FLASHBACK: Huckabee Compared ‘Homosexuality’ To ‘Necrophilia’ And Fought For Banning Sodomy
FLASHBACK: Huckabee Compared ‘Homosexuality’ To ‘Necrophilia’ And Fought For Banning Sodomy
On CNN’s Larry King Live last night, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said that he would “absolutely” allow a gay man or woman to serve in his administration. “I have people who are homosexual that work for me in the governor’s office,” noted Huckabee:
KING: Could a gay be in your administration?
HUCKABEE: Absolutely.
Why not?
People are competent because — not with anything to do with their sexual orientation. I have people who are homosexual that work for me in the governor’s office. And it was not a qualification. I think you should never (INAUDIBLE)…
In the interview, Huckabee also indicated that he would not change the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. Watch it:
Huckabee’s openess towards LGBT employees may indicate that he is personally tolerant towards gay men and women. But, as his reticence to change Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell shows, he is still in favor of using the power of government to discriminate against gay Americans.
Huckabee is against gay marriage, arguing that “civilization” may not survive if “what marriage and family means” is “rewritten.” As Governor of Arkansas, he “avidly” supported the state amendment banning gay marriage. That wasn’t the only anti-gay public policy Huckabee pushed in Arkansas:
– In 1997, Huckabee requested an amendment to a state Senate bill stating “that it is Arkansas public policy to prohibit sodomy to protect the traditional family structure.” [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 1/23/1997]
– In 1998, Huckabee supported banning gay men and women from acting as foster parents because “it is not in the best interest of children.” [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 7/29/1998]
– In 2003, Huckabee said “If you ask for survivor benefits to be paid to a same-sex survivor, I think we have a right to say no to that.” [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 7/3/2003]
Additionally, in the past, Huckabee has spoken of homosexuality using some of the most divisive and hyperbolic rhetoric possible:
– In a 1992 questionnaire for the Associated Press, Huckabee claimed that “homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk.”
– In his 1998 book, Kids Who Kill, Huckabee compared homosexuality to necrophilia, decrying “publicly endorsed and institutionally supported aberrations–from homosexuality and pedophilia to sadomasochism and necrophilia.”
While Huckabee now wants to claim that he has no personal animus against gay Americans, his record suggests he has no problem using the powers of government to discriminate against them.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
How very Christian of him
December 18th, 2007 at 3:29 pmhe doesn’t have a problem with killing dogs, unless you’re going to have sex with the corpse later.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:30 pmIn keeping with the season, Schmuckabee is as ‘nutty as a fruitcake.’
December 18th, 2007 at 3:32 pmso when the good book says to turn the other cheek, Ol’ Huck takes it as turn both cheeks and turn them away.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:34 pmNone of this suprises me comming from a conservative evangelical christian (a real evangelical christian, unlike most politicians who just play one on TV).
December 18th, 2007 at 3:35 pmOl’ Huck hates them homosexuals, but he LOVES criminals and pardons their sentences at will.
As governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee had a hand in twice as many pardons and commutations as his three predecessors combined.
The case he’s asked about most concerns the parole of a castrated rapist who later killed a woman.
Although the Republican presidential contender and Southern Baptist preacher plays down any personal involvement in that release, Huckabee granted 1,033 pardons and commutations in his 10 1/2 years as governor of Arkansas. The acts of clemency benefited the stepson of a staff member, murderers who worked at the governor’s mansion, a rock star and inmates who received good words from their pastors.
http://www.usatoday.com/ news/ politics/ election2008/ 2007-12-10-huckabee-pardons_N.htm
December 18th, 2007 at 3:36 pmIf elected, he damn well better get used to working with closeted bizarro Republican politicans, eh?
Hyuckabee, ‘I’m not a flat-earther. Nothing goes flat in just 6,000 years.’
December 18th, 2007 at 3:39 pmDoes this imbecil deserves a comment??
December 18th, 2007 at 3:41 pmI really hope he does get the nomination.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:47 pmHe’ll be grilled to repudiate those statements repeatedly.
If he does, he loses his base, if not, the rest of the nation will see how dangerous this religious fanatic is.
Whoa! TMI on Huckabee! And I believe that we are just scratching the surface of a very rigid mind here. He’s on his best behavior and this is what he’s all about?? I can’t imagine in my wildest of nightmares what else this poor sick soul believes.
Obviously, he had a totally repressed childhood and is suffering from an under-developed world view as well as a very limited concept of what a life of non-judgment and unity can be all about.
I think that Gomer Pyle would make a better president because at least he plays at “being ignorant”; when it comes to incredible stupidity and ignorance, I’m afraid that Huckabee’s the “real deal”.
This man is downright scary!
December 18th, 2007 at 3:50 pmI love watching each and every one of the RePugniScum candidates sucking wind as soon as the blogs (with a piece of history in their hands) show up and point out the truth.
Trudy Julie Annie is out!!
Huckleberry is out!!
Mitt Witt Roomy is out!!
McLame is out!!
Fred Thompson is out!! Was he ever in??
What a bunch of crooooked up, hoooked up looooosers!!!
And Fux nOoze can’t do a damn thing to help any of them!!
Uh oh!! Time for another terrierist threat from GW Botch and Dick(head) Vader!
December 18th, 2007 at 3:50 pmHi RU: Indeed! He will have these moronic philosophies come back to haunt him - just when he’s done the “christmas snapshot ad” painting himself all warm and fuzzy. He’s a pretty sick dude.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:51 pmLIAR is written all over Hucks face. No one changes their views from anti abortion, anti gay, anti women of the severity Huck has shown to this passive go the flow BS. Do we need another LIAR in the WH?
December 18th, 2007 at 3:51 pmMaybe we need to start calling Huckabee Dinkleberry instead?
December 18th, 2007 at 3:52 pmI don’t even think the reichwing christofascist can stomach the likes of this guy. They know now that they were used like toilet paper by Bush in the last election. They’d have to be a bit gun-shy right now. I think this: If it walks like a hypocrite, talks like a hypocrite, acts like a hypocrite, it’s probably Huckabee!
