Comments on: Sampson Lied Under Oath: ‘Had In Mind’ Plan To Replace U.S. Attorneys With Loyal Bushies http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/ Thu, 26 Nov 2009 09:55:26 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Matchoo http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-4/#comment-3760329 Matchoo Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:40:35 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3760329 Did you see this clip? It's Chuck Shumer after the hearings yesterday. It makes me wonder if the White House's rationale for asking Gonzales to resign might switch from saving face, which is impossible at this point, to covering their asses on seeing this move any further. The clip is here: http://snuffmonkey.com/gonzales Did you see this clip? It’s Chuck Shumer after the hearings yesterday. It makes me wonder if the White House’s rationale for asking Gonzales to resign might switch from saving face, which is impossible at this point, to covering their asses on seeing this move any further. The clip is here:

http://snuffmonkey.com/gonzales

]]> By: Bill http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-4/#comment-3747851 Bill Sun, 15 Apr 2007 14:30:33 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3747851 Jake, why don't your and your many enemies here do something good for the country; like get a job or do something worth while with your time instead of bantering back and forth like a couple of Jr. High Boys! Jake, why don’t your and your many enemies here do something good for the country; like get a job or do something worth while with your time instead of bantering back and forth like a couple of Jr. High Boys!

]]> By: Jake http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-4/#comment-3747845 Jake Sun, 15 Apr 2007 14:26:41 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3747845 wieland: Assuming I am the Anti-Christ, you'd better care because the return of the REAL Christ can't be that far away. For the record, however, I am registered Indpendent and have not engaged in any vitriol and name-calling either. wieland:

Assuming I am the Anti-Christ, you’d better care because the return of the REAL Christ can’t be that far away. For the record, however, I am registered Indpendent and have not engaged in any vitriol and name-calling either.

]]> By: wieland http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-4/#comment-3737488 wieland Sun, 15 Apr 2007 03:20:36 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3737488 Assuming that Jake is the anti-Christ, should we care? The silliness of all these back and forth posts must be the reason that, for example, Talking Points Memo doesn't have comments. What I am seeing here is are apparent Democrats resorting to the same type vitriol and name-calling that I thought our side refuses to engage in. Granted I have been away from blogs since the election, but has discourse really collapsed so quickly? What happened to Rule#1 - don't feed the troll? Assuming that Jake is the anti-Christ, should we care? The silliness of all these back and forth posts must be the reason that, for example, Talking Points Memo doesn’t have comments. What I am seeing here is are apparent Democrats resorting to the same type vitriol and name-calling that I thought our side refuses to engage in. Granted I have been away from blogs since the election, but has discourse really collapsed so quickly? What happened to Rule#1 – don’t feed the troll?

]]> By: truth fairy http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-4/#comment-3722230 truth fairy Sat, 14 Apr 2007 12:00:18 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3722230 ann coulter with a different name ann coulter with a different name

]]> By: Synaptic Stew » Blog Archive » Sampson Lied Under Oath: ‘Had In Mind’ Plan To Replace U.S. Attorneys With Loyal Bushies http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-4/#comment-3722101 Synaptic Stew » Blog Archive » Sampson Lied Under Oath: ‘Had In Mind’ Plan To Replace U.S. Attorneys With Loyal Bushies Sat, 14 Apr 2007 11:50:38 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3722101 [...] Read more  [...] [...] Read more  [...]

]]> By: old hack http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3717005 old hack Sat, 14 Apr 2007 07:19:23 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3717005 she does have alot of chin. you're right. compared to who shes surrounded by (sampson, gonzales, rove, cheney) I contend shes attractive. They probly act like Ward towards June Cleaver towards her too. "This is where we send the secret emails. shhh" she does have alot of chin. you’re right. compared to who shes surrounded by (sampson, gonzales, rove, cheney) I contend shes attractive. They probly act like Ward towards June Cleaver towards her too. “This is where we send the secret emails. shhh”

]]> By: ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3716704 ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus Sat, 14 Apr 2007 07:04:17 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3716704 <em>because that language is reprehensible. This is why TP really needs to crack down on name-jackers. They confuse the debates and leave everyone wondering who is really saying what… Comment by Exley — April 14, 2007 @ 2:16 am</em> That was not a name jacking, because he's disgustingly prissy pointing out *immediately* when he's name jacked. He's a lying terrorist piece of unamerican sh*t! because that language is reprehensible.
This is why TP really needs to crack down on name-jackers. They confuse the debates and leave everyone wondering who is really saying what…
Comment by Exley — April 14, 2007 @ 2:16 am

That was not a name jacking, because he’s disgustingly prissy pointing out *immediately* when he’s name jacked. He’s a lying terrorist piece of unamerican sh*t!

]]> By: ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3716682 ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus Sat, 14 Apr 2007 07:03:21 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3716682 Exley, look carefully. Jake did several followup posts on this topic, clarifying who exactly should die. He wasn't name Jake'd, it was him. He's a disgusting lying piece of sh*t. Exley, look carefully. Jake did several followup posts on this topic, clarifying who exactly should die. He wasn’t name Jake’d, it was him.

He’s a disgusting lying piece of sh*t.

]]> By: Jake http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715911 Jake Sat, 14 Apr 2007 06:22:46 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715911 Yes. Yes.

