Think Progress

Ahmadinejad scrubs gay denial from speech.

During his speech at Columbia University on Monday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad outlandishly denied the existence of homosexuality in Iran, saying “In Iran, we don’t have homosexuals like in your country. We don’t have that in our country.” That section of his speech, however, is not included in the transcript posted on Ahmadinejad’s official website.



91 Responses to “Ahmadinejad scrubs gay denial from speech.”

  1. rastaman says:

    looks like he’s learned something from Bush et al.


  2. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    Just what I was about to say, #1 & 2…


  3. Nevar says:

    Books are being written filled with the junk George spouts that never make it to the WH official website…


  4. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Sorry, Mahmoud. You said it…you can’t unsay it.


  5. katy says:

    i still think it was a “lost in translation” gaff…

    maybe he meant that iran’s gay community is not as open
    as ours…
    according to the translator, he did say:
    “…we dont have homosexuals like in your country. We don’t have that in our country. In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon.”

    just sayin’…
    .


  6. TripMaster Monkey says:

    katy sez:

    Comment by katy — September 26, 2007 @ 12:22 pm

    If this was the case, why didn’t Ahmadinejad clarify? He, of all people, should know better than to fire off a gaffe like that.

    Also, why was the phrase scrubbed from the transcript, instead of merely being clarified after the fact?


  7. Wayne says:

    i still think it was a “lost in translation” gaff…
    Comment by katy — September 26, 2007 @ 12:22 pm

    It wasn’t, Katy.
    The guy is as much a goofball as Chimpy McFlightsuit.


  8. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    The guy is as much a goofball as Chimpy McFlightsuit.

    Comment by Wayne — September 26, 2007 @ 12:29 pm

    And that’s the point of free speech. Ahmadinejad really kind of made a fool of himself up there, and a whole lot more people know that now than if he hadn’t been allowed to say what he wanted.

    Sometimes, ya gotta trust people to get it right. Ya don’t need to tell ‘em Ahmadinejad is a nut.

    BTW, Chimpy McFlightsuit? How about Commander Codpiece???


  9. Keltoi says:

    If this was the case, why didn’t Ahmadinejad clarify? He, of all people, should know better than to fire off a gaffe like that.
    Also, why was the phrase scrubbed from the transcript, instead of merely being clarified after the fact?
    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26

    It was scrubbed precisely because it WAS a gaffe. Expecting honesty from Achmandinijad is a rather vain hope. It is emblematic of why his words cannot be taken at face value as some were suggesting yesterday. Hitler said the Sudatenland was his last territorial ambition, and guess what? He was lying.

    That Bush is a liar is gospel on the left. Is it so hard to believe that when Achmandinijad says “I just want peace, I don’t want a bomb, I don’t hate Jews” that he too is lying? I am not saying this specifically about you, Tripmaster, but I am sometimes amazed that Iran’s president is given more credibility than our own, or that the first four posts on this thread that tangibly demonstrate Achy has no respect for the truth brought instant criticism of Bush.


  10. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    He meant what he said….homosexuals are executed in Iran.

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:31 pm

    And yer STILL a fraud!


  11. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Personally, I think Ahmadinejad did a good job with his speech and Q&A session, with this one glaring example. I found myself wondering: “Mahmoud, WTF? Did you think that you had too much credibility, and you needed to jettison some???”.


  12. Juan C. says:

    I think katy has a point.

    Just like the supposedly Iranian claim about wiping out Israel out of the map, who was only Arabic bogus by Al-Jazeera.


  13. DRxJ says:

    Hey, who knew that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was a Republican?


  14. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    I am sometimes amazed that Iran’s president is given more credibility than our own…

    Check again. I haven’t seen a single comment in the last 2 days here that gave him ANY cred at all. Clearly, the man’s a raving loon. W/out the opportunity to speak, that wouldn’t have been so evident.

    … or that the first four posts on this thread that tangibly demonstrate Achy has no respect for the truth brought instant criticism of Bush.

    Goes ta show ya jes’ how badly Bush has alienated folks in his own country, huh? As for the parallels between the 2 men’s behavior commented on here, kind of disturbin’ to say the least.

    Perhaps while we see Ahmadinejad as a big problem, we simply see Bush as a BIGGER problem, and our problem. Ahmadinejad isn’t the POTUS, and at least right now, he can’t start a nucear war.

    But… but… God TOLD George to smite Saddam…

    Comment by Keltoi — September 26, 2007 @ 12:34 pm


  15. Candyce says:

    Some kind of fixation problem on the left?

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:37 pm

    481 days, 11 hours, 19 minutes.


  16. Juan C. says:

    I should begin proofreading.


  17. DRxJ says:

    Some kind of fixation problem on the left?
    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:37 pm

    Yes. We, the left, like to fixate on the problems caused by trolls who post data from 16 months ago as current.
    You got a problem with that?


  18. Doc Rock says:

    Ahmadinejad proved why idiots like duncan Hunter should be shunned. America should be an open forum for everyone, even the president of country whom Katie Couric editorializes as “enemy” [what a marron!] , should be allowed to speak in our country–let folks see what an ass they may or may not be. That was and will be our strength–don’t let the fear-mongers scare you out of it!


  19. Wayne says:

    Some kind of fixation problem on the left?

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:37 pm

    And you Bush worshippers are avoiding todays veteran thread like the plague. “Run away”problem from the right?


  20. Juan C. says:

    Whats wrong with someone converting to Islam?

    At least they do it in their adult life, when they can make that choice unlike when your parents stuff you with the religion they want you to take…


  21. gummitch says:

    Some kind of fixation problem on the left?

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:37 pm

    Yup. We’re deeply depressed that we have such a fugghead as president.

    Once he’s gone, though, I hope we can learn to forget about him, and now obsess about him like the Right has obsessed about Clinton to this day.


  22. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Littlefoot sez:

    President Bush wasn’t mentioned in the above article, nor was he even referred to…yet somehow this thread has become about bashing President Bush…just as so many others do that have nothing to do with President Bush.

    How does four posts in twelve make the thread “about Bush”?

    Of course, it’s five in 13, if we count yours…and 6 in 16, if you count mine. If you work a little harder, I’ll bet you can make theis thread “about Bush”, and then you can b!tch about it all day. Would that make you happy?