December 18th, 2007 at 3:53 pmYou sure you want to go through with this Chucklebee? It’s about to get ugly. For such a family values kind of guy we haven’t seen you showing off that wife of your’s yet. Come on bring her and the young ones up front where we can all have a look at them and ask a few questions. Got rope?
December 18th, 2007 at 3:56 pmRUCerious,
I guarantee he will get the nomination. The Republican Party and its hopes lie with the Evangelicals now. They have found their guy and will take him to the nomination. And then he will get exposed as the zealot he is.
As I said, the Republican nominating process, is as good as over.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:57 pmOK then CHL since you know everything, who will be the nominee then?
December 18th, 2007 at 3:58 pmI’m glad that Huck at least is willing to work alongside a gay person — apparently he doesn’t think it’s a contagious condition, as some people do.
He’s got a long way to go on some of his other beliefs, though:
“Huckabee is against gay marriage, arguing that ‘civilization’ may not survive if “what marriage and family means†is ‘rewritten.’ ”
– This is what people said about allowing interracial marriage. A frequent argument was that “if you allow whites to marry blacks, next you’ll be allowing people to marry animals.” As we have seen, interracial marriage has hardly damaged the institution.
“…it is Arkansas public policy to prohibit sodomy to protect the traditional family structure.â€
– And how did Huckabee plan on enforcing this law? Maybe I don’t want to know. I suspect that he felt the “traditional family structure” would best be served by forcing the Larry Craigs of the world into public restroom stalls.
“If you ask for survivor benefits to be paid to a same-sex survivor, I think we have a right to say no to that.â€
– Even if that survivor was a partner for years, and even financially dependent upon the deceased. Gays make lifetime commitments just as straight people do, yet their commitment still isn’t supported by society.
So I guess Huckabee can work with a gay person. But can he look that co-worker in the face and say, “I can make a lifetime commitment to my partner that is recognized by society. You can’t. I can have sex with my lifetime partner. You can’t. And if I die, my dependent partner will get survivor benefits. If you die, your partner won’t.”?
December 18th, 2007 at 3:59 pmThis man is downright scary!
Comment by Veritas — December 18, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
And he thinks he was created in the “image of God!” Huckleberry is a supertitious(sp?) fool. Religion does that!! Weakens the mind and finds all kinds of hatred it all the wrong places!!!
The hatred of homosexuals is found only in the book of Leviticus. That book also says that I can sell my daughters into slavery!! The Book of Leviticus is the most hateful chapter found in either the Torah or the Bible!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 4:01 pmOh Huckabee, Oh Huckabee,
December 18th, 2007 at 4:03 pmHow archaic are thy decrials.
You spout such creed, and make it thine,
You deplore deeds, and then you whine,
deny it all, deny it all, how hypocritical thy denials
“…and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk.†— Huckabee, 1992
—————————————————
I hope he realizes by now — 15 years later — that homosexuality is not, nor ever has been a public health risk.
Promiscuity, however, is. And always has been. For gays and straights alike. Not just for AIDS, but for all STDs.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:03 pmComment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
Seems conservatives aren’t fond of any of the lot but then again neither am I.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:05 pmMike Huckabible’s illegal drug plan: It’s either a typo or pretty damn interesting:
http://www.slate.com/id/2179595/entry/2179598/
December 18th, 2007 at 4:05 pm“publicly endorsed and institutionally supported aberrations–from homosexuality and pedophilia to sadomasochism and necrophilia.â€
——————————
Um…since when have pedophilia and necrophilia been publicly endorsed and institutionally supported? By pedophiles and necrophiles, maybe. But I know of no place where they are legal, let alone acceptable by anyone else. What planet is Huckabee living on?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:06 pmCHL:
December 18th, 2007 at 4:11 pmWhy would any respectable conservative vote for Giuliani?
Doesn’t Huckabee know that the GOP fell off moral mountain some time ago?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:11 pmIt’s too soon to tell for sure Shayne, but at the present time, I’d say its likely to be Rudy Giuliani -CHL
Naw, Bill Kristol signaled to the base that Rudy wasn’t it.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:12 pmHuckabee had his little bump in the polls, but now that people are learning about him, he’ll fade away. Conservatives, as a whole, aren’t exactly thrilled with him as a Presidential candidate either, although VP remains a possibility.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
It’s too soon to tell for sure Shayne, but at the present time, I’d say its likely to be Rudy Giuliani. Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney each have a shot, although far less likely. Alan Keyes, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter will likely all be out of it within the next 6 or 7 weeks.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:06 pm
It’s too soon to tell for sure Shayne, but at the present time, I’d say its likely to be Rudy Giuliani. Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney each have a shot, although far less likely. Alan Keyes, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter will likely all be out of it within the next 6 or 7 weeks.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:06 pm
First yousay he’ll fade away and then you say he has a shot. You’re as good with the future as you are with history I see. Forget I asked.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:13 pmhuck talks about what he knows. homosexuality, necrophilia, sodomy, sadomasochism, pedophilia, unnatural, aberrant and sinful.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:15 pmthese are his strengths, he is telling the faithful what they want to hear more about.
. That is an issue open to fair and honest debate, and one on which I may someday change my mind.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
Reich-wingers are incapable of changing their mind….that’s the basis of conservatism i.e. afraid of change, progress, and new ideas.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:15 pmComment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
Yeah it would be cool to have a leader in the European sense. One who isn’t afraid to use their civil servants to run their mistresses errands and not pretend to be just another family values clown. You go Rudy!
December 18th, 2007 at 4:17 pm“While Huckabee now wants to claim that he has no personal animus against gay Americans, his record suggests he has no problem using the powers of government to discriminate against them.”
