Hot Pants and KSM: The Difference Between Good and Bad Prosecution

February 3, 2010 at 9:33 pm 227 comments

The recent revelations of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab cooperating with authorities after he was read his Miranda rights was music to the ears of anyone who believes in our criminal justice system. Abdulmutallab is the would-be Christmas bomber who tried to bring a flight down over Detroit by detonating an explosive in his underpants. This, so far has been a case of beautifully executed pre-prosecution procedure. Immediately after being taken into custody, Hot Pants was interrogated for about 50 minutes until it was determined that the pain drugs he had been administered would interfere with credible information. One can only assume, unless the interrogators were completely incompetent, that this 50 minutes of questioning centered around any possible ticking time bomb scenario. Was he a one-off? Did he have partners planning to down other planes? News reports indicated that Umar was more than forthcoming in this initial round of questioning. My guess is after this first interrogation, a ticking time bomb scenario was deemed unlikely.

When the next round of interrogation began, Umar was read his Miranda rights and basically allowed to “lawyer up”, which he did. The cries of conservatives were heard across the land. A missed opportunity to get more intel. But guess what? Good prosecutors know how to get information and once they leveraged the influence of  Umar’s family and possibly took a death sentence off the table, Hot Pants began spilling the beans yet again. Not a drop of water touched Umar’s head. No loud music. No sleep deprivation. Just good old-fashioned law enforcement work.

Unfortunately, this puts the case of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) in sharp contrast and has forced me to revisit the arguments of conservatives and in particular my conservative readers. Back in November, I wrote about the KSM case and in my eagerness to discard eight years of Bush lawlessness I did not see the noose I was tying around my own neck.

  • I can find no evidence despite a fairly exhaustive Google search that KSM was ever read his Miranda rights.
  • KSM was not arrested in the United States nor was he arrested by foreign law enforcement and extradited here. He was captured in Pakistan as a POW.
  • KSM was tortured on at least 183 occasions.

These facts alone make this a defense attorney’s wet dream. To top this off, we have assurances from everyone from Attorney General Eric Holder to the President himself that KSM will be convicted and executed. Now every prosecutor brags about how he will secure a conviction, but in this case “innocent until proven guilty” is nothing but a farce. How can we say that we are holding up our justice system as a beacon of light to the world and in the same sentence make the verdict and punishment a forgone conclusion? We might as well summarily execute him and save the time and money. (As a side note, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s about-face on this matter based on cost is incredibly lame. Justice has no price tag.)

Back last November when I was waving my American justice flag, David Feige of Slate painted an even bleaker picture of the KSM prosecution. He stated that no matter how righteous our intentions, there is not a judge or jury in this country, even at the appellate levels, who would allow KSM to go free, no matter how prejudicial the evidence against him. This has ramifications going far beyond KSM’s conviction. It sets dangerous precedent for many prosecutions down the line:

…there is no judge in the country who will seriously endanger the prosecution. Instead, with the defense motions duly denied, the case will proceed to trial, and then (as no jury in the country is going to acquit KSM) to conviction and a series of appeals. And that’s where the ultimate effect of a vigorous defense of KSM gets really grim.

At each stage of the appellate process, a higher court will countenance the cowardly decisions made by the trial judge, ennobling them with the unfortunate force of precedent. The judicial refusal to consider KSM’s years of quasi-legal military detention as a violation of his right to a speedy trial will erode that already crippled constitutional concept. The denial of the venue motion will raise the bar even higher for defendants looking to escape from damning pretrial publicity. Ever deferential to the trial court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will affirm dozens of decisions that redact and restrict the disclosure of secret documents, prompting the government to be ever more expansive in invoking claims of national security and emboldening other judges to withhold critical evidence from future defendants. Finally, the twisted logic required to disentangle KSM’s initial torture from his subsequent “clean team” statements will provide a blueprint for the government, giving them the prize they’ve been after all this time—a legal way both to torture and to prosecute.

Hence with the inevitably corrupt prosecution of KSM, we open the door to corruption down the line in other trials, and we ultimately justify all the short cuts and indiscretions of the Bush era that we had hoped to repudiate.

This puts us between a rock and a hard place. KSM cannot get a “fair” trial in our criminal justice system. Any conviction he receives in a military tribunal is subject to Supreme Court challenge and overturn. The final alternative is to hold KSM indefinitely as a POW and release him to his home country once we defeat them at the end of the war. Oh, but wait a minute. There is no country with which we are at war. We are at war with a criminal phenomenon that will always exist. The war has no end. And so it follows that KSM’s incarceration has no end.

This brings us back to the folly of the war on terror. It reinforces what I have maintained for months now — terrorism is a crime and should be treated as a criminal matter. The reason Hot Pants will be successfully prosecuted is that he was treated like a common criminal. That is the way to achieve justice in America.

For KSM, there may be no true justice and the survivors of the victims of his crimes may never get closure. This is the true legacy of the Bush/Cheney endless war.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

About these ads

Entry filed under: Politics, Social commentary, Wordpress Political Blogs. Tags: , , , , , , .

Memo to Mayor Oscar Goodman of Las Vegas A Mother and a Comedian Take On Sarah Palin

227 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 3:54 am

    I read this one twice, and still can not figure out how you think you justified your conclusions. Make a statement of wild speculation, anonymous leak or gossip, present it as proof, and in doing so justifying your own confirmation bias I guess. This has gotten to be a pattern with you as of late, and when your initial claims are retracted later by the press, you seldom admit error. Honestly, your logic and assessment of the situation escape me. Forget your conclusions. I couldn’t even get past the first sentence.

    The recent revelations of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab cooperating with authorities after he was read his Miranda rights was music to the ears of anyone who believes in our criminal justice system.

    How would you know of the cooperation? Do you have sources that document Hotpants admissions that no one seems able to substantiate except strictly from a leak by unnamed sources? BIC would be better to judge, but I think he would tell your verdict would be tried in a court of law, this claim of “singing” would best be defined as hearsay. Without confirmation, there is no way to corroborate your claims information obtained. Sound bites from MSNBC don’t count for much these days.

    Are you willing to put your reputation on the line for an administration that didn’t even include or consult any of the intelligence services when Abdulmutallab was Mirandized after 50 minutes of questioning? How many times do your attempts at leftist propaganda have to blow up in your face before you admit to your willing gullibility Rutherford. Obama has failed by ten orders of magnitude. Do you think these recent elections have just been an anomaly?

    This announcement of “singing like a bird” carries about as much truth as Obama’s claims to how many jobs have been saved. There is no way to corroborate the claim. There is no way to measure or substantiate it, and even if the information obtained is now available, it is much too late to be of real use as information concerning the war on terrorists a perishable good.

    Do you not realize that at least 60% of the American public has completely lost faith in the present administration, and most of us believe they are a pack of corrupt lawyers, lobbyists and politicians heavily influenced by 60s radicalism and/or ideology and nothing more?

    The only thing I know for sure is that you’re trying to cover the ass of an Attorney General that should be fired immediately for incredibly poor decisions. The game is over. Holder hasn’t just demonstrated himself incompetent – and he has a long history of corruption dating at least back to Marc Rich.

    Holder has proven himself a fool and America knows it. You of all people should be hoping that Obama recognizes how poorly he has been served by this cabinet and makes changes right soon.

    But if it adds fuel to the flame, I can be patient while the lies are slowly uncovered. I just hope this time you don’t magically move on to the next pack of boastful fibs before admitting culpability in propagandizing.

  • 2. an800lbgorilla  |  February 4, 2010 at 8:22 am

    This, so far has been a case of beautifully executed pre-prosecution procedure. –R

    Really? Wasn’t it just revealed that Eric Holder was the one who mandated he get mirandized? The SAME Eric Holder who is pushing to try KSM in CIVILIAN court? And consider for a moment, that news of ‘Hot Pants’ continued talking was leaked- from the government- to media- in light of outrage by the American people… I’d ask you to connect the dots, but the left struggles with that, so here it is for you: Eric Holder was the one leaking this info because he knows that, in the face of the catastrophe that is the KSM trial in New York, he needed something to pull his ass out of the fire.

    And what about the regulations that state that the intelligence community are to get a shot at the guy? They were never informed or pulled into the process. Hmmmmmm, concerning since Abdulmutallib is A) foreign national, B) acting as an agent for a foreign terrorist organization, C) caught in the act of executing a terrorist attack. Yet, you and the morons on the left feel proud that you’ve managed to completely undermine the counterterrorism intelligence process. Give yourself a star!

    Immediately after being taken into custody, Hot Pants was interrogated for about 50 minutes until it was determined that the pain drugs he had been administered would interfere with credible information. One can only assume, unless the interrogators were completely incompetent, that this 50 minutes of questioning centered around any possible ticking time bomb scenario. Was he a one-off? Did he have partners planning to down other planes? News reports indicated that Umar was more than forthcoming in this initial round of questioning. My guess is after this first interrogation, a ticking time bomb scenario was deemed unlikely.. – R

    Again, really? And the whole more-are-trained-and-coming comment he made was what exactly? Again, you highlight how little you know. The key to good interrogations is how much the interrogator knows about the subject. Not only does it allow him to smell bullshit, but it allows him to attack nuance and half truths, or more importantly, pull the micro details that most of us over look when we recount a story. Do you really think they had al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula experts there when they chatted with him? Doubtful.