  23. gummitch says:

    Arggh. “now obsess” should be “not obsess”.


  24. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    Back to you!

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:40 pm

    Not only are you totally disingenuous, yer an idiot ta boot!

    “… The troops have drawn conclusions about fellow citizens back home. Asked why they think some Americans favor rapid U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq, 37% of troops serving there said those Americans are unpatriotic, while 20% believe people back home don’t believe a continued occupation will work.”

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — August 25, 2007 @ 6:13 pm

    Since Little [ ] won’t link to his “source”, I found at least one of them for ya, folks. The above info is actually from a Zogby poll taken almost a yr and half ago (source below! ;-D!!). No wonder Little [ ] didn’t provide the reference. Don’t know where the rest of it comes from, but ** YAWN **, I think it’s safe to ignore Little [ ]’s “data” here.

    He’s an F-ing LIAR!!!

    Released: February 28, 2006
    U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006
    http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
    Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 25, 2007 @ 7:16 pm

    Yer a FRAUD!

    BTW, the Islamic thing? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA… I can’t begin to fathom why you think that hurts or is insulting. It makes ya look like a bigger fool everytime ya say it!

    Ya got… NOTHIN’!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA… whew… that’s funny.


  25. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Littlefoot sez:

    And yer STILL a fraud!

    Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — September 26, 2007 @ 12:35 pm”

    And how’s your conversion to Islam coming along?

    …na na na na naaaaah na…!!!

    Back to you!

    The difference, being, of course, that TRoS has documented proof of your fraudulence…


  26. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    And when you find the poll that refutes/discounts that poll, please feel free to post it.

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:44 pm

    You make this WAAAYYY too easy…

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…


  27. Candyce says:

    I found this article via No Quarter, worth an entire reading.

    Bed-wetter Nation

    By Rick Perlstein on September 25, 2007 – 3:02pm.

    Here’s a big question that I want to start addressing in upcoming posts: what is conservative rule doing to our nation’s soul? How is it rewiring our hearts and minds? What kind of damage are they doing to the American character? And can we ever recover?
    [...]
    September of 2007, American soil supported a visit by what many, if not most Americans agreed was the most evil and dangerous man on the planet.

    Nikita Khrushchev disembarked from his plane at Andrews Air Force Base to a 21-gun salute and a receiving line of 63 officials and bureaucrats, ending with President Eisenhower. He rode 13 miles with Ike in an open limousine to his guest quarters across from the White House. Then he met for two hours with Ike and his foreign policy team. Then came a white-tie state dinner.
    [...]
    Nikita Khrushchev simply visited a nation that had character. That was mature, well-adjusted. A nation confident we were great. We had our neuroses, to be sure—plenty of them.

    But look now what we have lost. Now when a bad guy crosses our threshhold, America becomes a pants-piddling mess.


  28. DRxJ says:

    And when you find the poll that refutes/discounts that poll, please feel free to post it.

    Comment by O. Bigfoot In Mouth — September 26, 2007 @ 12:44 pm

    No thanks, ROS already did!
    Back atcha!


  29. Candyce says:

    I copied my previous content badly, that’s September of 1959, of course.


  30. Bruce Gorton says:

    It could be a error: He might just mean Iranians just aren’t cheerful people.


  31. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Littlefoot sez:

    Best do a recount, Monkey..

    I don’t think so. Four in twelve before your post. That’s the important number. Somehow, you think that 33% equals a takeover of the thread. Funny how you neocon apologists think 33% equals a mandate…


  32. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    Best do a recount, Monkey..

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:48 pm

    Hmmm… hard of hearing too, ’cause he doesn’t seem to hear EVERYONE laughing at him!

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA… whew… Li’l Footie, yer a natural born comic. Yer defintiely ready fer the Half Hr News Hr…

    Oh, wait… it’s already been pulled…


  33. missmolly says:

    Probably what Ahmadinejad should have done is to post his speech on his website in the language he delivered the speech in (Farsi, I assume), and then post a translation done by his own people. This way he wouldn’t be able to claim he was misquoted or mistranslated. If his posted translation was completely bogus, other translators would quickly expose that.

    On the other hand, if he really said what the translator says he said at Columbia, he should clarify what he meant or explain why he said it. Merely erasing it doesn’t fool anyone, and only serves to make him look like he’s hiding something.

    The other thing he could do is publish “exerpts” of his speech on his site — that way he gets to pick and choose without posting the entire thing.


  34. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    Funny how you neocon apologists think 33% equals a mandate…

    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26, 2007 @ 12:51 pm

    Or that 3 inches is actually 7…

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA… stop… stop… yer killin’ me.


  35. IgnoranceIsNotBliss says:

    At the Iranian site, I didn’t see mentioned where he thought that the Professor’s remarks were insulting either. Or did I miss it?


  36. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    he’s doing it because Osama told him it was the only way to save himself from the rath of Islam.

    Back to you!

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:56 pm

    Yer a fraud and an idiot.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA… this is gittin’ painful.

    BTW, IDIOT, its “wrath”, not “rath”?

    Like “levees”, not “levies”.


  37. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Littlefoot sez:

    And as for ROS conversion to Islam, it has nothing to do with his personal spiritual beliefs..he’s doing it because Osama told him it was the only way to save himself from the rath [SIC] of Islam.

    First of all, I think the word you’re groping for is “wrath”.

    Second, you have yet to provide evidence to substantiate this ridiculous claim, while TRoS has provided ample evidence that you are, in fact, a fraud.

    Back to you.


  38. gummitch says:

    Ahmadinejad is certainly not the first person to claim that his country completed lacked the homosexuals that plague the decadent West. I’m pretty sure I’ve heard the same thing from the Chinese over the years. To the perennially uptight, the mere existence of gay people is proof that a society is crumbling, so they rely on denial and draconian measures of punishment for unacceptable behavior.

    Maybe Ahmadinejad took the offending sentences out because he discovered that his son/brother/aunt is gay.

    In this country, “conservatives” take the opposite tack and shriek about the feminization of culture and the overwhelming power and impact of the gay plague but it’s a difference with no distinction. It’s all about fear.


  39. Wayne says:

    Arggh. “now obsess” should be “not obsess”.