“Animus” above, s/b “animice”. Huck has plenty of it for a lot of people, but enough pr sense to come up with ways to run and hide from it now that he’s a “top-tier” candidate.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:21 pmI’ll be voting for Rudy Giuliani, although I also like Fred Thompson.
The only Republicans that I would not vote for are Alan Keyes, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo….all three strike me as a bit nutty, each in their own way, especially Ron Paul and Alan Keyes.
As for the Democratic field, well, I would never vote for any of them…I get a sick feeling in the pit of my gut at the thought of any of those clowns in the White House.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:21 pmFrank - don’t you think we’d be a LOT safer if we’d just exterminate everyone who does/might pose a threat? What would you propose for a “final solution”?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:22 pmThe religious right are hanging onto Huck’s old views.. the anti gay, anti abortion and anti women which is why they support him. It is all about the appointment of SC judges.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:23 pmThat is an issue open to fair and honest debate, and one on which I may someday change my mind.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
It’s not open to fair and honest debate, because the right comes at it out of ignorance, fear and lies. it’s discrimination of the most unAmerican kind, and should be struck down, as other unreasonable, ignorant, fear-based forms of rightwing, conservative discrimination have been struck down by this liberal democracy over the years. Gays in the workplace, military or legal marriage pose no threat of any kind to our democracy, strength or moral standing. Your bullshit term of “special rights” is just another in the long line of ignorant lies that republiscum hatred thrives on.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:23 pmComment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
Dude Thompson is about as alive as Bob Dole
December 18th, 2007 at 4:23 pmSettling for the ‘least dangerous’ candidate does not sound like a plan I can support.
Campaign reform is what’s needed. An American shouldn’t need $100M to enter a political race.
Let’s reform the process while initiating term limits and no private ’soft’ money from corporations.
If we did that, you know who would still be running? Kucinich & Paul.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:24 pmThis idiot should just go away so that we can concentrate our money and effort on a real-world candidate like Giuliani or McCain.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
Please let it be Guiliani! That’d be so fun to watch. That guy’s record is atrocious, he’s dispised by liberals and yet stands against almost every domstic policy conservatives care about. He’s the right’s Joe Lieberman.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:24 pmHEY Go Easy on Huckabee! As a Dem we want him as the 2008 Repug Nominee in the worst way.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:25 pmWe LUV Mike!
In a 1998 book decrying American culture, Huckabee was no seeker of common ground. He drew stark lines, equating environmentalists with pornographers and homosexuality with pedophilia and necrophilia. He also declared that people who do not believe in God tend to be immoral and to engage in “destructive behavior.” He drew a rather harsh picture of an American society starkly split between people of faith and those of a secular bent, with the latter being a direct and immediate threat to the nation.
Two of the 14 points of Fascism brought to you by Mike Huckabee:
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause
The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous†acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.†Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together
Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.†A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
For those of you who want to know, FACT – According to the October 5, 2006 issue of Pediatrics, the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, 98% of molested boys and 99.6% of molested girls are victims of HETROSEXUALS.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:25 pm(sorry for the typos - too excited).
December 18th, 2007 at 4:25 pmAs long as the candidate is strong on security and will not hesitate to use all means available in the war on terror, he’s got my vote.
Comment by Frank M
Sieg Heil!
December 18th, 2007 at 4:25 pm“publicly endorsed and institutionally supported aberrations–from homosexuality and pedophilia to sadomasochism and necrophilia“
where are pedophilia, sadomasochism and necrophilia publicly endorsed and institutionally supported???
“People are competent because — not with anything to do with their sexual orientation.â€
yeah! Why not extend that thinking to the military?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:25 pm“As long as the candidate is strong on security and will not hesitate to use all means available in the war on terror, he’s got my vote.
Comment by Frank M”
Yup, kill ‘em all and let God sort ‘em out.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:27 pms for the Democratic field, well, I would never vote for any of them…I get a sick feeling in the pit of my gut at the thought of any of those clowns in the White House.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
well, that post shows your ignorance and hatred for American freedom and ideals. Giuliani, a cross-dressing serial adulterer who hires thugs and cronies like kerick, excellent ckoice, if you like Idi Amin. Thompson, the laziest Senator to ever sleep through a term, a bad actor, and an ignorant ass with a trophy wife, another country-club bozo. There isn’t a single Dem running who doesn’t stand head-and-shoulders above those two losers, morally, intellectually, and spiritually.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:27 pmFrank, the “war on terror” is a myth — just a device used by Bush-Cheney and Company you keep you shaking in your boots while they trample your rights under the Constitution and reduce all of us to a state of total subservience.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:28 pmComment by Billy Hill — December 18, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
You talk silly!
December 18th, 2007 at 4:29 pmI don’t see any need to change this policy formulated by our current President.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:24 pm
of course you don’t, you’re a loser. Losers like to lose.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:29 pmI had hoped that Duncan Hunter would get the nomination and choose Fred Thompson as his VP…so that I could put a Hunter/Thompson ‘08 sticker on my car, but I just don’t see it happening.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:30 pmFrank, the “war on terror†is a myth — just a device used by Bush-Cheney and Company you keep you shaking in your boots while they trample your rights under the Constitution and reduce all of us to a state of total subservience.
Comment by Don in Texas
———————————————-
Sounds like you’re the one shaking in your boots.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:30 pmefty. Should Republicans or Conservatives have the right to sue the Center for American Progress if it refuses to hire them because of their political beliefs?
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
they do have that right, they’ll just lose.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:31 pmGiuliani is a political cadaver.
Castro has more life in him than Rudy Gee.
He’s cutting and running from NH, just like Frederick of Hollyweird.