]]> By: Exley http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715802 Exley Sat, 14 Apr 2007 06:16:55 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715802 #140, So, Jake, are you saying that this comment: <em>"For the record, I do not want any “innocents” killed when we bomb the New York Times building — just the traitorous editors and reporters. Comment by Jake — April 13, 2007 @ 3:58 pm"</em> was made by a name-jacker???? If so, I certainly hope that THIS was also a name-jacker: <em>"Now you are going to crucify all these sweet young girls but you thought what Clinton did with that Jew tramp was just fine! Who’s the hypocrite now? Comment by Jake — April 13, 2007 @ 8:48 pm"</em> because that language is reprehensible. This is why TP really needs to crack down on name-jackers. They confuse the debates and leave everyone wondering who is really saying what... #140,

So, Jake, are you saying that this comment:

“For the record, I do not want any “innocents” killed when we bomb the New York Times building — just the traitorous editors and reporters.

Comment by Jake — April 13, 2007 @ 3:58 pm”

was made by a name-jacker????

If so, I certainly hope that THIS was also a name-jacker:

“Now you are going to crucify all these sweet young girls but you thought what Clinton did with that Jew tramp was just fine! Who’s the hypocrite now?

Comment by Jake — April 13, 2007 @ 8:48 pm”

because that language is reprehensible.

This is why TP really needs to crack down on name-jackers. They confuse the debates and leave everyone wondering who is really saying what…

]]> By: Jake http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715785 Jake Sat, 14 Apr 2007 06:16:05 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715785 At least no one can say I only post in 8-hour shifts anymore ; ) At least no one can say I only post in 8-hour shifts anymore ; )

]]> By: Jake http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715727 Jake Sat, 14 Apr 2007 06:13:40 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715727 If anyone NOT on the “Ignore List” has a question how Truman could be a “peacemaker” given his decision to drop two A-bombs, let me know. I think anyone from the Greatest Generation would agree with me, but I'm always open to a reasonable counter-argument. If anyone NOT on the “Ignore List” has a question how Truman could be a “peacemaker” given his decision to drop two A-bombs, let me know. I think anyone from the Greatest Generation would agree with me, but I’m always open to a reasonable counter-argument.

]]> By: JPark http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715553 JPark Sat, 14 Apr 2007 06:04:51 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715553 I thought my Steve Buscemi comments were funny but every time Jake posts they become less funny and more disturbing. I thought my Steve Buscemi comments were funny but every time Jake posts they become less funny and more disturbing.

]]> By: JPark http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715478 JPark Sat, 14 Apr 2007 06:01:47 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715478 #139 You really are fricking crazy. #139 You really are fricking crazy.

]]> By: Exley http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715438 Exley Sat, 14 Apr 2007 05:58:01 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715438 VVGFU, Like I said, I am not Jake's or anyone else's defender nor was my posting about the end of the Korean War intended to indicate such. I just now saw his comments about The New York Times. If those are his comments, they are pretty darn indefensible (I say "if" because there is always the possibility that such extreme statements come from a name-jacker looking to discredit someone). So, again, despite your rather strong comments in posting #132, I will take you at your word that your misstatement about the end of the Korean War was some type of rhetorical "trap" for Jake. VVGFU,

Like I said, I am not Jake’s or anyone else’s defender nor was my posting about the end of the Korean War intended to indicate such. I just now saw his comments about The New York Times. If those are his comments, they are pretty darn indefensible (I say “if” because there is always the possibility that such extreme statements come from a name-jacker looking to discredit someone).

So, again, despite your rather strong comments in posting #132, I will take you at your word that your misstatement about the end of the Korean War was some type of rhetorical “trap” for Jake.

]]> By: Jake http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715437 Jake Sat, 14 Apr 2007 05:57:14 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715437 P.S. -- I also don't want to blow up the New York Times. P.S. — I also don’t want to blow up the New York Times.

]]> By: Jake http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3715394 Jake Sat, 14 Apr 2007 05:56:05 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3715394 Exley: I have looked at the posts in question -- since both JPark and VVGFU are on the "Ignore List" I hadn't caught that error -- my point about Truman being a "peacemaker" to other posters NOT on the "Ignore List" was actually directed at his decision to drop two A-bombs to end WWII. I was in the Army in Korea, and then Japan, until Ike took over -- so much for them taunting or baiting me -- thanks for your input. Exley:

I have looked at the posts in question — since both JPark and VVGFU are on the “Ignore List” I hadn’t caught that error — my point about Truman being a “peacemaker” to other posters NOT on the “Ignore List” was actually directed at his decision to drop two A-bombs to end WWII. I was in the Army in Korea, and then Japan, until Ike took over — so much for them taunting or baiting me — thanks for your input.

]]> By: Karim http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3714793 Karim Sat, 14 Apr 2007 05:51:38 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3714793 Worst. Administration. Ever. Worst. Administration. Ever.

]]> By: ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/comment-page-3/#comment-3714681 ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus Sat, 14 Apr 2007 05:47:57 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/rachel-brand/#comment-3714681 <em>Okay…I’ll take you at your word. Like I said to JPark, I have no stake in the conflict between you and Jake. I just saw a historical error and wanted to correct it. Comment by Exley — April 14, 2007 @ 1:42 am</em> You live in the New York are, and Jake wants to blow up the New York Times. I would think you would have a stake in it. But if you don't care about wingnuts calling for domestic terrorism in NYC again, hey, I guess you don't have a stake in it. And I have no problem you pointed out the historical 'error', I prefer some con like you points it out actually. It just helps prove the point that Jake is a Fake. Okay…I’ll take you at your word. Like I said to JPark, I have no stake in the conflict between you and Jake. I just saw a historical error and wanted to correct it. Comment by Exley — April 14, 2007 @ 1:42 am

You live in the New York are, and Jake wants to blow up the New York Times. I would think you would have a stake in it. But if you don’t care about wingnuts calling for domestic terrorism in NYC again, hey, I guess you don’t have a stake in it.

And I have no problem you pointed out the historical ‘error’, I prefer some con like you points it out actually. It just helps prove the point that Jake is a Fake.

]]>