    When the next round of interrogation began, Umar was read his Miranda rights and basically allowed to “lawyer up”, which he did. The cries of conservatives were heard across the land. A missed opportunity to get more intel. But guess what? Good prosecutors know how to get information and once they leveraged the influence of Umar’s family and possibly took a death sentence off the table, Hot Pants began spilling the beans yet again. — R

    So let us ponder this for a minute, once they started plea bargaining with him, all was ok in your book? Listen, you idiots keep referring to this guy as the “suspected bomber”- he was en fuego, removed from the aircraft still smoking with the explosives still wrapped around his sphincter, yet you are going to champion the prosecutorial skills of folks who are pleaing down on a guy who almost- through no effort of the government mind you- killed nearly 300 people and caused millions of dollars in damage.

    Here’s a premise, if we would have just simply interrogated him, we’d have gotten the same info, only we wouldn’t have had to plea a lighter sentence for him. But you go girl, pat that back and all that…

    Here’s a chuckle: “Holder said he is confident the decision not to hold Abdulmutallab – accused of trying to blow up Detroit-bound Flight 253 on Christmas Day – as an enemy combatant in the war against terror “has not, and will not, compromise our ability to obtain information needed to detect and prevent future attacks.”

    Because the Administrations efforts thus far to stop terrorist attacks have been so damn successful…

    These facts alone make this a defense attorney’s wet dream. –R

    And you step on your crank. So, with this in mind, you again open up the question of what soldiers in the field should do- interrogate or Mirandize? What part of ‘enemy combatants on the battle field’ do you not understand?

    To top this off, we have assurances from everyone from Attorney General Eric Holder to the President himself that KSM will be convicted and executed. — R

    Don’t feel too bad R, they promised a decline in umemployment too…

    As a side note, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s about-face on this matter based on cost is incredibly lame. Justice has no price tag. — R

    If you’re on the left, nothing apparently has a price tag, especially if it is in the name of some ideal, like justice or compassion, equality or some other buzz word drummed up out of random searches in the dictionary… A billion dollars in security alone for what exactly?

    So fun reading from the leftwing site Salon.com– What exactly did Bush and Cheney do wrong? http://salon.com/news/terrorism/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2010/02/02/bush

    Hence with the inevitably corrupt prosecution of KSM, we open the door to corruption down the line in other trials, and we ultimately justify all the short cuts and indiscretions of the Bush era that we had hoped to repudiate. — R

    Or, more correctly, we come to the realization that terrorism is not a law enforcement issue- we’re at war.

    I say it again, because it is clearly not getting through: we execute wars with extreme prejudice.

    We’re not interested in facilitating a fair and balanced playing field for an equal presentation of positions, to then be decided by objective arbiters focused on a just outcome. We’re in this to win it, or at least those of us or are actually in it- I’m still not convinced the One is interested in winning this and one only needs to read this to question his intent:

    This puts us between a rock and a hard place. KSM cannot get a “fair” trial in our criminal justice system. Any conviction he receives in a military tribunal is subject to Supreme Court challenge and overturn. The final alternative is to hold KSM indefinitely as a POW and release him to his home country once we defeat them at the end of the war. Oh, but wait a minute. There is no country with which we are at war. We are at war with a criminal phenomenon that will always exist. The war has no end. And so it follows that KSM’s incarceration has no end.

    This brings us back to the folly of the war on terror. It reinforces what I have maintained for months now — terrorism is a crime and should be treated as a criminal matter. The reason Hot Pants will be successfully prosecuted is that he was treated like a common criminal. That is the way to achieve justice in America.

    For KSM, there may be no true justice and the survivors of the victims of his crimes may never get closure. This is the true legacy of the Bush/Cheney endless war. — R

    I have never been a fan of the term ‘war on terror’, I mean, how do you declare war on a tactic, but I understand the premise behind it. Clearly, R does not understand it.

    We’re not at war with terror per se, but we- or at least we were- are expressing to the world, that the use of this tactic will not be tolerated and any and all actors who do engage in this activity will pay a dear price. Obama, and R, have walked away from that and are clearly in a pre-9/11 mindset.

    News flash: whether you want to admit it or not, al-Qaeda has declared war on the US, and in case you haven’t noticed, they are executing that war against us- and have been doing so since the early ‘90s. 20 years they’ve been at war with us, and we had not accepted that fact until about 8 years ago. Your position is to walk that acceptance back, and say, ‘nope, no war here’.

    How many dead will it take? How much destruction will it require? What will the costs have to be before you will accept that this is a war, and that this will have to be decided through politics, which is the antithesis of justice.

  • 3. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 12:30 pm

    Gorilla,

    I think we are wasting our breath. If Rutherford is anything, he is an idealogue not subject to change.

    The gall to call the perpetrators of 9/11, or the USS Cole, or the the Khobar Towers, or suicide attempts to bring down airliners as criminal, or terrorism a criminal matter is a new low, even for Rutherford. He’s made a lot of dumb comments the last year as the political tide begin to swing, but I never remember one this stupid. If you had just landed on this planet and read R. Lawson, you might think Abdulmutallab held up a bank, pistol whipped granny to death during a home invasion, maybe got busted for selling drugs at the elementary school.

    Rutherford is not concerned about justice or to “restore” the image of American jurisprudence as he insinuates, but to further label Adolph Bush or Imam Cheney. This is all a political tactic to save face and at one time I thought even beneath Rutherford. I was wrong.

    Rutherford could care less about the rights of Abdulmutallab. How could he, if He doesn’t understand we are at war? This is all a game to Rutherford, but his side plays for keeps.

    Trust me, the left are not concerned about anyone’s civil liberties as they are the first to step on them which they demonstrate time and again. Rutherford’s intent is to blame Bush, and Cheney, and Rumsfield, ad infinitum because Rutherford is left with little else after the hollow Obama victory. Like Obama, Rutherford is still in campaign mode.

    Here’s my prediction for the 2010 Rutherford Lawson blog. As the election approaches in November, blog entries will become more shrill, there will be wilder claims of Republican abuse both past and present, bashing of the politically correct type (but by no means will Islam be identified) by focusing on a few loons either tea party, military or Conservative Christian, with a huge dose of exaggerated Obama successes.

    But I “think” those days of misleading the masses and the cult of personality are over. Time will tell.

  • 4. Alfie  |  February 4, 2010 at 1:10 pm

    Thats some bullshit boy!
    Seriously the two things that piss me off the most about this post are:
    #1 The flippant juvenile use of the word hot pants. If the bomb went off would the idiots,predominantly those on the Left,be such lippy punks and give him a “cute” nickname?
    #2. I’m a little concerned that those that fail to see any value in a military trial.More importantly the Lefts pathetic whining about Bush. Will you f@#$s get over that please!!!!!!

  • 5. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 4, 2010 at 1:16 pm

    Rutherford, if there weren’t some really important life-and-death issues on the line, your partisan pontification regarding legal procedures and their underlying rationale would be amusing.

    But you have no idea what you are talking about. Really. No freaking clue. And that doesn’t make you simply an idiot. It makes you a dangerous idiot.

  • 6. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 3:41 pm

    A further example of our new Obama driven terrorist philosophy:

    http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=167754

    I don’t even know what to say about the man’s ability to cast sound judgment anymore. Perhaps morbid curiosity to watch Rutherford and like this as wisdom. :roll:

  • 7. Rutherford  |  February 4, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    It makes you a dangerous idiot. — BiW

    Why am I starting to feel like Glenn Beck all of a sudden? :lol:

    Alfie I used Hot Pants as frivolous shorthand. Have you not heard the phrase “pants bomber” or “underpants bomber”? Did those piss you off too? C’mon.

    I think some of you guys come here to pick a fight and don’t read the damn article. Did you not see the huge bone I threw you by way of mea culpa? Do you not understand the trouble this gets me in hard core liberals? I acknowledged after months of you guys pounding me that trying KSM in Fed court is a non-starter.

    Now Alfie, am I mistaken that military tribunals have been successfully challenged in courts? Why are you so gung ho about them when they carry an equal risk of KSM not being punished?

    I have never been a fan of the term ‘war on terror’, I mean, how do you declare war on a tactic, but I understand the premise behind it. Clearly, R does not understand it.

    Ah Gorilla, after all the verbosity good to see you agree with me. Since you know the “war on terror” is nonsensical why do steadfastly support it? Yes I get the premise. Same premise as “war on drugs”. War implies we’re taking things VERY seriously. Problem is with the war on terror, we’re actually acting like warriors. And you know what? We’re elevating organized criminals to warriors, the very thing they WANT us to do. They WANT to frame this as a war against Islam. And we throw gasoline on the fire.

    We’ve been down this road before G. Aren’t wars (like projects) defined by a start and end date? When is this “war” over? This is the point I closed with in my article. If KSM stays a POW, he stays a POW the rest of his life and he never has to answer for his crimes. You copacetic with that? You think that is fair to the 9/11 victim’s families?