-GSD
December 18th, 2007 at 4:31 pm#62: Really? And how many terror attacks have there been on US soil since 9/11? Not a single one.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
wrong, frank, you’re ignoring the anthrax attacks (5 dead) and katrina, which was handled like 9/11, resulting in another huge loss for the USA. You’re so pathetically a tool, and you are really uninformed. Bush and bin laden count on you.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:32 pmSounds like you’re the one shaking in your boots.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
pretty funny from a coward who isn’t posting from Iraq.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:33 pm62: Really? And how many terror attacks have there been on US soil since 9/11? Not a single one.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
Hasn’t been any attacks of killer tomatoes either. You point is pointless. If they were any would you blame the president or would you make excuses?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:34 pmpretty funny from a coward who isn’t posting from Iraq.
Comment by Lefty Patriot
—————————————————-
Lame.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:34 pmface it, rightards, there isn’t a single eligible candidate for the GOP nimination. losers, perverts, lazy-ass actors, religious nuts, cult followers, and failures. Thanks for ‘06, it was a good start. Now we will finish you off, and bury that stinking carcass of the treason party, the GOP, Gross Old Perverts.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:35 pmThe only area on which we may differ with regard to sexual preference is whether or not it should be a protected classification under state and federal workplace discrimination laws.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
Even though I’m sure we differ on this point, I suspect we probably aren’t too far apart.
I support protected classifications under discrimination laws ONLY when that classification can produce evidence of ongoing widespread discrimination (one or two isolated cases of discrimination by nutcases don’t count). For example, I don’t support people with blue eyes being a protected classification, because there hasn’t been widespread discrimination against people with blue eyes.
There has been widespread discrimination practiced based on race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, physical disability (when that disability is irrelevant to the situation), and even weight. Therefore, I support anti-discrimination laws based on these characteristics. Common sense must prevail, however. No one should be required to hire a paraplegic to scale telephone poles, a dark-skinned model to appear in a Coppertone ad, or an obese man to model junior miss fashions.
You make an interesting point about increased litigation. Yes — one of the nasty little byproducts of making laws is lawsuits. It’s frustrating when somebody sues you with the claim “you fired me because I’m ____________ (fill in your favorite protected classification here)”. And it’s entirely possible that had nothing to do with the firing — you fired him because he’s a jerk. No matter what system you set up, somebody will abuse it.
However, litigation today will usually favor the alleged discriminator — UNLESS the alleged discriminator has established a pattern of discrimination (for instance, never promoting black employees despite their having the same qualifications as white employees, or always firing somebody after they admit they’re gay), or if the alleged discriminator has blatantly and publicly made admissions that the discrimination was race, religion, gender or whatever based.
I would love to be able to do away with protected classifications altogether. I truly hope that someday we will all judge people on what they do instead of who they are.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:39 pmIf Republicans and Conservatives don’t have the right to sue the Center for American Progress should it refuse to hire them because of their political beliefs, why should people be able to sue private employers for refusing to hire them because of their sexual preference?
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Because one is not like the other?
jesus, are you all taking stupid pills? Since when does sexual preference equal treason? Republicans are traitors, and discrimination against them is in the best interests of national security, that’s plain enough. Gays, not so much.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:39 pmWhy does ever thread have to be turned into a wacko 9/11 conspiracy thread?
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:38 pm
are you addressing frank?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:40 pm76 - If what you say is true, then the President has done a shockingly BAD job of tracking down the perpetrators. A really, really, bad job.
and back @ 51 - from a “conservative” standpoint, how are you going to “pay for” the so-called Bush policy???
December 18th, 2007 at 4:40 pmComment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
jas, “huck” huckabee’s going to be the republican party’s candidate for president. relax get use to it.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:41 pmWhy does ever thread have to be turned into a wacko 9/11 conspiracy thread?
Comment by cold_hard_left
———————————————–
It probably has something to do with the fact that most of the people who post comment here are nuts.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:41 pmWhen you’ve got a Congress that openly hinders your war effort, it can only result in less security.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:39 pm
well, the longer Bush is in office, the better the chances of another successful attack, considering the massive failure of 9/11, so you may have a point. Impeachment is the only protection we have, at this point.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:41 pmstop being so sensitive about those things Frank - it erodes your “get tough” credibility enormously. if we “spineless pinko moonbats” can take the insults hurled at us, what can be said of your durability?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:42 pm#73: Looks like we may be having another attack soon, because we have had to scale back the methods that worked so well before. Why? Because of the threat of partisan witch-hunts after the 2006 elections. When you’ve got a Congress that openly hinders your war effort, it can only result in less security.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:39 pm
So if it happens on Bush’s watch it will be Congress’ fault but if it doesn’t it will be Bush’s fault. That’s moronic thinking. By the way what else do your tea leaves have to say?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:42 pmI wouldn’t be worried about old Huck as he is just the turd that has floated to the top at this point in time.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:43 pmWhy the large troll turnout for a story about someone they claim they don’t support? If this isn’t proof they are simple vandals, driven by a warped need to attack all they can’t understand, I don’t know what is.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:45 pmI wouldn’t be worried about old Huck as he is just the turd that has floated to the top at this point in time.
Comment by BillFromDover — December 18, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
yes, come november that whole load will be flushed, along with the treason party GOP.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:46 pmWhen you’ve got a Congress that openly hinders your war effort, it can only result in less security.
Comment by Frank M
————————————————————–
Right you are Frank, right you are.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:47 pmI don’t care how much the Repukes tout that Gay Marriage will destroy traditional marriage, it has not and will not affect my 30 YEARS OF MARRIAGE, which is longer than most Repukes stay married, uh, Newt, Rudy, and all the rest.
I know that the right just has a warped sense of reality, a very warped one.
And how come Atheists stay married so long, maybe it’s the lack of religion and just good personal values.
Buck Fush
December 18th, 2007 at 4:47 pmI don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone (sane/adult, that is) be so utterly and shamelessly dishonest with a straight face as Frank and Chuck are. Only the Cheerleader Prince could hope to outdo them in that regard.
Next they’ll be telling us the sky is green, and the grass is a vivid orange, and pretending to be insulted when we disagree.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:47 pmI would love to be able to do away with protected classifications altogether. I truly hope that someday we will all judge people on what they do instead of who they are.