    Comment by gummitch — September 26, 2007 @ 12:43 pm

    Sure it’s not abcess? LOL


  40. Starve-A-Bush_Feed-A-Beaver says:

    President Bush wasn’t mentioned in the above article, nor was he even referred to…yet somehow this thread has become about bashing President Bush…just as so many others do that have nothing to do with President Bush.

    Some kind of fixation problem on the left?

    Comment by O. Bigfoot
    ______________________

    Well, when you have cancer, you tend to see everything around you in terms of coping with your disease.

    George Bush is America’s cancer. He’s a blight upon the land. He’s an infection and an infestation. He’s the gangrene and putrefaction that is destroying the body of America. Ahmadinejad is his own country’s cancerous growth. Noting that Iran’s cancer behaves somewhat like America’s cancer is like two cancer patients sharing their personal struggle and commiserating with each other.


  41. Lefty Patriot says:

    And as for ROS conversion to Islam, it has nothing to do with his personal spiritual beliefs..he’s doing it because Osama told him it was the only way to save himself from the rath of Islam.

    Back to you!

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 12:56 pm

    Play your childish games, bigfoot, as you send your wife’s kids off to die for oil. You’ve proven your ignorance and your inability to deal with the truth, as well as your projectionist fear of Osama and al Qaeda, Bush’s best friends. Enjoy your irrelevance for the next 40 years, as we bury the GOP forever.


  42. gummitch says:

    No, actually, liberalism is America’s Cancer. Conservatism is the cure.

    Even France is starting to figure that one out.

    Wise up, liberals. See the error of your ways. There is always an open door for you in the “big tent”.

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 1:05 pm

    You think French “conservatives” have anything in common with people like you? You’re delusional.

    Face it, the “conservatives” have had ample opportunity to prove that they’re the solution. They’ve been in control of at least two, and lately all three branches of the federal government, and have utterly failed at governing the country. They’ve failed to manage the economy, failed to keep us secure and their only success to date is fattening the wallets of the already fat cats.

    Conservatism is a disaster, as the intelligent among us predicted long ago. Your party is dead, they’re just too stupid to realize it’s time to fall over.


  43. The Republic of Stupidity says:

    There is always an open door for you in the “big tent”.

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 1:05 pm

    Yer an IDIOT, and a liar.


  44. Juan C. says:

    Hehehe.

    France goes two liberal periods followed by two conservative periods…as always.


  45. Keltoi says:

    Check again. I haven’t seen a single comment in the last 2 days here that gave him ANY cred at all. Clearly, the man’s a raving loon. W/out the opportunity to speak, that wouldn’t have been so evident.
    Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — September 26, 2007 @ 12:40 pm

    This is from yesterday:

    “Since it seems that the MSM is more interested in putting words in the mouth of the president of a country that we are trying to fabricate reasons to attack than in allowing him to speak ,I thought it apprtopriate to present what this supposed hate monger had to say at Columbia himself .
    MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Why don’t we encourage more research on a historical event …..” extensive quote by Achy.
    Comment by freeman — September 25, 2007 @ 3:40 pm

    I infer from this that Freeman does think Achmadinajad’s words have credibility and that it is the Media that is distorting his position, but perhaps I misunderstood his point.

    I’d LIKE to believe everyone here thinks he – Achy, not Freeman – is a raving loon, but I am not so sure


  46. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Littlefoot sez:

    Hardy har har! At least I am still capable of having fun playing my childish games. You libs really need to get a sense of humour!

    First of all, thanks for verifying that your antiocs are, in fact, “childish games”. Not that there was any question, but always good to hear from the horse’s mouth.

    Second, don’t think we’re incapable of enjoying ourselves. Kicking you around the playground is a perpetual source of enjoyment for us, Littlefoot, especially when you squeal so.

    (BTW, unless you happen to be British, it’s ‘humor’. You’re welcome.)


  47. Keltoi says:

    In this country, “conservatives” take the opposite tack and shriek about the feminization of culture and the overwhelming power and impact of the gay plague but it’s a difference with no distinction. It’s all about fear.
    Comment by gummitch — September 26, 2007 @ 12:59 pm

    No distinction? How many Americans have been put to death by the state for being gay?


  48. Starve-A-Bush_Feed-A-Beaver says:

    No, actually, liberalism is America’s Cancer. Conservatism is the cure.

    Comment by O. Bigfoot
    ____________________

    So you’re saying the cure for the disaster that has been all things Bush is more Bush? Are you advocating that the cure to cancer is more cancer? Bush and Ahmadinejad are both extreme conservatives. So you’re clamoring for more of the same?


  49. gummitch says:

    No distinction? How many Americans have been put to death by the state for being gay?

    Comment by Keltoi — September 26, 2007 @ 1:17 pm

    How many conservatives have had the luxury of a totalitarian state? Get back to me when they’ve succeeded in that effort and we’ll see how long it takes before they start rounding up the homosexuals.


  50. TripMaster Monkey says:

    *ERRATA*

    “antiocs” in post #57 above should read “antics”.

    Damn these giant fingers…


  51. gummitch says:

    Hardy har har! At least I am still capable of having fun playing my childish games. You libs really need to get a sense of humour!

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 1:11 pm

    Humour? I thought you claimed to live in New Mexico?

    The liberal lack of humour or humor would probably explain why The Daily Show has bombed and the Half Hour News Comedy Show (or whatever Fox called it) is an enormous success.

    Just because your childish games aren’t funny doesn’t mean that the rest of us lack a sense of humor/humour.


  52. Eskwaya says:

    I take issue with this post as far as the “outlandishness” of Ahmadinejad’s assertion that there are no gays in Iran. Please support that characterization with proof that there are gays in Iran. When TP addresses global warming, for example it encourages readers to trust the science and it gives the science to back up its claims; it rightly criticizes the deniers on the basis of the science. So, in this case, back up the claim or pull the post.


  53. Keltoi says:

    How many conservatives have had the luxury of a totalitarian state? Get back to me when they’ve succeeded in that effort and we’ll see how long it takes before they start rounding up the homosexuals.
    Comment by gummitch — September 26, 2007 @ 1:19 pm

    Well, I am quite conservative from a foreign policy standpoint but a libertarian domestically – when the government starts rounding up gays they can expect violent opposition and revolution from my quadrant of the political spectrum.