    Why don’t we just man up and take the Bush Doctrine to its logical conclusion and formally declare war on Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen? (Maybe throw in Somalia too.) Then we can define victory as putting our own effective governments in those countries who will take it as their responsibility to stamp out the terrorists among them.

  • 8. Rutherford  |  February 4, 2010 at 4:58 pm

    A further example of our new Obama driven terrorist philosophy:

    Yeah Tex, it’s truly scary how many North Koreans are trying to set themselves on fire on international flights. :-)

  • 9. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 4, 2010 at 5:12 pm

    Since you know the “war on terror” is nonsensical why do steadfastly support it? Yes I get the premise. Same premise as “war on drugs”. War implies we’re taking things VERY seriously.

    You might think twice on that whole “War on ______” canard. It started with LBJ and his Great Society declaring a War on Poverty. And after billions in entitlement spending over 4 decades with no real net change in the percentage of Americans living in poverty, I would say that the Dhimcratic approach to such “wars” doesn’t have a record of success to reflect on.

    Problem is with the war on terror, we’re actually acting like warriors.

    Oh NOES!!! You mean that we have actually tried to kill people have a single-minded goal to kill as many of us as they can, to the exclusion of their own lives? How terrible. I know!!!! Maybe we can throw money at them and encourage them to express themselves more constructively if we quit calling evil evil and tell them they are ok and offer them milk and cookies and stuff?

    Problem is with the war on terror, we’re actually acting like warriors. And you know what? We’re elevating organized criminals to warriors, the very thing they WANT us to do. They WANT to frame this as a war against Islam. And we throw gasoline on the fire.

    Really? They’re just criminals? How on earth do you even justify such a foolish belief? What “crimes” are they breaking, R? How is it our criminal law gains jurisdiction over their activities?

    I know you will continue to ignore it with your dying breath, R, and if Holder continues to cling to the “Obama Doctrine”, you may well get you chance, but Islam declared war on us. We aren’t simply dealing with a hostile nation, or a hostile ethnicity. It is a hostile philisophy, masquerading as a religion that teaches that it is ok to kill those who do not hold to it. You can man up, and take care of the mad dog once and for all, or you can continue to retreat until there is no place left to retreat to, and then die in agony.

  • 10. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 5:12 pm

    Yeah Tex, it’s truly scary how many North Koreans are trying to set themselves on fire on international flights.

    Once again my buddy so aptly demonstrating his breadth of true wisdom, and his depth of character and thought. You would have been another in a long list of lefties once adored by Lenin and Mao. Somewhere today, Kim Jong Il smiles…let it never be said Obama ever had a more loyal sack sucker.

    I’ll bet you estimate the 2010 Lawson household budget and expenditure based on your winning the lottery, don’t you:?:

  • 11. an800lbgorilla  |  February 4, 2010 at 6:35 pm

    (n) terrorism, act of terrorism, terrorist act (the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear)

    A man by the name of Carl Von Clausewitz, whose treatise “On War” is the primary basis of pretty much all Western military strategic doctrine once said, “War is a mere continuation of politics by other means.”

    See R, when you say things like this, “Aren’t wars (like projects) defined by a start and end date?”, I’m frankly a little sad for you. Yes R, wars have start dates and end dates, the end dates best defined- and most lasting- when VICTORY is involved. This is especially concerning to those of us involved in national defense, because the very last thing I want or need to hear from the Commander in Cheif is this, “I’m always worried about using the word ‘victory,’ because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur.”

    Also, I’d like for you to identify a criminal enterprise that has declared war on the US government. Tell me, I’m interested in hearing what mob family or criminal syndicate declared “war”.

    And are you implying that we’re not taking this VERY serious? I’ve blood and tears invested, I’ve lost friends to this conflict, I can assure you, we as a community take this VERY FUCKING SERIOUS. Now, I can understand your confusion, it is quite clear that you, nor Obama and his administration, take this serious at all…until elections start to get involved.

    This is about all I stomach of this post right now, but I must admit, I do look forward to hopefully seeing BiW destroy you on what is and is not “criminal”…

  • 12. Alfie  |  February 4, 2010 at 6:44 pm

    Again I’m disappointed that only my “e” indignations get a reply from Rutherford.
    I don’t buy the statelessness argument but understand why people like to use it as a defense.
    As far as your mea culpas and “us guys” picking on you. First if every post you write has a built in mea culpa thing going for it perhaps you reconsider why you’re writing it in the first place. And as far as this guy is concerned I read your posts,almost always disagree,and yeah stop by primarily for the thread feed. I think that shows something you should be happy about. I get why you may feel grief but since the fellow feelers of the Left don’t hang here ….oh well. Be happy with what you got.

  • 13. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 4, 2010 at 6:58 pm

    I think that shows something you should be happy about. I get why you may feel grief but since the fellow feelers of the Left don’t hang here

    Mores the pity. I haven’t had a good chew toy in ages.

  • 14. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 7:02 pm

    Alfie,

    Where at one time Rutherford was somewhat of a spokesman for the WordPress Left, you may have noticed that Rutherford has been forced to resort the occasional red herring, or picking one line out of a well documented post and attempting to trivialize it, as if that will justify the entire Ruherford position.

    Then there’s the time management alibi, the proverbial straw man, projecting opinion as fact, MSNBC mantra, and as last resort just ignore the whole damn thing. Rutherford is going to make a wonderful Democratic Senator one day! :wink:

    If you want a prime example of the red herring strategy, I suggest you peruse the BiW blog and topic of abortion. Read closely Rutherford’s argument about the deficiency of the pro-life position and the corresponding law. In it, he makes the well-worn pick the absolute worst situation to justify the equivalent infanticide of the entire West Coast. I started to make example to him that there is the occasional guilty part that goes free, and explaining how that still doesn’t make the law wrong. But I was afraid it would be a gigantic waste of time.

  • 15. Dead Rabbit  |  February 4, 2010 at 7:55 pm

    “Throwing bones.”

    It’s all a game to Rutherford.

    Thank you Rutherford for letting us “score some points.”

    You were forced to concede the retarded (yeah, i said it) desicsion to try KSM as a citizen and you act like we owe you something?

    This is not some political version of Dungeon and Dragons you doe-doe-bird.

    Did you agree with me this whole time and play coy or do you really lack that much street smarts to not see how all of this would end up.

    What a joke. The biggest cluster fuck I have ever seen and the only thing you can do is pin it on Bush. It’s Bush’s fault that Holder and Obama are so fucking stupid to not see this coming.

    …do you like the fact that Holder politicizes national security on such a massive level?

    Are you that much of an ivory tower chump that you don’t even know the basics of even lower level street crime?

    Keep the snitch a secret!

    FOR THE LOVE OF GOD IT’S COMMON SENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 16. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 8:07 pm

    I can hear Bob Hope music ringing in my ears Rutherford…Thanks for the memories…

    One of my favorite Barry vs. Bush concerning the people saving our asses:

    Try to remember this “R” when you think about who it is that is like and disdained by those who matter…

  • 17. Rutherford  |  February 4, 2010 at 9:55 pm

    Gorilla, you see sarcasm where there is none. The fact is that “war” can be a rhetorical flourish to show we mean it. That does not mean we don’t really mean it. Again you see barbs where none are intended.

    To answer one question in the thread, there are at least two anti-government groups who committed crimes to express their dissatisfaction: The Manson Clan and the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA). I don’t recall us going after them with our army.

    From the responses I see in this thread, I see that everyone is comfortable with an indefinite, endless war. We’re not going to wipe Islam off the map … or do some of you think we are?

    Alfie, sorry you lost me on “e” indignations. What the hell is that? I’m not complaining about being “picked on”, it goes with the territory of blogging and better to have readers yell and scream than to have no readers. I shouldn’t have to remind you guys that I value your presence here. I was just surprised that I at least didn’t get a “now he sees the light on NYC” from any of you, particularly Rabbit.

    Be that as it may, a slightly sympathetic party has supplied me with some info that I shall research and introduce into this thread. I’m not doing it now cos I have a terrible chest cold (no Tex, not an excuse … I’m sick as a dog).

    Later.

  • 18. Dead Rabbit  |  February 4, 2010 at 10:27 pm

    Rutherford, I can’t give you a “now you see the light” becuase I swear that you always saw the light from day one.

    You chose to forgo your intellect and defend the president at all costs, as per usual by relying on..well…a bunch of hope and change. You simply hope things work out despite what your mind tells you.

    No sir, you’re too smart to get a welcome card from me.

  • 19. Dead Rabbit  |  February 4, 2010 at 10:27 pm

    I hope you feel better soon

  • 20. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 10:28 pm

    This one is directed to Gorilla.

    Did you hear the THE CHOSEN ONE refer to our military today as “corpse” man three times in his speech? :lol: You guys feeling all right over there?

    http://infidelsarecool.com/2010/02/04/video-obama-calls-navy-corpsman-a-corpse-man-what-if-bush-or-palin-said-it/

    Can you imagine the howls of glee in the press if George Bush had made this mistake? Crickets chirping at every place except FOX this evening. And Dan Quayle was absolutely crucified for misspelling potato?