Comment by missmolly — December 18, 2007 @ 4:39 pm
That would be great. We’d never have another coke-snorting, draft-dodging fratboy failure run for president again. In fact, that would end the republican party once and for all.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:49 pmafter all the garbage, do you expect anything but an insult from anyone, Chilly?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:49 pmLooks like we may be having another attack soon, because we have had to scale back the methods that worked so well before. Why? Because of the threat of partisan witch-hunts after the 2006 elections.
Comment by Frank M Stein — December 18, 2007 @ 4:39 pm
Wha’ the Hell are you talking about, Jake? Are you cutting and pasting again? Don’t you have other Vet’s biographies to steal as your own? Or am I on the Ignore List?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:51 pmThe Top 10 Moments in Mike Huckabee’s extremism:
1. Huckabee Calls for the Quarantine of AIDS Victims
2. Huckabee Enables the Politically-Motivated Parole of Repeat Rapist/Murderer
3. Huckabee Offers Faith-Based Pardons
4. Huckabee Undermines the Teaching of Evolution
5. Huckabee Speaks for God
6. Huckabee Speaks to God
7. Huckabee Claims God Behind His Rise in the Polls
8. Huckabee Proclaims His Theology Degree a Unique Qualification to Fight Terrorism
9. Huckabee Flip-Flops, Calls for Federal Abortion Ban
10. Huckabee Calls for Consumption Tax, Abolition of the IRS
December 18th, 2007 at 4:52 pmhttp://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000854.htm
“…born-again Christian couples who marry…in the church after having received premarital counseling…and attend church regularly and pray daily together…†experience only 1 divorce out of nearly 39,000 marriages — or 0.00256 percent.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
So, Newt and Rudeee must not born-again Christians.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:53 pmYou mean no Obama? (coke snorting, never served, private schooled, etc…)
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:53 pm
You mean herr dubyah (coke snorting, AWOL, private schooled, etc…)???
December 18th, 2007 at 4:53 pm10 More Moments in Mike Huckabee’s Extremism:
11. Huckabee Vows to Take Nation Back for Christ
12. Huckabee Declares Culture War in 1998 Book
13. Huckabee Declares Women Should Graciously Submit to Their Husbands
14. Huckabee Predicts Victory over Islam at the End of Times
15. Huckabee Boasts About Theology Degree He Doesn’t Have
16. Huckabee Destroys His State Computer Records - and Church Sermons
17. Huckabee Offers State Appointments in Exchange for Gifts
18. Huckabee Uses Wedding Registries to Furnish New Home
19. Huckabee Offers Clemency to Repeat DWI Offender (and GOP Donor)
20. Huckabee Intervenes to Save Dog-Killing Son from Legal Jeopardy
http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000863.htm
December 18th, 2007 at 4:54 pm104 - 1 divorce, and how many domestic homicides?
We didn’t miss the story about the Baptist Minister’s Wife killing him this past summer, and we didn’t miss the story of the homeschooled Fundy teens killing that girl’s parents, and we didn’t miss the story of the….really, the list is kinda long.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:55 pmHere’s Huckabee’s hyper-religious Christmas ad. Notice the passive-aggressive cross shape directly behind him.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BjtGgfhKIvo
December 18th, 2007 at 4:55 pmCHL, coke snorting offends you? Why so silent during the reign of GW?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:55 pmMost conservatives will fall in line when it comes to a choice between family values and national security. The latter will always win. When we’re secure, then we can squabble over the rest of the values. Survival is the ultimate idology.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Then I guess you guys felt the most secure under Bill Clinton because you found plenty of time and money to squabble over bullshit that meant nothing back then didn’t you.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:57 pmIn the interest of being on topic can someone mention sodomy?
December 18th, 2007 at 4:57 pmWe’ve all heard who you do not like Lefty. Who do you support?
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
At this point, I’m against conservatives and republicans, since they have proven over the years their inneffectiveness, weakness, incompetence and lack of compassion. The only thing they’ve been good at is winning questionable elections. Their foreign policy has weakened America and our military, their domestic policy has divided the electorate against itself. They are without scruples and ethics, and have admitted their desire for a One World Government that would be used to enable the rich to get richer, on the backs of the 98%. The next election will only be a tiny little step in taking back our country from traitors and opportunists; if it can be done, it will take many years. there are very few candidates that are worth the effort, and the republican slate is an international embarrassment. corporate bribery has all but ruined our country, so whoever can stand up against the big money will get my support.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:57 pmLiberal Regions have the lowest divorce rates in the country: District of Columbia had the lowest reported divorce rate, at 1.7, followed by Massachusetts at 2.2 and Pennsylvania at 2.5.
http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml
Notice the only “stats” about divorce rates among Christians come from a non-scientific source?!?
ROFL!!!!!! CHL is debunked again!! LOL!!!!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 4:59 pmWha’ the Hell are you talking about, Jake?
Comment by DRxJ — December 18, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
Survival is the ultimate idology.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
When I read that I instantly thought of Jake. They just can’t keep away! They love it here so much.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:00 pmBorn-Again Christians No More Immune to Divorce Than Others, Says Author
Born-again Christians are just as likely to get divorced as anybody else in American society, and the vast majority of those identifying themselves as divorced and born-again actually got their divorces after converting to Christianity, according to a new book called The Divorce Reality.
