph*cked up opinions. Now I know you are twice as useless as a regular troll.
Comment by dixie blood
Give it a rest loser. You mean to tell me that you believe the regulars here never use their computer at work to post here? Or is it that many of you just don’t have a job and are using your conservative parents’ computer to propagate your left wing liberal trash. Do you expect me to believe that you libs don’t read the news, or check your bank account, or whatever, from your computer at work? That you never send a joke or a personal email from that computer as well? Where do you draw the line Mr. Ethics? Everything is permissable except posting an opinion on a ph*cked up liberal blog?
While you may call my day at work ph*cking off, I assure you that wasn’t by my choice. Some day when you get a job, and it happens to be in a technical field, you might begin to understand how things work in this industry. I don’t create part shortages, I didn’t promise any unrealistic ship dates, I didn’t ask to come in on Sunday to see if our parts arrived. I didn’t instruct our quality department to put everything on hold. When that happens, I can’t legally work on anything. AND just so you can feel better about the whole thing, my time was not charged to the program, it was charged to a department overhead charge number. If at some point the company’s accounting department bills the customer for my overhead charges, then that’s not my fault either.
Go ahead, contact any aerospace company or any known defense contractor. Maybe you’ll get lucky and get the one I work for, but it doesn’t matter, because they all operate the same. Tell them that the highly principled dixie blood demands some serious accountability—I’m sure at the mere mention of your name the industry will be reformed.
In case you haven’t noticed, I never claimed that my views reflect the views of my employer. You’re making an issue out of something that shouldn’t even concern you. If I knew your parents, I’d suggest that they’d restrict your internet access, and make you go play outside.
March 6th, 2007 at 9:43 amGive it a rest loser. You mean to tell me that you believe the regulars here never use their computer at work to post here? Or is it that many of you just don’t have a job and are using your conservative parents’ computer to propagate your left wing liberal trash. Do you expect me to believe that you libs don’t read the news, or check your bank account, or whatever, from your computer at work? That you never send a joke or a personal email from that computer as well? Where do you draw the line Mr. Ethics? Everything is permissable except posting an opinion on a ph*cked up liberal blog?
While you may call my day at work ph*cking off, I assure you that wasn’t by my choice. Some day when you get a job, and it happens to be in a technical field, you might begin to understand how things work in this industry. I don’t create part shortages, I didn’t promise any unrealistic ship dates, I didn’t ask to come in on Sunday to see if our parts arrived. I didn’t instruct our quality department to put everything on hold. When that happens, I can’t legally work on anything. AND just so you can feel better about the whole thing, my time was not charged to the program, it was charged to a department overhead charge number. If at some point the company’s accounting department bills the customer for my overhead charges, then that’s not my fault either.
Go ahead, contact any aerospace company or any known defense contractor. Maybe you’ll get lucky and get the one I work for, but it doesn’t matter, because they all operate the same. Tell them that the highly principled dixie blood demands some serious accountability—I’m sure at the mere mention of your name the industry will be reformed.
In case you haven’t noticed, I never claimed that my views reflect the views of my employer. You’re making an issue out of something that shouldn’t even concern you. If I knew your parents, I’d suggest that they’d restrict your internet access, and make you go play outside.
Comment by 20wordsorless — March 6, 2007 @ 9:43 am
Lots of words to defend your criminal activity on behalf of your employer!!!
Lawyer up a$$wipe!!!!
March 6th, 2007 at 7:57 pm