    And Rutherford, do you now understand why I can’t for the life of me (corpse man) believe you to think Obama brilliant? He’s a damn marionette on a string you loon. Obama isn’t as intelligent as you!!!! When are you going to open your damn eyes to the truth :!:

  • 21. Dead Rabbit  |  February 4, 2010 at 10:41 pm

    Tex……I heard the speech today and was cracking up in my truck. Poor guy. Corppppseman.

  • 22. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 10:48 pm

    D.R.,

    At the prayer breakfast mind you, which in turn turned into a orgy of humanism, kumbaya, nebulous, ‘AND TO WHAT EVER GOD YOU WORSHIP’ junk.

    What an affront to the One True God. Just like when they have one of these global warming summits and it has a blizzard every time! :twisted:

  • 23. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 10:51 pm

    Get well “R”. I know a chest cold would be rougher on you than most.

  • 24. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2010 at 11:10 pm

    After that Corpse Man salute, I feel obliged to sing along!!! All Hail Obama!

  • 25. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 4, 2010 at 11:26 pm

    To answer one question in the thread, there are at least two anti-government groups who committed crimes to express their dissatisfaction: The Manson Clan and the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA). I don’t recall us going after them with our army.

    R, you’re talking about two groups that were made up of citizens, opporating on our soil. The same isn’t true of AQ in general. And although it doesn’t matter for this conversation, the Mansons and the SL were focusing their attacks on regular citizens without connection to government.

    What makes the Obama Doctrine so backward and wrong is the fact that we are extending the rights of citizens for NONcitizens. It is abborant. It is repellent. It is wrong. It dishonors everyone who ever gave their life for this country. It cheapens our birthright, and it tries to give authority to Article III courts that is not conferred upon them by the Constitution or the Congress.

  • 26. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 1:33 am

    BIC,

    I’m frankly surprised Rutherford didn’t prop up SDS as example. After all, about half the Obama Cabinet arose from the SDS ranks. :razz:

  • 27. an800lbgorilla  |  February 5, 2010 at 7:55 am

    What about the Weatherman Underground? Oooops, shhhhhhhh, they’re not terrorists, they’re authors and friends… :)

    Yeah Tex, I saw that. I guess the O isn’t so cultured after all, I mean, can’t he- with his Ivy league education- recognize French influences in our vernacular? You’re certainly right though, if Bush made the same mistake, he would have been lambasted as a baffoon, but when the buffoon does it, it’s glossed over.

  • 28. an800lbgorilla  |  February 5, 2010 at 7:57 am

    Also wanted to echo BiW, those were indeed domestic groups of citizens. But they had ideological and political ends, I’m asking you to identify criminal enterprises- ones that operate from greed- that have declared war.

    Still waiting…

  • 29. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 11:53 am

    “R”,

    You can file this one under “Be Careful What You Wish For” – sooner or later, this unelected clown where you really did steal an election is going to give your party more heartburn than he was ever worth. Before it is over, I predict he will stain the Dimocratic party for years to come and his Senate Life will be one term.

    Al Franken lays into David Axelrod over health care bill

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32561.html#commentsform#ixzz0eg3IwvVw

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32561.html#commentsform

  • 30. Dead Rabbit  |  February 5, 2010 at 12:21 pm

    an800lbgorilla,

    Perhaps Mexican organized crime may fall into the category if it already hasn’t.

  • 31. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 12:35 pm

    IT’S A MIRACLE! Just to prove how either dishonest or inept the reporting is at NBC and its little ugly sister MSNBC, read the heading and then explain it to me mathematically anyone:

    Economy Sheds 20,000 Jobs But Rate Drops to 9.7 Percent

    As I’m pondering exactly how this happens (knowing fully well what really happened), I find this buried in the article:

    While a sharp increase in the number of people giving up looking for work helped to depress the jobless rate, some details of the employment report were encouraging. The number of “discouraged job seekers” rose to 1.1 million in January from 734,000 a year ago.

    Is that what passes for encouragement at CNBC? Discouraged workers increase and that’s good news? Heaven help if we ever get any bad news. :lol:

    Trust me, you have to read this beauty yourself.

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/35254420

    Rutherford, do you really want to tie your good name to these idiots much longer? I’m tired of beating you up and you deserve a break.

  • 32. an800lbgorilla  |  February 5, 2010 at 1:03 pm

    DR,

    I wonder if that is more a case of preserving chaos. Maybe close, though I don’t think it equates to R’s premise to al-Qaeda.

  • 33. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 5, 2010 at 1:10 pm

    No doubt, our friend R thinks this is brilliant:

    Let’s see if he employs the proper methodology to figure out why the answer is no.

  • 34. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 1:22 pm

    BIC,

    Do you figure we can incorporate all of those thousands of anonymous credit card holders outside U.S. Shores that donated to Yes We Can! on their credit cards :?:

    I mean, who doesn’t want a Brussels representative?

  • 35. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 5, 2010 at 1:31 pm

    Gee, how refreshing. Another author who gets it.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/clarence-thomas-reacts-state-union

    The money quote:

    This is a refreshingly antediluvian view of judging: Discomfort in the presence of partisan misbehavior, an obligation to remain passive–or at any rate not to react–when provoked. What struck me about the famous moment when Justice Alito visibly shook his head and muttered when Obama misrepresented the meaning of the decision was not Alito’s action–which was swift, reflexive, and not intended for public consumption–but the alacrity with which the Senate Majority Whip, Dick Durbin of Illinois, and several of his Democratic colleagues, sprang to their feet and loudly and conspicuously applauded Obama’s statement. Durbin, in particular, seemed to lean over Alito as he clapped, and clearly took some delight in taunting the justices.

  • 36. Dead Rabbit  |  February 5, 2010 at 1:57 pm

    Pronunciation: \ˌan-ti-də-ˈlü-vē-ən, -(ˌ)dī-\
    I learn from BiC on a daily basis.

    antediluvian

    Function: adjective
    Etymology: ante- + Latin diluvium flood — more at deluge
    Date: 1646

    1 : of or relating to the period before the flood described in the Bible
    2 a : made, evolved, or developed a long time ago b : extremely primitive or outmoded

  • 37. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 1:59 pm

    There is nothing I love more than to watch the politically correct speech and thought police step all over themselves while running for cover…

    NBC Cafeteria Celebrates Black History Month With Fried Chicken Special

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/nbc-cafeteria-celebrates-black-history-month-with-fried-chicken-special/

    I always contended that if fried chicken and watermelon are considered soul food, consider me James Brown. One of the best meals on the planet, if you ask me.

  • 38. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 2:07 pm

    Politicizing Justice? Obama names DNC member Tim Purdon as a U.S. Attorney

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/02/obama-tim-purdon-dnc-us-attorney.html

    More slush for the Obama campaign. Speaking of money quotes:

    According to the Vogel law firm website, Purdon specializes in personal injury lawsuits, criminal defense and class action litigation for the plaintiffs.

    A lawyer since 1995, Purdon has no experience as a prosecutor.

    Federal Election Commission records, however, show Purdon has donated more than $12,000 in recent years to Obama, Dorgan, Pomeroy and Conrad, among others.

    Remember this next time a lib preaches to you in there uniquely sanctimonious way about transparency and honesty.

  • 39. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    OH, and did I add Purdon was the national committeeman and state chairman for the presidential campaign of John Edwards?

    Purdon learned well from the master. Surely there’s an OBGYN to sue some place.

  • 40. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    Shitte…

    there should be their.

  • 41. Tex Taylor  |  February 5, 2010 at 3:20 pm

    Krauthammer is brilliant in my mind. If I could write like this, I would never leave the keyboard – which I have been guilty as of late not doing anyway without brilliance.

    I’ll be glad when my wife gets back in town tomorrow – I need a life.

    The Electorate vs. Obama’s Agenda Could have easily been titled Progressivism Against America.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/02/05/dont_they_understand_massachusetts.html

  • 42. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 6, 2010 at 4:06 pm

    Hey R!

    I just posted on a Wa Po story you’ll love to deny, and a few of the priceless comments to it made by people who apparently felt it their duty to prove the author correct.

  • 43. hippieprof  |  February 6, 2010 at 8:19 pm

    OK – I have been back for 24 hours but apparently I was on the wrong thread…. I was wondering why it was so quiet….

    So – great news to you righties – you have someone other than Rutherford and Sensico to beat up on now….

    I have no idea what this thread is actually about yet – but I will get there. Meanwhile – any of you willing to condemn Tancredo’s hate speech at the Tea Party?

    – hp

  • 44. Dead Rabbit  |  February 6, 2010 at 8:59 pm

    hippieprof,

    How do you explain stuff like this?

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.8d6e5773c60565dfc6e882b0a8dcbf18.4e1&show_article=1

    The last time I sawyou on here, you acted like those of who were skeptical of Global Warming were akin to those who still believe the Earth is flat.

    Do you not see an institutional politicization of Global Warming science?

    Do you not see how guys like me, who live in the rust belt, have every reason to believe that skepticism is in order considering guys like you want to severly damage my local economy?

    Why is the science so secretive?

    Why did it take hackers to shine light on piss poor science that would fail and 6th grader in lab?

    Hey man, I have no doubt the Earth warmed in the 90′s.