  54. gummitch says:

    I take issue with this post as far as the “outlandishness” of Ahmadinejad’s assertion that there are no gays in Iran. Please support that characterization with proof that there are gays in Iran. When TP addresses global warming, for example it encourages readers to trust the science and it gives the science to back up its claims; it rightly criticizes the deniers on the basis of the science. So, in this case, back up the claim or pull the post.

    Comment by Eskwaya — September 26, 2007 @ 1:24 pm

    There are gays everywhere. Just peek under your bed.


  55. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Keltoi sez:

    Well, I am quite conservative from a foreign policy standpoint but a libertarian domestically – when the government starts rounding up gays they can expect violent opposition and revolution from my quadrant of the political spectrum.

    And just what makes you think you’ll be capable of such “violent opposition and revolution” at that late date?


  56. gummitch says:

    Well, I am quite conservative from a foreign policy standpoint but a libertarian domestically – when the government starts rounding up gays they can expect violent opposition and revolution from my quadrant of the political spectrum.

    Comment by Keltoi — September 26, 2007 @ 1:25 pm

    How does one square being a libertarian on domestic issues with being “conservative” on foreign policy? You’re either a libertarian or you’re not.


  57. Keltoi says:

    I take issue with this post as far as the “outlandishness” of Ahmadinejad’s assertion that there are no gays in Iran. Please support that characterization with proof that there are gays in Iran.
    Comment by Eskwaya — September 26, 2007 @ 1:24 pm

    ME! ME! I GOT IT!

    There are people in Iran. Therefore, there are gays. Homosexuality is a biological fact that dates back to the earliest recorded history.

    Iran was once known as Persia. It was as accepting if not moreso of homosexuality than their Greek contemporaries. There is nothing to suggest this population is genetically immune to being gay, and in fact there is historic evidence to the contrary.

    Ach-ma-Dinner Jacket is a reactionary religious freak who oversees a government that executes gays. He WISHES there were no gays and is working hard to make it so.


  58. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Eskwaya sez:

    I take issue with this post as far as the “outlandishness” of Ahmadinejad’s assertion that there are no gays in Iran. Please support that characterization with proof that there are gays in Iran.

    Ok.

    According to the landmark Kinsey report, about 10% of human males are gay.

    This report has fallen into dispute lately, mostly generated by right-wing “family advocate” groups. But while these right-wing groups seek to lower the percentage to as low as 1% (like here), none of them try to make the claim that the percentage is in fact zero.

    Given this fact, and the fact that citizens of Iran are every bit as human as the citizens of America, the burden of proof is squarely on you and Mahmoud. The claim that there are no homosexuals in Iran is ridiculous, and it is up to him (and you) to substantiate it, not us.


  59. Keltoi says:

    And just what makes you think you’ll be capable of such “violent opposition and revolution” at that late date?
    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26, 2007 @ 1:28 pm

    Well, Trip, I happen to believe that in reality the Christian totalitarian state you see coming at us is a boogeyman with no chance of happening. So I am not really sweating having to head to the hills with my guns and MREs.


  60. Keltoi says:

    How does one square being a libertarian on domestic issues with being “conservative” on foreign policy? You’re either a libertarian or you’re not.
    Comment by gummitch — September 26, 2007 @ 1:31 pm

    It is easy. In the US, I have the luxury of being a Libertarian because my society is basically peaceful, ruled by law and does not use force to make everyones opinions line up with the government. But in the majority of the rest of the world, the opposite is true. Most of Asia, including the ME, is still “conservative” in the sense that it sees the relationship between the individual and the state the same way it did when Hammurabis Code was written. So I find it unreasonable to use a Libertarian moral vision when you are fighting totalitarian dictatorship, or at least I think it is reasonable to see things domestically differently than abroad.

    Iran murders gays. Evil. I can ignore the evil and do nothing, pretend it isn’t happening, say mean things about it, but still gays will die in Iran. Does a good Libertarian say, “oh well, it sucks to be them”?

    Lets make it more relevant to the US – Iran is working on nukes. That is, IMHO, very dangerous to us and our interests. Does a good Libertarian do nothing? Was Neville Chamberlain a Libertarian? Was Edmund Burke a Libertarian?

    My point is, my politics in America are influenced by conditions in America, and my politics vis the rest of the world are influenced by conditions in the rest of the world, and the conditions vary greatly.


  61. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Keltoi sez:

    Well, Trip, I happen to believe that in reality the Christian totalitarian state you see coming at us is a boogeyman with no chance of happening.

    Well, if that’s truly what you believe, why then did you say this?

    Well, I am quite conservative from a foreign policy standpoint but a libertarian domestically – when the government starts rounding up gays they can expect violent opposition and revolution from my quadrant of the political spectrum.

    If it truly has “no chance of happening”, why bloviate on about your promised “violent opposition and revolution” if and when it does happen?

    Get back to me when you’ve made up your mind.


  62. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Keltoi sez:

    Iran is working on nukes.

    Prove it. Provide some evidence to support that assertion.


  63. Keltoi says:

    If it truly has “no chance of happening”, why bloviate on about your promised “violent opposition and revolution” if and when it does happen?
    Get back to me when you’ve made up your mind.
    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26, 2007 @ 2:09 pm

    Oh, Relax, willya? Jeez, one facetious comment and now I can’t make up my mind?

    It WON’T happen, which is good; MRE’s taste like crap and I am a terrible shot.


  64. Keltoi says:

    Prove it. Provide some evidence to support that assertion.
    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26, 2007 @ 2:10 pm

    The IAEA has not given them a clean bill of health on their enrichment. Their entire program was covert for over a decade. They sit on an ocean of oil and their need for nuclear power is mysterious at best. They are allies with North Korea, who also secretly developed nukes.

    I can’t PROVE they are working on nukes without being a technical expert with access to their sites – the ones we know about, anyway. I think it pretty damn likely that Achmadinajad is being as honest about there being no nuclear weapons program in his country as he is about there being no gays in his country.

    Can you PROVE Iran isn’t seeking nukes?


  65. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Keltoi sez:

    Oh, Relax, willya? Jeez, one facetious comment and now I can’t make up my mind?