In the churches, people have a superstitious view that Christianity will keep them from divorce, but they are subject to the same problems as everyone else, and they include a lack of relationship skills,” said Donald Hughes, author of The Divorce Reality and editor of the JesusJournal.com Web site. “Just being born again is not a rabbit’s foot,” he said.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ ViewCulture.asp?Page=/ Culture/ archive/ 200201/ CUL20020121b.html
ROFL!!!!!! CHL is debunked again!! LOL!!!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:00 pmWhy are the religious right-wing fanatics so obsessed with sexual deviance?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:01 pmBecause as far as I know, Bush being an alleged coke snorter was a fictional creation of the media and left wing bloggers. Obama, on the other hand wears his past drug use as a badge of honor and tends to give teens the impression that they can abuse coke and still grow up to be POTUS.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
herr dubyah admitted on tape to being a coke head!!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6999665/
ROFL!!!!!! CHL is debunked again!! LOL!!!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:02 pmAnd, before anyone gets mad at me, by deviance I mean deviance from the “norm”. Perhaps the religious fanatics are just so bored with their own sex lives?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:02 pm#50: Most conservatives will fall in line when it comes to a choice between family values and national security. The latter will always win. When we’re secure, then we can squabble over the rest of the values. Survival is the ultimate idology.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Who exactly is threatening you? Do the hordes of Islamic radicals have carriers off the coast and no one told me? To live your life like a scared little girl is a life not worth living. It’s just sad, if I were 1/100th of the coward you were, I wouldn’t be able to live with myself. Frank, however, brags about how much of a wimp he is.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:02 pmBecause as far as I know, Bush being an alleged coke snorter was a fictional creation of the media and left wing bloggers. Obama, on the other hand wears his past drug use as a badge of honor and tends to give teens the impression that they can abuse coke and still grow up to be POTUS.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
even though all the evidence and all the testimony disproves your thesis. very good, little tool. and Bush proves that one can abuse alcohol and drugs, get a free ride all of your life, learn nothing from your affirmative action college admissions, and grow up to be POTUS, despite losing the elections. This is the legacy you’ve left.
And 9/11.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:02 pmI don’t vouch for these statistics, but Dr. Tom Ellis, chairman of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Council on the Family said that for “…born-again Christian couples who marry…in the church after having received premarital counseling…and attend church regularly and pray daily together…†experience only 1 divorce out of nearly 39,000 marriages — or 0.00256 percent.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
Well I only know on Christian fundamentalist couple but they got divorced because he hooked on internet porn so bad he couldn’t bother to keep it from his 3 daughters. As a loyal participating church member it came as quite a surprise to his fellow church goers.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:03 pmjas, when did Obama tell teens it’s ok to abuse coke? He openly admitted to his mistake…that’s brave. Herr dubyah hide about his past and tried to cover up his alcohol and drug addictions. What coward. You support a coward who hides his past.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:03 pmFor more background on Mike Huckabee the dangerous extremist and radical reactionary, see:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:03 pm- “Top 10 Moments in Mike Huckabee’s Extremism.”
- “10 More Moments in Mike Huckabee’s Extremism.”
Survival is the ultimate idology.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
What does survival have to do with idols?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:04 pmJAS:
Born-Again Christians No More Immune to Divorce Than Others, Says Author
Born-again Christians are just as likely to get divorced as anybody else in American society, and the vast majority of those identifying themselves as divorced and born-again actually got their divorces after converting to Christianity, according to a new book called The Divorce Reality.
In the churches, people have a superstitious view that Christianity will keep them from divorce, but they are subject to the same problems as everyone else, and they include a lack of relationship skills,†said Donald Hughes, author of The Divorce Reality and editor of the JesusJournal.com Web site. “Just being born again is not a rabbit’s foot,†he said.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ ViewCulture.asp?Page=/ Culture/ archive/ 200201/ CUL20020121b.html
ROFL!!!!!! CHL is debunked again!! LOL!!!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:04 pmCHL, a man admits his past was less than spot free and you want to cut him down. But you stand behind a man that has a dark and covered past. One who has never proven that he attended the Air National Guard on the dates he was supposed to. No evidence has ever come up that Bush was there. That’s AWOL. As for Bush’s coke history, it’s not a fantasy. It’s Bush’s past, along with pissed soaked beds.
You attack a man for coming clean but defend a man that cowers in the dark.
That says a lot about you.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:04 pmROFL!!!!!! CHL is debunked again!! LOL!!!!!
Comment by Dr. Matt — December 18, 2007 @ 5:02 pm
it is funny.
but let’s let jas speak for himself.
jas?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:04 pm116. Lefty, you have avoided the question. What is the name of the candidate you support? It’s easy as hell to be against someone. Who are you for?
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:00 pm
I answered the question honestly and completely. there is no name yet. why are you so purposefully stupid and dense? By the way, it’s also none of your damn business.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:05 pmJas, you didn’t read the article.
ROFL!!!!! Jas is debunked again!! LOL!!!!!
adolf dubyah says. “You know why? Because I don’t want some little kid doing what I tried.”
December 18th, 2007 at 5:06 pmHellina - it’s only when Democrats do it that it becomes so offensive.
Ol’ Dubya’s coke use was just innocent youthful experimentation.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:06 pmNewt was Southern Baptist, but I don’t think he met the rest of Mr. Ellis’ criteria for his statistics.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 4:56 pm
But you don’t know do you. Something else you’re just pulling out of your ass to make your argument.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:06 pmJAS:
Born-Again Christians No More Immune to Divorce Than Others, Says Author
http://www.cnsnews.com/ ViewCulture.asp?Page=/ Culture/ archive/ 200201/ CUL20020121b.html
December 18th, 2007 at 5:07 pmLiberal Regions have the lowest divorce rates in the country: District of Columbia had the lowest reported divorce rate, at 1.7, followed by Massachusetts at 2.2 and Pennsylvania at 2.5.
http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml
December 18th, 2007 at 5:07 pmComment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:04 pm
See the thing is some of us actually lived in that little town in maine. I’ll go with the large ears of a small town long before I bother with your articles
December 18th, 2007 at 5:08 pmYes, Dr. Matt, CHL is a total propaganda tool for the reichwing fascists. Ignores the fact the liberals have a very low divorce rate. Atheists also have a very low rate. But CHL is probably not married and never will be, who would want a scum wad like that anyway?
Kiss off CHL, you lose, or should I say, you loser.
Buck Fush
December 18th, 2007 at 5:08 pm#62: Really? And how many terror attacks have there been on US soil since 9/11? Not a single one.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
That’s true if you leave out the terrorists threats made by GW Botch and Dick(head) Cheney!