    However, if you think I’m going to throw the baby out with the bathwater becuase guys like you simply say I should, you must think the Earth is flat.

  • 45. Dead Rabbit  |  February 6, 2010 at 9:04 pm

    sorry, hippieprof…the last time you were on here I probably didn’t use coherent English and apparently I still don’t. Typo city.

  • 46. hippieprof  |  February 6, 2010 at 10:32 pm

    DR….

    I never meant to suggest that you believed the earth was flat – or at least I don’t remember suggesting that. It has been a while…..

    Since I can’t remember what I said before – here is what I think now.

    A good, honest scientist is always skeptical. In fact, skepticism is the hallmark of science. It is why we say that a theory – even a strong theory – is never truly proven. The opinions of a good, honest scientist are based on the data – never on ideology.

    I have absolutely no ideological card in the global warming debate – in fact, I would prefer that global warming was false – Gore was quite correct to call it inconvenient.

    Even if I prefer it was false I have believed for several years that the data point toward it being true.

    Am I ignoring the hacker incident and its revelations?

    No. I am admittedly a bit more skeptical of the data now. On the balance I still believe in global warming – but my skepticism has grown. I do believe that the implications of the hacked emails have been greatly over-interpreted by people who in fact do have an ideological iron in the fire.

    I just ran across this story earlier today:

    http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2010/02/03/michael-mann-allegations-without-merit/

    I already posted this on another of R’s threads – and Tex said that having academics rule on this is hardly unbiased.

    I generally might agree – except I know from the inside that academics take accusations of research fraud very very very seriously. Research fraud is in fact one of the few things that can result in loss of tenure. We have to take such allegations seriously because all of our creditability is at stake. I have seen several such investigations in my career – and believe me they are thorough – and they don’t begin with an assumption of innocence.

    – hp

  • 47. Dead Rabbit  |  February 7, 2010 at 12:31 am

    Hippieprof,

    Maybe it’s just your solid prose or your very Zen like internet persona, but your spiel on the integrity of academia strangely worked on me for a flash. Then I remembered about all those fucking goofballs I had as professors. You think they can look themselves in the mirror and call it clean?

    What a coincidence, a member of the intelligentsia telling us not to question the intelligentsia.

    While you may shoot it straight at work, your colleagues do not.

    Dude, people who drink from the uncritical well of ideology, like most do in academia, are a strange lot. Critical analysis is a nuisance. It gets in the way of the conclusion. And we don’t have time for that, because of the looming Environmental Apocalypse being delivered by the 7 horseman of conservatism.

    Dr. Michael Mann didn’t get into the gig thinking he’d end up as a cheater.

    He joined with the noblest of intentions, to save the world!

    So, worked up in frenzy, he joins a massive flock of other cackling geese honking over the upcoming disaster. Good science subtly becomes a casualty. Little things start to not to matter. And they build up, like the snow this cold ass winter.

  • 48. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 1:29 am

    I’m HOME! “The Great Global Warming Collapse” hot off the press:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-great-global-warming-collapse/article1458206/

    Like I’ve always said. Do men really think they can control the planet, much less the universe, the height of lib arrogance. :roll:

  • 49. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 1:54 am

    Why do we have a prayer breakfast? For the obvious reason Rutherford, that unlike you and old Sandi, we are a religious people, your continuing screams of secularism notwithstanding. Though Obama’s faith pure politic and grandstanding, Pharisee redux, Obama does understand that basic concept Rutherford.

    Why do I question Obama’s sincerity about fhis so-called faith? Shoot why try to explain it. Let Obama…(which by the way while offensive to all true Christians, Rutherford will not remotely understand). Now I ask, is that the black liberation theology in a nutshell? Mush headed religion. See how government in Obama’s book is the highest power? How little Obama knows of scripture.

  • 50. Dead Rabbit  |  February 7, 2010 at 2:00 am

    I actually don’t rule out that we may have the potential to warm the planet. So far, I’ve seen very shaky evidence of such.

    We can split the atom. I guess we can over heat the Earth.

    I guess.

    If you ask me, God has granted us an unbelievable amount of control over our surroundings. It’s what separates us from Chimps and their lame stick in the termite mound.

    We were able to move big ass rivers 6,000 years ago.

    I may be full of hubris, but I’m amazed at our feats.

    Ultimately, I ponder Global Warming the same way I look at science fiction. I deem it possible that robots could one day declare war on us, thus, I’m able to enjoy The Terminator.

    Doesn’t mean I walk out of the theater and get a shit bill jammed through Congress taxing the hell out Microsoft becuase I’m petrified he’ll ” “Be Back”.

  • 51. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 2:10 am

    Palin Rutherford radio is a good show tonight!

    Obsession, jealousy, rage, disses at Christianity, watching Sarah Palin with the Mrs. and screaming at the TV, Obama excuse making, charges of theocracy, Palin bashing, sanctimony, charges of anti-intellectualism, taunts of stupidity, one shrill boast after another, eventually leading to a crescendo and eventual flame out.

    Do you know who Sandi reminds me? The ugly girl in hgh school with zits and buck teeth seething at the prom queen – i.e. Sarah Palin. Honestly. You do have to wonder about about the mental stability of a grown woman as stalker. Maybe she’s a lesbian? :lol:

    Great stuff if you want to waste time and listen to a crazed woman. They ought to market this stuff. Beats the hell out of TV.

    It really is good theater tonight.

  • 52. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 2:15 am

    Doesn’t mean I walk out of the theater and get a shit bill jammed through Congress taxing the hell out Microsoft becuase I’m petrified he’ll ” “Be Back”.

    GUFFAW! Rabbit, you should be a script writer. That was funny as hell!

    If not that, you at least should be a Republican consultant. FOX would gain another million viewers with lines like that.

  • 53. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 2:17 am

    Rabbit, you don’t figure Dims are creating policy based on Hollywood flicks, do you? :?:

    Who knows? Obama may have proposed a Jurassic Park weapon in that public slush fund.

  • 54. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 2:21 am

    Uh oh!! I’ve to sign off and listen closely. Rutherford is talking about the joys of sodomy and stuff.

    Was it Dennis Miller who said of M&M’s, some like it with nuts and some don’t?

  • 55. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 2:37 am

    Rutherford, I must intervene. Would you pass this on to your co-host?

    Hermaphrodites don’t exist? Does Sandi know something that the AMA and physicians don’t? And no, even in adulthood Rutherford there is still confusion, as attested to by this woman Caster Semenya, gold medal winner.

    http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/PICTURES/gossip/2009/08/2009-08-21-caster-semenya-sex-test-hermaphrodite/caster-semenya-gold-medal__13164566__MBQF-1250848872,templateId=renderScaled,property=Bild,height=349.jpg

    Sandi has got the nerve to call anyone ignorant and arrogant? No sense me debating Sandi – I’ve changed my mind I would be better to debate with a mannequin.

    Rutherford, get somebody competent on there. For crying out loud.

  • 56. hippieprof  |  February 7, 2010 at 12:49 pm

    DR said…. Maybe it’s just your solid prose or your very Zen like internet persona….

    Wow – when you praise my prose and my Zen persona – I guess I will have to agree with some of your points….

    …. and I do.

    I would certainly agree that most fraudulent scientists do not begin their academic careers with the intent of heading in that direction. At some point they are tempted to do something small – dishonest, yes – but still small. They get away with it – so they try something else – and it grows.

    I have seen this a few times over my career – and in one case it was someone I knew quite well (my former department chair) and I was the whistle-blower. In that case – and in most other cases I know about – it isn’t about ideology though – it is about personal power, fame, and fortune.

    Natural scientists as a whole are not a particularly ideological lot – at least not compared to people in the humanities and social sciences. I argued this point here a while back – and maybe from your perspective scientists are indeed ideologues. From my perspective they are generally not – at least compared to other areas of academia.

    – hp

  • 57. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 12:57 pm

    Rutherford, I didn’t listen to the Palin Tea Party speech, nor will I as she would not be my first choice for representing me, but I read a summary this morning of he speech and found this:

    Palin also demonstrated an understanding that the Tea Party movement must be independent of both major political parties, which share the blame for the country’s current morass, in order to be credible. She encouraged her Nashville audience “against allowing this movement to be defined by any one leader or any one politician. The tea party movement is not a top-down operation. It’s a ground-up call to action … it’s bigger than any king or queen of the tea party, and it’s a lot bigger than any charismatic guy with a teleprompter.”

    If that represents the gist of her speech, she was absolutely correct and the message quite powerful.

  • 58. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 1:22 pm

    RFK, Jr. 15 months ago: Global warming means no snow or cold in DC

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/RFK-79834057.html

    Another fine moment in Camelot lore. Probably Global Warming is the cause.

  • 59. hippieprof  |  February 7, 2010 at 2:48 pm

    Tex – so – obviously you know this is a red herring right? One snowstorm does not negate a long-term trend.

    My grandparents used to live in northern Virginia – and I remember that they used to have dreadful winters there. No so much anymore. Is that significant? Who knows. The trend (whatever it is) will have to play out quite a bit longer before we know.

    – hp

  • 60. Dead Rabbit  |  February 7, 2010 at 3:02 pm

    hippieprof, this is where Tex is 100% correct about the hubris of global warming flakes.