    Oh, I see. You comment about “violent opposition and revolution” was facetious. Nice to know where you really stand.

    It WON’T happen, which is good; MRE’s taste like crap and I am a terrible shot.

    Yes, I’m sure the Germans thought the same in 1938.

    Wake up. It has happened. Habeas Corpus is now a thing of the past. The President has unilateral power to designate anyone he lines an “enemy combatant” and make them disappear. Plans are in place to round up dissidents em masse and ship them off to detainment camps.

    You just haven’t noticed because it hasn’t impacted you personally yet. And by the time it does, you’ll be powerless to do anything about it. That’s how fascism works.

    Go ahead, make jokes about guns and MREs. But while you’re at it, research the points I mentioned above, and see if you can honestly dispute any of them.


  66. Keltoi says:

    Yes, I’m sure the Germans thought the same in 1938.

    Wake up. It has happened. Habeas Corpus is now a thing of the past. The President has unilateral power to designate anyone he lines an “enemy combatant” and make them disappear. Plans are in place to round up dissidents em masse and ship them off to detainment camps.
    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26, 2007 @ 2:21 pm

    Germany in ‘38: The Reichstag is in ashes, Kristallnacht has been carried out, Jews wear yellow stars, the Rhineland, Austria and Czechoslovakia have been annexed. I think you are overstating the metaphor a wee tad.

    How do you know about these secret plans to round up dissidents and ship them off to detainment camps, BTW? Let us stipulate that these are American citizens, on American soil, with no connection to AQ.


  67. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Keltoi sez:

    The IAEA has not given them a clean bill of health on their enrichment.

    That’s an interesting way of saying they have not yet completed their investigation. Another way of saying it is that they have not accused them of violations, either.

    I can’t PROVE they are working on nukes without being a technical expert with access to their sites – the ones we know about, anyway.

    Then perhaps you ought to leave the “proof” to the professionals.

    Can you PROVE Iran isn’t seeking nukes?

    OK, that’;s just plain retarded. You’re the one that’s making the assertion. The burden of proof is on you.

    Their entire program was covert for over a decade.

    And for how long was our program covert? How about India’s program?

    They sit on an ocean of oil and their need for nuclear power is mysterious at best.

    Their need for a nuclear program is irrelevant. They have the right to pursdue nuclear research for power production purposes under the NPT.

    They are allies with North Korea, who also secretly developed nukes.

    OK, again, retarded. This one is so stupid I’m having trouble understanding why you thought it fit for print.


  68. Nature Rules says:

    Fact is, most conservatives disagree with Bush about 50% of the time. Conservatives also happen to disagree with liberals about 99% of the time.

    Another SFTA, statistic from thin air. I believe 90% of Conservatives in the general population are religious and that only 20% of Conservatives in government positions are religious. Whoo hoo I made my own SFTA.


  69. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Keltoi sez:

    Germany in ‘38: The Reichstag is in ashes, Kristallnacht has been carried out, Jews wear yellow stars, the Rhineland, Austria and Czechoslovakia have been annexed. I think you are overstating the metaphor a wee tad.

    I don’t think so.

    The WTC is in ashes.

    Iraq and Afghanistan have been annexed.

    Muslims and liberal protesters are on the “no fly” list, among others.

    Anti-Muslim violence is epidemic in this country, and, for the most part, ignored by the complicit media.

    (BTW, the Nazis didn’t order the Jews to wear the yellow stars until 1941.

    How do you know about these secret plans to round up dissidents and ship them off to detainment camps, BTW? Let us stipulate that these are American citizens, on American soil, with no connection to AQ.

    From the New York Times, February 4, 2006:

    “The Army Corps of Engineers has awarded a contract worth up to $385 million for building temporary immigration detention centers to Kellogg Brown & Root, the Halliburton subsidiary…KBR would build the centers for the Homeland Security Department for an unexpected influx of immigrants, to house people in the event of a natural disaster or for new programs that require additional detention space.”

    Add this to directives that are known to have existed, like Rex 84, and the implication becomes chillingly clear.

    But don’t take my word for it…do your own research.


  70. Keltoi says:

    >>Then perhaps you ought to leave the “proof” to the professionals.

    I think that is what I am doing

    >>Can you PROVE Iran isn’t seeking nukes?
    OK, that’;s just plain retarded. You’re the one that’s making the assertion. The burden of proof is on you.

    I will take that for a “No, I can’t prove they are not seeking nukes”. Besides, I made the assertion to illustrate an entirely different point and you jumped all over it.

    >>Their entire program was covert for over a decade.
    And for how long was our program covert?

    Aha! The United States and Iran are moral equivalents!

    >>How about India’s program?

    When have I defended India? This is, to use your term, “retarded”.

    >>They sit on an ocean of oil and their need for nuclear power is mysterious at best.
    Their need for a nuclear program is irrelevant. They have the right to pursdue nuclear research for power production purposes under the NPT.

    There need is NOT irrelevant. It is a very expensive, difficult technology which has had mixed success in producing power. If you don’t NEED it, why develop it when you have all the power you need right in your own country? The by-product of nuclear enrichment is the capacity to develop nuclear weapons, c’mon! If it were biofuel or solar or whatever it wouldn’t matter, but we are talking nuclear weapons here.

    >>They are allies with North Korea, who also secretly developed nukes.
    OK, again, retarded. This one is so stupid I’m having trouble understanding why you thought it fit for print.
    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26, 2007 @ 2:33 pm

    Is it as stupid as the Syrians having received shipments of a POSSIBLY (no, I can’t PROVE what was in the buildings Israel hit last week, you don’t know either) nuclear nature from North Korea? Can it really be so hard to connect the dots between a N. Korea with nukes, an Iran that wants nukes, a common hate of the US and the chance they might help each other out?

    You seem a little cranky, today, Trip. Maybe I should say something about America being a force for good and you can get a good belly laugh out of it like you did last week.



  71. Leftside Annie says:

    Good grief.

    Bush? Ahmadinejhad?

    Ahmadinejhad? Bush?

    Hell, I can’t tell the difference. They’re BOTH batshit crazy thugs and wannabe dictators – who need to be LOCKED UP.


  72. Keltoi says:

    >>I don’t think so.
    The WTC is in ashes.