Remember all the hollow threats and red, orange alerts by our own completely worthless PresiDunce!!! That’s terrorism a$$hole!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:10 pmDon’t let the troll’s “logic” deceive, or distract, you. The fact of the matter is the Huckster’s individual beliefs are irrelevant.
What is relevant is that he has proven, by word and deed, that he will enact policy based on what his Faith dictates. This includes decisions on scientific issues which surpass his understanding or conflict with his preconceptions. He has publicly expressed his belief in Biblical inerrency. Can he be trusted to make sound decisions based on the latest data?
Perhaps most disturbing? He has stated, unequivocally, that he refuses to separate his Faith from his professional life. This fact, alone, causes me to think he should be exempt from any public office.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:11 pmI am not yet convinced that he quit as long ago as he claims, or even that he has quit at all.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:08 pm
Even though there is no evidence, nor even any claims, of current useage. You’ll believe it because of your racist ignorance, your fear of the minority. No wonder we can’t win a war with your kind in charge.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:11 pmI believe that Obama used coke as a teen. I am not yet convinced that he quit as long ago as he claims, or even that he has quit at all.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:08 pm
And you base this on what? So if I were to say I an not conviinced that Bush isn’t a dull witted spoiled brat with a coke and alcohol problem I would be on equal footing I assume
December 18th, 2007 at 5:12 pmComment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Who exactly is threatening you? Do the hordes of Islamic radicals have carriers off the coast and no one told me? To live your life like a scared little girl is a life not worth living. It’s just sad, if I were 1/100th of the coward you were, I wouldn’t be able to live with myself. Frank, however, brags about how much of a wimp he is.
Comment by Blue Stater — December 18, 2007 @ 5:02 pm
That Iraqi navy is getting ready to paddle their canoes up the Mississippi where they can toss their WMDs out on the shoreline, don’t you know. That’s why Frank/Jake types huddled under his bed pissing himself.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:13 pmI believe that Obama used coke as a teen. I am not yet convinced that he quit as long ago as he claims, or even that he has quit at all.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:08 pm
All this stuff you pulled out of your ass today you should be able to easily stick your head back up there where it’s comfortable.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:14 pmBuckie, not that it is any of your business, but within the next few months, I will have been married for 20 years, and have never been divorced.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:14 pm
my sympathies to your poor wife. is she out of the ER yet?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:15 pmAnd you base this on what? So if I were to say I an not conviinced that Bush isn’t a dull witted spoiled brat with a coke and alcohol problem I would be on equal footing I assume
Comment by dbadass — December 18, 2007 @ 5:12 pm
The difference is CHL doesn’t care one bit how stupid his argument is or how often he contradicts himself. We would be ashamed of ourselves if we spouted this inane drivel.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:16 pmI’m not wrong. I’m just considering the anthrax attacks to be a part of the 9/11. It was pulled off by the same group of militant muslims and was clearly synchronized with the twin towers attack.
Comment by Frank M — December 18, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Bullsh|t!!! Got proof a$$hole?
“[…] considering?” hAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA!!! Evidence sucks for assh0les like you, right???
December 18th, 2007 at 5:17 pmComment by Lefty Patriot — December 18, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
Just speculating but I think this may be an attempt to sound tough. Sort of a Stone Cold Steve Austin type of thing. Wanna clue us in cold_hard_left?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:17 pmcold hard left,
“Do you believe an admitted coke fiend that he has quit when he says he has quit?”
And the President? Admitted alcoholic, and drug user.
Do you believe him?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:17 pm148. It has nothing to do with his race. You are the only one who has played the “race card†in this discussion. Obama is an admitted coke fiend. Do you believe an admitted coke fiend that he has quit when he says he has quit?
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
No, he admitted to ‘trying’ it. A ‘fiend’ is an ‘addict’, which is a more appropriate description of GWB…
But that’s OK, ‘tards like you struggle consistently with proper usage of the English language - we attribute it to your childhood in the trailer when your dad/uncle only cursed at you…
December 18th, 2007 at 5:18 pmWhen was the word “Fiend” ever employed as a descripter of Obama’s experience with recreational drugs? Well other than by a few here?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:19 pmShe’s out shopping and supporting our economy Lefty. Managed to score a Wii this week and need to buy all of the accessories.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:18 pm
You mean by buying imported products at walmart, and underpaying workers? ROTFL!!! Sorry, you sad, fat old ‘tard, but the only thing you support is YOUR OWN CONTINUED IGNORANCE!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:20 pmComment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:14 pm
I call bullsh!t. If you are as old, or informed, as you claim; you would know the source of, and joke behind, Ret. Col. Jack Ripper.
Another ignorant troll discredits itself and will, probably, never even realize it.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:20 pmShe’s out shopping and supporting our economy Lefty. Managed to score a Wii this week and need to buy all of the accessories.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:18 pm
Jesus is so proud of you and your WIIfe!!! Just the time of year for unadulterated greed!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:21 pmI believe that Obama used coke as a teen. I am not yet convinced that he quit as long ago as he claims, or even that he has quit at all.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:08 pm
Yet you were CONVINCED that Bush was not a DRUG ADDICT? ROTFL!!
That kind of NAIVE STUPID IGNORANCE is why we MAKE FUN OF YOU OLD ‘TARDS!!!
Don’t forget to go TAP YOUR TOES in the MALL when you go PICK UP YOUR WIFE! Keep spreading those GOP VALUES all over the STALLS!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:21 pm148. It has nothing to do with his race. You are the only one who has played the “race card†in this discussion. Obama is an admitted coke fiend. Do you believe an admitted coke fiend that he has quit when he says he has quit?
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
Trying coke makes him a coke fiend? But congratulations are in order. You and the other idiot trolls managed to utterly derail a thread about huckabee and gay people. Now you’ve turned it into another thread about you and your stupid ideas and deranged opinions.