    While your type mock us when we state the obvious, such as “I’m freezing my ass of right now.” Yet, you guys have no problem using your own personal nostalgia of winters you think you remember on Grandma’s farm.

    I know that the hot coco was awesome and the snowball fights epic.

    You guys bring up non-objective memories of winters long gone, we say go outside right now!

    Neither is scientific.

    Considering the Earth has warmed and cooled several times sans-exhaust pipes, how can the last 40 years be such a valid sample?

    The last ten years have pretty much got slightly colder. But, oh no. We’re told ten years doesn’t mean anything. But 40 does?

    I sneeze loud and it sounds like “Bull Shit!!!!!”

  • 61. Dead Rabbit  |  February 7, 2010 at 3:05 pm

    long-term trend?

    the life of hippie-prof is so vast that it spans a long term trend.

    lol.

    not very Zen like, my beard stroking friend.

  • 62. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 3:36 pm

    Hippieprof,

    Tex – so – obviously you know this is a red herring right? One snowstorm does not negate a long-term trend.

    No, no red herring intended – just perhaps a laugh at another’s expense. Don’t believe the blizzard proves anything one way or the other. Just demonstrating the idiocy and irony of the Kennedy Clan prediction with the general Tex cheap shot.

    My questions might be a little more difficult to answer, because right now the “experts” seem to be doing such a poor job of answering the obvious. Like why was it warmer at various stages before the industrial revolution than now?

    And I’m still waiting for the much anticipated ozone alarm bell how we were all going to fry. I’ve had my 3000 UV sun tan lotion for years ready and waiting. :smile:

    Don’t fret Hippie, my old pal. The medical community, of which I was a part at a time, has its snakeoil salesman too. Surely we would all be dead by now because of free radicals, lack of Omega 3, and trans fats if that weren’t true.

  • 63. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 3:44 pm

    Rabbit,

    I’ve used your Terminator analogy from above already a couple of times this morning. Even my mother found it funny. If I ever create a blog, I hope you would share in the writing – at least guest commentary.

    Rutherford, for all of his personal foibles, bad choices, little recognition of character, secularism, idiocy, ill informed and rotten co-hosts, numerous other weaknesses, and egregious sins too numerous to list, is most definitely a more talent writer than I am. I’d need the help. :smile:

  • 64. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 5:05 pm

    I swear, I look at the posts and have become Elric. I’ll be the next to run off for overexposure. Nevertheless, HippieProf. Have you read this?

    Pretty good explanation of my thoughts too, if interested.

    http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2010/02/01/the-death-of-global-warming/

  • 65. Rutherford Lawson  |  February 7, 2010 at 5:48 pm

    I’m writing this from my iPhone while getting some R&R on the couch so this will be short.

    Tex that had to be the most qualified compliment I’ve ever received. Thanks anyway.

    I confess that my jaw dropped when my cohost said hermaphrodites don’t exist. You have to give me points for challenging that. I do take exception with your sports example in that she may have been assigned the “wrong” gender at birth hence the adult anomaly with blood test. I doubt she is currently physically ambiguous.

    Finally it’s good to have HP back. You dudes need a dose of academic rigor. My saying CT winters haven’t been bad in years proves no more than the current DC blizzard. To make arguments using these limited data points does show ignorance. I share HP’s approach. Climate change has not been proven but that does not mean we throw caution out the window.

    Finally I’ve always said Rabbit had a way with words. :-)

  • 66. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 6:51 pm

    “R”,

    And I’m doing this all day long while trying to find “those funny commercials.” CBS is demagoguing Katrina and the football team, Drew Brees and his trophy wife were responsible for bring N.O. back. Really vomitus stuff. No wonder I’m no fan of Pro Football anymore – there is nothing more sanctimonious and putrid than pro jocks, lest it be Ex-Pro jocks announcing. Pro athletes are for the most part, the bottom of the character poll IMHO and 90% of them I have no use for.

    I’ve decided if someone drew the joker face on Katie Couric like they did on that Obama joker poster, it would simply look like she was wearing lipstick. I’ve never seen a human being have a smile where the corners of their mouth reach their auricle.

    The compliment, however qualified, was real. You do write well – fiction, but well. :wink:

    Hope you feel better and I do give you credit for drawing a gasp and Sandi’s statement. You tried to get her to crawdad, but she never caught the hint. I thought for a moment I simply misunderstood, and then she repeated her mistake again and again. No wonder she is a fan of Mr. & Mrs. Obama. :smile:

  • 67. Tex Taylor  |  February 7, 2010 at 6:56 pm

    Actually, she is “R”. I missed this:

    I doubt she is currently physically ambiguous.

    Understand that symptoms of hermaphrodites don’t necessarily mean external genitalia. Part of the testing requires hormonal levels, internal sexual organs, and the like.

  • 68. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 7, 2010 at 6:57 pm

    Obsession, jealousy, rage, disses at Christianity, watching Sarah Palin with the Mrs. and screaming at the TV, Obama excuse making, charges of theocracy, Palin bashing, sanctimony, charges of anti-intellectualism, taunts of stupidity, one shrill boast after another, eventually leading to a crescendo and eventual flame out.

    In otherwords, he brought there what he doesn’t dare bring here anymore?

    Sometimes this “Two Rutherfords” approach reminds me of the joke about the horse in the bar with the bucket of money in front of it.

  • 69. An800lbGorilla  |  February 7, 2010 at 10:55 pm

    I would have enjoyed this discussion, but I was busy digging out of this DC blizzard…

  • 70. hippieprof  |  February 7, 2010 at 11:22 pm

    Two signs of the Apocalypse tonight….

    1) Saints win….

    2) Townshend’s guitar survives halftime….

    (back with something substantive later)

    – hp

  • 71. Alfie  |  February 7, 2010 at 11:46 pm

    Saints win…will the msm have the stones to cover the NO crime stats over the next 72 hours?
    Townshend guitar…guy too old to damage it anymore.

  • 72. Tex Taylor  |  February 8, 2010 at 1:13 am

    Funny Hippie. I made the same comment to my wife while we watched the halftime show, which probably was the most enjoyable part of the game – Pete was looking pretty rough. Did he get a pedophile pass to enter the U.S.?

    Actually, Roger still sounded pretty good and the back up singers carried them thru the tunes. I actually enjoyed this one more than U2 or Paul McCartney.

    My team one for three reasons (snicker – I could care less about pro football.).

    (1) Hopefully, this will help put to bed the phony sympathy about New Orleans which has received massive entitlement to rebuild, and includes to receive help from sister cities to this day. Like Alfie, I await the bill for damage and body count which I’m sure benevolent Barack will pay with our money.

    (2) Drew Brees mom killed herself before the season, and I was kind of hoping he would win on account. She was some lib loon running as a Dim and he refused her to let her use his image – I understand the relationship was very strained. Though I like Peyton Manning, he’d already won it once.

    (3) I thought Minnesota was the best team in the NFL and blew it with turnovers two weeks ago. My neighbor laughed at me when I said that, and now I will ride him unmercifully.

    (4) The Colts owner Irsay, if I’m not mistaken, was the one who raised hell about the character of Rush Limbaugh and his owning a minority part of a franchise. Who the hell are the Irsay family to criticize anybody? Beyond belief hypocrisy.

    (5) Indiana voted against McCain if memory serves – God has administered just punishment. :razz:

  • 73. Tex Taylor  |  February 8, 2010 at 1:14 am

    Um, I added the last two later – make that five reasons.

  • 74. Tex Taylor  |  February 8, 2010 at 1:27 am

    Here’s what passes for liberal female thinking like Rutherford’s cohost.

    “The Women’s Media Center, which had objected to Focus on the Family advertising in the Super Bowl, said it was expecting a “benign” ad but not the humor. But the group’s president, Jehmu Greene, said the tackle showed an undercurrent of violence against women.”

    No mention of dismemberment, scalding, or brain excavation of the female abortions administered Jehmu, but Tebow violence against Moms? These people truly are Mengele level sick. :mad:

  • 75. hippieprof  |  February 8, 2010 at 10:30 am

    Tex notes…. “But the group’s president, Jehmu Greene, said the tackle showed an undercurrent of violence against women.”

    Tex – gotta agree with you on this one – my side is being really stupid and petty to be offended by the tackle. We would do a lot better to stick to the substantive issues – this kind of silliness does us no good at all.

    – hp

  • 76. hippieprof  |  February 8, 2010 at 10:42 am

    Tex said….. ” I swear, I look at the posts and have become Elric. I’ll be the next to run off for overexposure. Nevertheless, HippieProf. Have you read this?

    Pretty good explanation of my thoughts too, if interested.

    Ha! I had actually noticed that you were getting Elric-like in your link posting – though you haven’t started calling us all by nicknames yet…..

    Interesting article. It brings up a really interesting point – one I think I will need to write about in the future. I agree that my side may have lost the political game on this one – but the verdict is certainly still out in the scientific game.

    The political game is played with soundbites – and is aimed a public who know virtually nothing about the science. What the public will remember from this is that global warming was just one big hoax. They are not going to see the subtlety and the shades of gray. They think that one or two bad bits of data or bad scientists dooms the entire endeavor – game over.