    And Bush did it, right? Please, please tell me you don’t think that….

    >>Iraq and Afghanistan have been annexed.

    No, they haven’t. Bush is so diabolical he can blow up WTC, blame the whole thing on non-existant terrorists, co-opt the entirety of the opposition party into his nefarious plot, but when he goes to “annex” countries the best he can do is what we have in Afg and Iraq?

    >>Muslims and liberal protesters are on the “no fly” list, among others.

    How many?

    >>Anti-Muslim violence is epidemic in this country, and, for the most part, ignored by the complicit media.

    Epidemic is a big word. Can you document this statement? Anti-Muslim violence is REALLY epidemic in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is just being done by other Muslims.

    >>(BTW, the Nazis didn’t order the Jews to wear the yellow stars until 1941.

    Point, remind me to Google more, but comparing Nazi policy toward Jews in ANY year to the US in 2007 is erroneous

    >>How do you know about these secret plans to round up dissidents and ship them off to detainment camps, BTW?
    From the New York Times, February 4, 2006:
    “The Army Corps of Engineers has awarded a contract worth up to $385 million for building temporary immigration detention centers

    Read the whole argument, not feeling like these “en masse” roundups you speak of are in the offing. Assuming they have broken ground on it, the facility can house 5,000. It seemed pretty clear to me it was aimed at illegal immigration. Henry Waxman, the most zealous Bush investigator on the Hill, had only one complaint about the facility – it is being built by Haliburton.

    Add this to directives that are known to have existed, like Rex 84..
    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26, 2007 @ 2:46 pm

    Rex84, Roswell57…..

    The thing I find amusing is you seem to think it is more likely that we attacked ourselves on 9-11 and are facing totalitarianism tomorow than it is that Iran wants nukes.


  73. gummitch says:

    Fact is, most conservatives disagree with Bush about 50% of the time. Conservatives also happen to disagree with liberals about 99% of the time.

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 1:41 pm

    Funny. That’s what “conservatives” say now about Bush. For the previous six years “conservatives” thought Bush walked on water. Now they’re attempting to distance themselves from what they themselves have labeled a conservative administration because it’s clear to everyone that it’s been a disaster.

    If you want to make ridiculous claims like this, you need to point to all the pundits who have disgreed with Bush 50% of the time since January 2001. Good luck with that.

    The rest of your claims about Bush’s success are your absurd assertions and have no more legitimacy (or less) than liberals who “blame Bush” for the state of the country.


  74. Nevar says:

    Oh, Bigpoot! keeps offering his back to us at the end of his posts.
    Is it some kind of subtle invitation?
    You know, like waving a hand underneath a divider?


  75. gummitch says:

    It is easy. In the US, I have the luxury of being a Libertarian because my society is basically peaceful, ruled by law and does not use force to make everyones opinions line up with the government. But in the majority of the rest of the world, the opposite is true. Most of Asia, including the ME, is still “conservative” in the sense that it sees the relationship between the individual and the state the same way it did when Hammurabis Code was written. So I find it unreasonable to use a Libertarian moral vision when you are fighting totalitarian dictatorship, or at least I think it is reasonable to see things domestically differently than abroad.

    Iran murders gays. Evil. I can ignore the evil and do nothing, pretend it isn’t happening, say mean things about it, but still gays will die in Iran. Does a good Libertarian say, “oh well, it sucks to be them”?

    Lets make it more relevant to the US – Iran is working on nukes. That is, IMHO, very dangerous to us and our interests. Does a good Libertarian do nothing? Was Neville Chamberlain a Libertarian? Was Edmund Burke a Libertarian?

    My point is, my politics in America are influenced by conditions in America, and my politics vis the rest of the world are influenced by conditions in the rest of the world, and the conditions vary greatly.

    Comment by Keltoi — September 26, 2007 @ 2:07 pm

    In other words, you do not want our government dictating your behavior but it’s OK for our government to dictate the behavior of people in other countries.

    I’ve got news for you. That’s not libertarianism, that’s hypocrisy.


  76. TripMaster Monkey says:

    I will take that for a “No, I can’t prove they are not seeking nukes”.

    Close…it’s “No, I don’t have to prove they are not seeking nukes”. I’m not the one who claimed Iran was seeking nukes…you’re the one who claimed they were. Try to keep up.

    Besides, I made the assertion to illustrate an entirely different point and you jumped all over it.

    And that point was…?

    Aha! The United States and Iran are moral equivalents!

    I know you’re trying to make a point here, but it’s pretty vague. Try a little harder.

    When have I defended India?

    When have I said you had? Again, do try to keep up.

    This is, to use your term, “retarded”.

    Sorry for using such a pejorative term, but nothing else does some of your ‘arguments’ sufficient justice.

    There need is NOT irrelevant.

    Yes, it is irrelevant. They have the right. Period. (Unless, of course, you’re contesting that right.)

    It is a very expensive, difficult technology which has had mixed success in producing power. If you don’t NEED it, why develop it when you have all the power you need right in your own country?

    You claim that it is very expensive and difficult, but in the same breath, you admit that they have vast wealth in the form of petrochemicals. Again, make up your mind.

    The by-product of nuclear enrichment is the capacity to develop nuclear weapons, c’mon! If it were biofuel or solar or whatever it wouldn’t matter, but we are talking nuclear weapons here.

    And with this passage, you have demonstrated conclusively that you have no clue as to the difference between fuel-grade and weapons-grade fissile material. Thanks for playing.

    Is it as stupid as the Syrians having received shipments of a POSSIBLY (no, I can’t PROVE what was in the buildings Israel hit last week, you don’t know either) nuclear nature from North Korea?

    No, you can’t prove what was in those buildings, and neither can I. So let’s speculate wildly about it.

    Again, Keltoi, retarded. No other adjective fits.

    Can it really be so hard to connect the dots between a N. Korea with nukes, an Iran that wants nukes, a common hate of the US and the chance they might help each other out?

    Here’s two questions, genius:

    1) How exactly do you suppose the Iranians are going to deliver this mythical nuclear warhead to us?

    2) Assuming a nuclear warhead does detonate on U.S. soil, exactly how many minutes do you think it will take for the U.S counterattack to turn the entire country of Iran into a plain of radioactive glass? Do you really think the Iranians are stupid enough to give Chimpy that chance?