Nice work.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:22 pmSure deadbeatass. I used to post under a different name until it was “discontinued†by the censors at ThinkProgress. Then I decided to post a summary of what Progressives believe (things I had actuall read at ThinkProgress), and used the name “cold_hard_left†to post it. I have been using it exclusively since then.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:21 pm
You mean you were BANNED FOR TROLLING!
Considering how STUPID, OFF-TOPIC, RUDE and IGNORANT you are, we’re sure this is TYPICAL of your INTERACTIONS FOR YOUR WHOLE LIFE!!! ROTFL!!
Can’t BLAME that wife of yours for DOING ANYTHING to ESCAPE YOU and BLEED YOUR MONEY DRY!!!! After all, with a CLOSET CASE like YOU as a HUSBAND, why wouldn’t she?
ROTFL!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:23 pmSure deadbeatass. I used to post under a different name until it was “discontinued†by the censors at ThinkProgress. Then I decided to post a summary of what Progressives believe (things I had actuall read at ThinkProgress), and used the name “cold_hard_left†to post it. I have been using it exclusively since then.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:21 pm
“Censors”? I love it. What you really mean is that the administrators did their job for once and attempted to ban you for pointless and irrelevant comments. Since you can’t stand the lack of attention, you had to worm your way back on to TP under yet another sock puppet name.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:24 pmComment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
I’ll take coked up over stupid!! You lose!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:24 pmI am in my early 40’s but admittedly do not know, or do not recall “the source of, and joke behind†someone pretending to be a Retired Colonel.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:23 pm
Sure Jake! You’re such a CRAPPY LIAR! Maybe it’s because you’re such a CRAPPY HUMAN BEING?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:24 pmComment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:21 pm
It is pronounced dbadass, just like it is spelled. Notice how I even got yhe underscores right and the lack of capitalization when addressing you
December 18th, 2007 at 5:25 pmComment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
I’ll take coked up over stupid!! You lose!!!
Comment by dixie blood — December 18, 2007 @ 5:24 pm
Why Choose? With BUSH, we GOT BOTH!! ROTFL!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:25 pmReich-wing Hypocrisy 101: Perfect College Sinners
December 18th, 2007 at 5:25 pmT’was the night before Christmas, and all through the house, not a conservative was stirring, except for Charles Napier Mouse;
The stockings were hung on Chimpy with care, in hopes St. Huckie would soon be there;
The children were nestled all snug in their beds, while visions of trust funds danced in their heads;
Then back in Iraq there arose such a clatter, I turned on the news to see their children’s blood splatter.
And then, in a twinkling, I heard on the roof, the prancing and pawing of Larry Craig’s hoof.
As I drew in my hand, and was turning around, down the chimney St. Huckie came with a bound.
He was scary and hump, a right wing old elf, and I laughed when I saw him, in spite of myself.
A wink of his eye and a twist of his head, soon gave me to know I had a lot to dread;
And laying his finger aside of his nose, he took a big snort and up the chimney he rose;
He sprang to his sleigh, to his team gave a whistle, all he wanted was the keys to the missiles.
But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight, “Happy Christmas to all, vote for me and good-night
December 18th, 2007 at 5:27 pmI am in my early 40’s but admittedly do not know, or do not recall “the source of, and joke behind†someone pretending to be a Retired Colonel.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:23 pm
I believe it’s a reference to a character in Dr. Strangelove. I could be wrong, but that’s what I always assumed Ret. Col. Jack Ripper to be referring to.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:28 pmI will have been married for 20 years, and have never been divorced.
Comment by cold_hard_left
My sympathies to her, I am sure you are the perfect husband….hahahaha, can’t believe I even typed that, nah, you are scum.
Buck Fush
December 18th, 2007 at 5:30 pmNotice how conservatives are ready to blame Dems in congress if another attack happens. This refusal to take responsibility for anything is part of what and who they are. The first WTC attack happened 30 days into Clinton’s first term and there is absolutely no record of Clinton or anyone associated with his administration blaming papa Bush for that attack. And we weren’t attacked again by radical Muslims until 9 months into W’s administration. Do they give Clinton ANY credit for “keeping us safe” for the rest of his 8 years? Of course not. Fair play is just not in their nature.
And, they’re simply unable to grasp the facts - Frank is sure the anthrax attacks were part of the Muslim attack even though it has been documented that the anthrax in question originated in a U.S. military facility. Can’t these idiots even remember that an employee at a U.S. facility tried to sue the government for implicating him in the attack?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:32 pmCitizen_of_Earth,
Thank you for proving my point.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:32 pmI will have been married for 20 years[…]
Comment by cold_hard_left
When? In 19 years? If she doesn’t fight back or get a restraining order!!
I hope she has health insurance…even if it’s Universal!!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:35 pmCitizen_of_Earth,
Thank you for proving my point.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 5:32 pm
I thought you left in a huff because people weren’t properly respectful to you. At least, that’s what you said in another thread.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:36 pmMissMolly, of course you’re right. And, yes, the character was a Colonel. I’m not “pretending” to be anything any more than he’s pretending to be cold, hard and left.
The main General in the story is played by George C. Scott - General Buck Turdjeson.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:37 pmI thought you left in a huff because people weren’t properly respectful to you. At least, that’s what you said in another thread.
Comment by gummitch
——————————————–
I guess I came back.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:39 pmComment by cold_hard_left — December 18, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
I’ll take coked up over stupid!! You lose!!!
Comment by dixie blood — December 18, 2007 @ 5:24 pm
Why Choose? With BUSH, we GOT BOTH!! ROTFL!!
Comment by republicans hate facts — December 18, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
I don’t like both together. Either coke up or drool like a moron!!
With both you’ve got a motivated moron!! That’s the prob. with GW Botch!!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:39 pmRender unto Caesar (civil marriage for all)and unto the LORD (religious, sacramental marriage).
December 18th, 2007 at 5:40 pm