    The scientific game is different. As I said earlier, my skepticism has been raised by the Mann emails – though I do believe those have been way over-interpreted. I still think the bulk of the evidence points to man-made global warming, even though a small bit of the evidence has been called into question. Scientists will continue to debate this – long after the public has moved on.

    – hp

  • 77. Tex Taylor  |  February 8, 2010 at 4:53 pm

    Sarah, “hopey changey”? Is that what attending five different colleges got you? Looks like you “quit” after kindergarten ~ Rutherford

    Rutherford Lawson. Is this the type of crowd you’re keeping anymore? You sound like masturbating sixth graders. I don’t mean to sound like your mother, but son. You’re wasting your life.

  • 78. Rutherford  |  February 8, 2010 at 9:48 pm

    said the tackle showed an undercurrent of violence against women

    Oh, I thought you were referring to the Betty White commercial, which btw was friggin hilarious! Abe Vigoda has been “dying” since the mid-70′s LOL.

  • 79. Rutherford  |  February 8, 2010 at 9:58 pm

    OMG! Tex has gotten so bored he’s reading my Twitter posts on the sidebar. What’s worse, that’s something Elric used to do. Queue the Twilight Zone theme music. :-)

    OK Tex here’s a guide to Rutherford spontaneity from most spontaneous to least spontaneous (i.e. most filtered):

    R on Twitter
    R on Blogtalkradio
    R in comments section
    R in main article

    So, on Twitter I’m likely to say any old sh*t ‘cos I’m satisfying an emotional need in 140 chars or less. ;-)

  • 80. Rutherford  |  February 8, 2010 at 10:01 pm

    Oh as for my sounding like a sixth grader, at least I don’t write my tweets on my hand first.

  • 81. Rutherford  |  February 8, 2010 at 10:07 pm

    Interestingly, I heard an explanation today of how the DC blizzard is a RESULT of global warming. I won’t bother to attempt the argument here but I did get a chuckle out of it. Poor old Tex …. one day he shall be proven wrong just like his forefathers were when they prescribed hysterectomies for “hysterical” women.

    The GOP: No science, no social progress, no nuthin’ :-)

  • 82. Tex Taylor  |  February 8, 2010 at 10:08 pm

    Rutherford,

    Oh as for my sounding like a sixth grader, at least I don’t write my tweets on my hand first.

    Yeah, but that doesn’t excuse your need of the teleprompter on the radio blog hermaphrodite. Or was the name Corpse Man? :wink:

    Nah – I saw that looking for the link to Gorilla’s blog because I’ve been meaning to comment there and knew you had the lead. The comment was so bizarre, I couldn’t miss the opportunity for cheap shot. But in fairness, undoubtedly you want us to read your emotional needs because you do post them. Am I misunderstanding their purpose?

  • 83. Rutherford  |  February 8, 2010 at 10:12 pm

    A couple of days ago a newscaster said, “And the halftime show will feature a performance by The Who, a rock band from Britain”. All I could think was damn, I must be getting old if the average viewer needs an explanation of who The Who is. :-(

  • 84. Rutherford  |  February 8, 2010 at 10:15 pm

    Oh exactly Tex … my Twitter sidebar is just part of my overall strategy of media overload. All Rutherford all the time! :-)

  • 85. Rutherford  |  February 8, 2010 at 10:19 pm

    HP, there is yet a third sign of the Apocalypse on the way but I forget the date (sometime in March I think): Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann on the same stage!

    OH THE HORROR

    Ahhh, to my conservative friends on the blog I have found someone who might very possibly make you unfaithful to your significant others. I asked her to visit the blog but I doubt she will. She is a Palin supporter and she spouts conservative talking points like Tex-with-boobs. I told her that while she will hate my blog, she will love the comments section and my buddies will love her! Still I doubt she’ll visit. I pissed her off on Facebook. :-)

  • 86. Tex Taylor  |  February 8, 2010 at 11:10 pm

    Can’t go wrong with a Conservative and boobs. It’s my second favorite part of Mrs. Palin. :evil:

  • 87. Dead Rabbit  |  February 8, 2010 at 11:42 pm

    Hey Rutherford, I’ll take no science over bad science any day.

    I know you have a cold right now. Shall Dr. Rabbit come over with his 16th century medical kit. Do you want to take your mercury before or after I bleed you?

    Dude, they were off by something like 30% on how much the Netherlands is under water. 30%!

    Nobody questioned this for almost 3 years!!!!

    Just like your trial of KSM will debase justice in America, your Global Warming buddies have perverted science.

    Why did this happen?

    Lefty politics run amok.

    Either suck my icicle or have the balls to stick KSM in the neck with it. In other words, go outside and get real.

  • 88. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:45 am

    Truly a Carteronian performance by Zero. :oops:

    While Rutherford and the rest of the traitorous poverty pimping progressives ripped Bush for eight years giving it everything they got with one lie after another, Zero managed in 12 short months to hit rock bottom. Quite an achievement! Imagine what Zero can do in four years!

    I think a round of drinks is on Tex for BIC, Gorilla, Alfie, and the Rabbit. We done good boys – but we need to put the pedal to the floor now and bring Rutherford’s ego to a merciful end. I’ll send a handkerchief to Curator, Hippie and a towel for the Mr. Lawson. For Densi, an Always Pad.

    Obama’s Latest Gallup Numbers Seem Somewhat Late Bushian

    According to the latest Gallup poll, President Obama is underwater — higher disapproval than approval — in six of nine categories. He’s at a 48/49 split on terrorism, a 36/60 split on health care, 36/61 split on the economy, and 32/64 split on the deficit.

    Among independents, his approval is at 35 percent on Iran, 24 percent on health care, 29 percent on the economy, 24 percent on the deficit.

    What I want to know is, how in the hell could any sane person give Zero a positive mark about the deficit? These frickin people are completely insane and without merit. I’ll bet even Rutherford couldn’t push positive on that one.

  • 89. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 3:31 am

    Tex notes….

    Obama’s Latest Gallup Numbers Seem Somewhat Late Bushian

    sigh….

    Well, on thing Bush didn’t have working against him – and in fact had working for him – was an entire “news” network that was nothing more than a propaganda organ for the GOP.

    McLuhan was so so so right….

    – hp

  • 90. LOL  |  February 9, 2010 at 3:39 am

    “Well, on thing Bush didn’t have working against him – and in fact had working for him – was an entire “news” network that was nothing more than a propaganda organ for the GOP.”

    Bush had 1 network for him. Obama has 1 network against him.

    There is more than 1 network.

    You do the math.

  • 91. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 3:48 am

    Indeed there is more than one network. But – the other major networks at least make an attempt to provide a balanced view and present both sides of the issues.

    Not only does FOX fail to provide a remotely balanced view – it actively seems to promote distrust of the “mainstream” – to the point that that anything – however balanced – coming from other media outlets is now viewed as lies.

    I think this era will be very very interesting for media historians. Sadly – it is pretty frightening for those who have not been duped by FOX.

    – hp

  • 92. Dead Rabbit  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:02 am

    But – the other major networks at least make an attempt to provide a balanced view and present both sides of the issues. “-hippieprof

    You obviously haven’t watched MSNBC.

    What a funny one. It’s the media’s fault.

  • 93. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 9:30 am

    DR said… What a funny one. It’s the media’s fault.

    Come on, DR – be honest. You guys are happy to blame the “MSM” when things are going against you. Take Palin – any time she hears the slightest criticism it is a cue for another round of liberal media bashing.

    I would trade you MSNBC for FOX any day. MSNBC is nothing compared to FOX. It has nowhere near the viewership – and it does make at least some attempt to give a balanced view. MSNBC has Joe Scarborough, for example. There is no equivalently liberal voice on FOX – none.

    I think what really bothers me is the way FOX infuses propaganda into what are supposed to be its straight news segments…. “In the news today, Obama screws up…. and in our next news story, another Obama screwup….”

    It literally sickens me.

    – hp

  • 94. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:02 am

    As usual, HP makes some great points here. MSNBC particularly between the hours of 5PM and 10PM EST spends less time supporting Obama and more time fighting lies propogated by the conservative media, Fox being the prime suspect.

    Everyone needs to watch Jon Stewart’s appearance on the O’Reilly Factor. He points out beautifully how the likes of Neal Cavuto can phrase a headline such that it presupposes a negative about Obama.

    Just go the Factor and find the video on the front page http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/

    Seeing Roger Ailes on ABC’s “This Week” was also illustrative. The man ooozes partisan venom. Now I admit, Arianna Huffington was the LAST person who should be calling him out on it, but that is beside the point.

    The reason why many people watch Fox is the same reason folks like Ripley’s Believe it or Not, the circus, and the Jerry Springer Show. Colorful lies are always more entertaining that boring truth.

  • 95. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:25 am

    R said…. The reason why many people watch Fox is the same reason folks like Ripley’s Believe it or Not, the circus, and the Jerry Springer Show. Colorful lies are always more entertaining that boring truth.