    You seem a little cranky, today, Trip. Maybe I should say something about America being a force for good and you can get a good belly laugh out of it like you did last week.

    Sloppy thinking like yours always seems to irritate me.


  77. Zimzone says:

    Wise up, liberals. See the error of your ways. There is always an open door for you in the “big tent”. -Comment by O. Bigfoot

    To get in, just check with Larry Craig, Mark Foley or Ted Haggard.
    (Just be sure the ‘big tent’ isn’t in their pants.)


  78. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Keltoi sez:

    And Bush did it, right? Please, please tell me you don’t think that…

    And 19 guys with box cutters, led by a guy suffering from terminal renal failure, operating out of a cave, managed to outwit and circumvent the defense capability of the most powerful nation on the planet for hours? Please, please, tell me you don’t think that

    No, they haven’t. Bush is so diabolical he can blow up WTC, blame the whole thing on non-existant terrorists, co-opt the entirety of the opposition party into his nefarious plot, but when he goes to “annex” countries the best he can do is what we have in Afg and Iraq?

    Chimpy and his cronies have accomplished exactly what they were after: a perpetual state of war in the M.E., justifying the need for a permanent military presence.

    How many?

    I’m not sure why that question is even relevant, but it is a good question nevertheless. Unfortunately, I can’t provide you with an answer, as that information is classified. The only way you find out if you’re on the no-fly list is if you show up and can’t board the plane.

    Epidemic is a big word. Can you document this statement?

    Certainly. Here’s just one source.

    Anti-Muslim violence is REALLY epidemic in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is just being done by other Muslims.

    Yeah…civil war is a real b!tch, isn’t it? Of course, you leave out all the violence to muslims being done to them in Iraq by non-muslims (U.S. forces and “contractors” (mercs)), as well as all the future violence that will be visited on them by our indiscriminate use of DU in their country, but that would spoil your trite little truism, wouldn’t it?

    Point, remind me to Google more, but comparing Nazi policy toward Jews in ANY year to the US in 2007 is erroneous

    Funny…I seem to recall laying out an argument that illustrated that the comparison was quite valid. If you want to refute that argument, go ahead…but don’t claim you have until you’ve done it.

    Read the whole argument, not feeling like these “en masse” roundups you speak of are in the offing. Assuming they have broken ground on it, the facility can house 5,000. It seemed pretty clear to me it was aimed at illegal immigration. Henry Waxman, the most zealous Bush investigator on the Hill, had only one complaint about the facility – it is being built by Haliburton.

    So…your refutation is based on a “gut feeling”? You must really admire Chertoff…

    Rex84, Roswell57…..

    And what exactly is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to insinuate that Rex 84 is fictitious?

    If all you’re going to do is grind your head even deeper into the sand, Keltoi, feel free, but in that case, there’s really no need to respond to my posts.

    The thing I find amusing is you seem to think it is more likely that we attacked ourselves on 9-11 and are facing totalitarianism tomorrow than it is that Iran wants nukes.

    Oh…now we’re down to Iran “wanting” nukes”, are we? Way to move the goalposts, Keltoi.

    I never claimed that Iran didn’t “want” nukes. I’m not going to make wild speculations about the possible desires of a foreign country. I didn’t even say that Iran wasn’t trying to acquire nukes. All I did is challenge you to prove your assertion that they are…an assertion that, despite the torrential volume of words from you since, you have yet to either substantiate or retract.

    One or the other. Make up your mind.


  79. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Well, gotta skate…

    I’ll be looking for either your substantiation or your retraction later tonight, Keltoi. Please don’t disappoint me (again).


  80. MapleStreet says:

    But even Daily Show (or was it Countdown or Colbert) had a video of him saying this. My Arabic is non-existent, but I was listening to see how he pronounced Iran (figuring the president would have the right pronunciation).

    He definitely said ee-RAQ . Admittedly the translator could have mis-translated.

    So to deny he said it makes him look even more ludicrous.


  81. missmolly says:

    What unmitigated bullcrap. Explain the Log Cabin Republicans, which are welcome in the “big tent”.

    Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 26, 2007 @ 1:43 pm

    Log Cabin Republicans are welcome because, for the most part, they have money to contribute. They are willing to be in the big tent because they are conservatives who just happen to be gay. Heck, if I agreed with the Repubs on all but one issue, I might be in their tent, too.

    But you’ll notice the LCR presence in this tent is all but invisible. They’re welcome, as long as they stay in the closet in the corner. It’s a rare Repub candidate who will actually meet with them, and several Repub candidates have returned LCR contributions once others in the tent (evangelical Christians, for example) bring those contributions to light.


  82. Keltoi says:

    I’ll be looking for either your substantiation or your retraction later tonight, Keltoi. Please don’t disappoint me (again).
    Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 26, 2007 @ 3:53 pm

    Declare victory and flee the field. Nice technique. Reminds me of some other group….

    Substantiation of What? That there ISN”T a conspiracy afoot to make Bush President for Life? That is going to be a bit tough, don’t you think?

    Conspiracies are wonderful because by their very nature they cannot be disproved.

    Yes, I think AQ attacked us on 9-11 and not our own government. If you think that is “grinding my head in the sand” I suggest YOUR head is stuck in a dark, moist, unpleasant place it should not be.

    But I do so with love! Have a nice evening.


  83. Keltoi says:

    In other words, you do not want our government dictating your behavior but it’s OK for our government to dictate the behavior of people in other countries.

    I’ve got news for you. That’s not libertarianism, that’s hypocrisy.

    Comment by gummitch — September 26, 2007 @ 3:19 pm

    NO – it is OK for our government to help people in other countries become free of their governments ability to dictate to them.

    Let me ask you a simple question. If you were a gay Iranian, would you favor the US deposing the Theocracy that threatens your life?


  84. katy says:

    *
    well folks… i kinda hated that post-and-run earlier… i had to get to a project right away, but wanted to get that notion out there…

    honestly, i understand all the reasons given for why ahmadinejad meant, literally, what was translated and is repeated constantly…
    and i wondered myself, why “scrub” those words?, why not clarify?
    if it was a matter of miscomunication…
    those are valid and obvious reasons…

    but something gnaws at me about this, is all… just like the mistaken words repeated adnauseum about israel and the map…
    i just have this instinct that this is not a stupid man and that he didn’t really say what we are being TOLD he said…

    and when juan @15 commented that i may have a point, i figured i couldn’t be too far gone if one our finest minds also sees a point…
    thanks juan :-)

    sooooo… i went to THE premier source for middle-east studies…
    if ANYone would know, JUAN COLE would know…
    i’m surprised that there wasn’t more about this at his site, and what HE had to say was rather condemning, without much explanation…
    in part:

    …Ahmadinejad’s bigotted statement that there are no homosexuals in Iran derived from his rightwing religious commitments. What he said is very serious. He erased gays right out of existence. The ultimate in denying people their rights is to deny they even exist (the nonexistent obviously have no rights.)
    [...]It would be nice for the US Right to have us forget that they pull the Ahmadinejad act with regard to gays every day. Denying gays the right to marry is a way of erasing them from civil society. It is a way of denying that they really love one another, as straights do. It is a way of asserting that they do not exist.

    the COMMENTS that followed his piece are also enlightening, and offer some vindication to MY position and reasoning…

    The problem is you didn’t get to hear what he said. What he actually said was “Iran does not have homosexuality like you (in America) do”. In Farsi, he said “enya Shoma”, which translates to “in the manner in which you do”.

    His point, and I think it’s reasonable, is that nature of homosexual identity in Iran is different then the nature of homosexual identity in the United states. I’d say that the nature of homosexual identity is different in the United States then it was, say, 40 years ago. I’d say the same thing about straight identity.

    thank you, coolhappymax… yea, what he said…
    read more here:
    http://www.juancole.com/2007/09/there-are-no-homosexuals-in-more-common.html#comments

    excuse the length… read it all…
    .


  85. tombaker says:

    kind of funny – a universally reviled nutjob like that actually bothering to spiff up his p.r. package. for what, Mahmoud, for whom?

    p.s.@ 98 – I kinda figured that’s what he meant. Nonetheless, it amounts to him saying “we don’t let our gays get all uppity and public (and when they do, we kill them), so it doesn’t really absolve him of anything.

    We should be supporting the numerous Human Rights and Student Democratic movements in Iran, which are, by degree, dragging their own country forward on the road of progress. The people of Iran, though oppressed, really do lean Western in a lot of ways, and killing them with airstrikes is about the only guaranteed way to halt that progress and send them backward.

    More and more, I can only conclude that righty military-industrial-pseudo-intellectuals see the proliferation of terrorism and jihadism as job security for themselves, and that’s as craven a motive as human beings are capable of harboring.


  86. katy says:

    tombaker – all very good points… and i agree…

    but let me make THIS clear – i am not absolving ahmadinejad
    of anything… at least i don’t mean to sound that way…

    your last sentence is insightful and profound…
    and sad…


  87. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Keltoi sez:

    Declare victory and flee the field. Nice technique. Reminds me of some other group….

    Sorry, Keltoi…some of us have jobs and commutes. I told you I had to go, and I told you I’d be back. I also told you I’d be waiting for either a substantiation or retraction.

    Well, here I am…no “fleeing the field” here. But you’ve had almost three hours to provide either a substantiation or a retraction, and what do I find?

    Substantiation of What? That there ISN”T a conspiracy afoot to make Bush President for Life? That is going to be a bit tough, don’t you think?

    Oh, COME ON, Keltoi…you can’t possibly be this thick. Deliberate obtuseness is one of the last refuges of the intellectually bankrupt, and one of my pet peeves.

    Substantiation of what? Substantiation of the assertion you made all the way back in post #73…I quote:

    Iran is working on nukes.

    I challenged you to prove this statement way back in post #75, and you’ve been desperately evading the question ever since.

    Now that I’ve refreshed your allegedly faulty memory, I’ll issue my challenge anew. Substantiate the claim or retract it. Your choice.

    (BTW, who mentioned Chimpy as President for life? I don’t recall doing that, and a quick scroll up confirms my recollection. You might want to see a physician about that memory problem…)

    Yes, I think AQ attacked us on 9-11 and not our own government. If you think that is “grinding my head in the sand” I suggest YOUR head is stuck in a dark, moist, unpleasant place it should not be.

    Again we see evidence of that crippling memory problem of yours. It’s sad, really…

    My comment about your head in the sand was in regards to your reply to my reference to Rex 84. I was even good enough to supply you with a link on the subject, and here was your reply:

    Rex84, Roswell57…..

    Again, just what are you attempting to insinuate, Keltoi? Or is your strategy just to be vague and dismissive enough to discourage me from taking you to task?

    But I do so with love! Have a nice evening.

    Reminds me of something I heard earlier…

    Declare victory and flee the field. Nice technique.

    Now where did I hear that…

    Just so you know, Keltoi, I’m still waiting for your substantiation or retraction of your claim that Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. I’ll be bringing it up on every thread I see you on until I get an answer, so it’s in your best interests to be honest enough to give me one or the other ASAP.


  88. tombaker says:

    ol’ sasquatch is sounding more and more like Daryll every time he rears his detestable head…

    don’t worry folks, after next fall, we won’t have to bother with the smug attempts at wit from the righty crowd – they’ll all slink back into the holes they inhabited prior to the reign of the cheerleader prince.


  89. TripMaster Monkey says:

    Well…it seems as though Keltoi won’t be answering me tonight.

    Isn’t it funny that when I’m forced to be absent for a short period, and I leave notice that I’ll be absent, and I will return, that’s labeled as “declaring victory and fleeing the field”, but when Keltoi just arbitrarily decides to leave for the night (with my first and primary challenge still unanswered), that’s just fine and dandy.

    Don’t worry, Keltoi. As I said earlier, I’ll be giving you all the opportunities you require to answer my challenge.


  90. tombaker says:

    typical righty cut-and-runner



Jump to Top

About Think Progress | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2009 Center for American Progress Action Fund
View Most Popular

Advertisement

What We're About

Featured

image
Subscribe to the Progress Report



imageTopic Cloud


Visit Our Affiliated Sites

image image
Reports


Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.

Name:
Email:
Tip:
(required)


imageArchives


imageBlog Roll