    I think it is more than that R…. I think FOX tells them what they want to hear – and it is always more pleasant to hear things you agree with than to hear opposing views. I cringe when I hear someone like Ed Rollins on CNN – he makes me want to smash the TV. But – in the end it is better for me to hear his views than to hear only from the Paul Begalas who agree with me.

  • 96. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:35 am

    Indeed there is more than one network. But – the other major networks at least make an attempt to provide a balanced view and present both sides of the issues.

    No, they don’t. MSDNC gets their talking points straight from the White House:

    http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2009/10/21/messnbc-is-the-new-rca-victor/

    CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS filter them through their nuanced shills first.

    I would trade you MSNBC for FOX any day. MSNBC is nothing compared to FOX. It has nowhere near the viewership – and it does make at least some attempt to give a balanced view. MSNBC has Joe Scarborough, for example. There is no equivalently liberal voice on FOX – none.

    Joe Scarborough is about as conservative as David Brooks, that is to say “Not at all.” As for liberal voices on FOX, Juan Williams and Bob Beckel are as liberal as they come, and of course they don’t have their own shows. It is first and foremost, a business. If they wanted to be failures, they could simply air the same tired tripe that all the other networks do.

    The reason why many people watch Fox is the same reason folks like Ripley’s Believe it or Not, the circus, and the Jerry Springer Show. Colorful lies are always more entertaining that boring truth.

    I have to confess, HP, that this sounds an awful lot like liberal condescension to me. “The average American is likes being lied to and that’s why they watch FOX.”

    Whatever. The average American doesn’t make their career in the rarified halls of academia where theory is king, and the practice, which never seems to match, is viewed as an abberation that can be fixed with more tinkering, or the vilification and complicit abscence of real-world experience and common sense.

  • 97. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:53 am

    BiW…. “I have to confess, HP, that this sounds an awful lot like liberal condescension to me. “The average American is likes being lied to and that’s why they watch FOX.”

    That was actually Rutherford who said that….. I believe that people like FOX because it tells them what they want to hear. Perhaps that is equally condescending – but it is a slightly different angle.

    A while back on my blog someone commenting on my blog said exactly that – something to the effect “Watching the other networks always made me depressed because the news (about the war in Iraq) was always so negative. Then I started watching FOX, where the news was upbeat and positive – and it isn’t depressing anymore.” I will have to try to dig out the exact quote – but in effect he was saying that watching FOX made him feel better. That probably is good for business – but it really works against the goal of having an informed society.

    – hp

  • 98. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:54 am

    DAMN! HP, I was going to warn you about that Joe Scarborough name drop …. but BiW hit before I could intervene. You see anyone who has the balls to tell the GOP that they’re off kilter and to laugh at Sarah Palin the way she deserves to be laughed at, CAN’T be a true conservative. I like Scarborough because while he may be an ass at times, I think he tries to be fair.

    BiW, sadly “real-world experience and common sense” lately has become a euphemism for lazy ignorance. Lots of folks say Sarah Palin exhibits “real-world experience and common sense” when the truth is she REFUSES to bone up on policy issues and become educated.

    What is telling is that the current administration has intelligent highly educated men like BiW so unnerved that they are ready to turn their country over to Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber.

  • 99. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:58 am

    Hippie and Rutherford,

    I like you both, but you’re charges incredibly lame. You go on whining about FOX News, but a great majority of America simply isn’t buying your lies anymore. If the majority of people didn’t think Obama a huge failure, FOX News wouldn’t be on the radar.

    MSNBC and NBC are an arm of Obama; CNN has been known as the Clinton News Network for years. Virtually every newspaper in America is leftist besides the WSJ. Time, Newsweak, Newsday, even Sport’s Illustrated – all left. ABC and CBS have been left since Edward Murrow.

    Like the professors on campus, neither of you want real debate or dissent of opinion. FOX is a combination of threat and jealousy to your type.

    I told you when the playing field is level, Conservative trumps Progressive every time. So to add to your misery, read this and weep: :sad:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703630404575053363478066720.html

  • 100. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:03 pm

    Case in point:

    Here is a story on the MSNBC website – it is featured right at the top of their home page.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35233485/ns/us_news-the_elkhart_project/

    It is a very balanced story. It includes some criticism and some praise.

    Here is a featured story from the FOX News website:

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/02/09/andrea-tantaros-obama-republicans-health-care-bipartisan/

    Wow – a story calling for Republicans to be wary of an Obama trap – that is certainly well balanced….

    I don’t think I have ever found a balanced story on the FOX site. I find them on MSNBC all the time.

    Yes – we are talking websites and not broadcast – but in my experience the correlation between them is fairly high.

    – hp

  • 101. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:10 pm

    I wrote this over at BIC’s place in depth so I won’t repeat myself. It’s the biggest of big whoppers that the left parrots daily, believing that if you repeat it often enough, it is truth.

    The left are the intellectuals of America…

    Why? Because Ivy League types at one time dominated the communication media and told us so. The more their claim is challenged, the more shrill the left gets.

    Delicious stuff…

  • 102. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:15 pm

    Tex said: I like you both, but you’re charges incredibly lame. You go on whining about FOX News, but a great majority of America simply isn’t buying your lies anymore. If the majority of people didn’t think Obama a huge failure, FOX News wouldn’t be on the radar.

    Hey – I like you too – but you are dead wrong on this. The medium is indeed the message.

    MSNBC and NBC are an arm of Obama; CNN has been known as the Clinton News Network for years.

    I call em’ as I see em. On CNN (my preferred network for news) I hear opinions both to the right and to the left of me. For every Paul Begala or James Carville there is a Ed Rollins or William Bennnet on the other side. There are people to my left on CNN, just as there are people to my right.

    There isn’t anybody to my left on FOX – not even close. There are lots of people way way way to my right. Sorry – I don’t see any balance there. FOX also loves to blur the lines between news and opinion – their “straight news” comes with lots of editorial content. I don’t see that on other networks.

    – hp

  • 103. An800lbGorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:23 pm

    Tex,

    This infuriates me often. I don’t know how many times I’ve encountered a lefty “intellectual” who’s grasp of facts was so dismal, who’s ability to apply a logical flow of thought so faulty that it was literally impossible to have a conversation with them without a full reference library to systematically and consistently prove all of there argument void of reality.

    I work with a very healthy number of folks with Ivy league diplomas, none have impressed me. The arrogance most hold- not all, but most- shuts down most communication from the get go. Columbia and Brown are probably the worst, followed by Harvard, Yale and Cornell. I frankly don’t consider Cornell Ivy league since any state college in the Cornell system gives you the exact same diploma as the liberal arts school, hence idiots like Ogerman can claim Ivy league status when he never attended, nor earned an ivy league degree. But if the Ivy league folks want him as a spokesman, by all means, put him front and center. Nuff said…

  • 104. An800lbGorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:29 pm

    Alan Holmes, Bob Beckel, that white haired young guy, Kristen something…

    Pretty much every issue, they bring in someone from the left to discuss, quite passionately, the issue.

    The fact that Obama attacked Fox is probably enough of a message for the American people, who have overwhelmingly turned to Fox for their news…

  • 105. An800lbGorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:31 pm

    HP, the fox piece is an opinion piece. Apples and oranges. And I’m sorry, MSNBC opinion mouth pieces are some of the most vitriolic, hateful SOB’s on the air. Rush ain’t got nothing on these nut jobs…

  • 106. An800lbGorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:32 pm

    Where is she (Palin) wrong on policy issues? R, educate the masses if you will…

  • 107. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:37 pm

    Gorilla says: Alan Holmes, Bob Beckel, that white haired young guy, Kristen something…

    You mean Alan Colmes, right?

    Case in point – he isn’t even there anymore, and he never was a progressive to begin with. Yeah – I would call him center-left – but by no means was a balance to Hanity – and like I said, he isn’t there anymore.

    – hp

  • 108. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 12:59 pm

    Gorilla says: HP, the fox piece is an opinion piece. Apples and oranges.

    True – it is an opinion piece. But – I *never* see a left-of-center opinion piece on FOX. I see right-of-center opinions all the time on the other network sites – including MSNBC.

    – hp

  • 109. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:00 pm

    Pay attention at 7 minutes 51 seconds:

  • 110. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:02 pm

    Hippieprof, You mean Hannity? :smile:

    You say I’m wrong – I say you’re biased and lack objectivity. You academicians simply can’t see through the fog of your own group think. No different in life than you are on campus. From irreligious, to global warming, to progressive politic, I find you guys like sardines stacked in the can. You are just the gentlemanly sardine of the can.

    P.S. – Alan Colmes calls himself a progressive.

    Gorilla, true story.

    Dumbest group of consultants I ever worked with were a consulting group from MIT. A company gave them $3MM dollars to complete a project and implement a system. After they had spent $2.3MM of the budget to produce (and I shit you not) a 200+ page Word document explaining the process, they were fired. They hired me and my buddy to finish the work – simple stuff of mixing two systems from two different companies. Took us about four weeks and we charged the company $25K to finish the job – no Word document, just a working system. When completed, the management was shocked and ask if we would stay to “document” our process. My buddy, the more talented of the two of us (and get this – a North Texas State graduate), piped up, “Why? Wasn’t $2.3MM enough?” :lol:

  • 111. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:09 pm

    Tex notes that guys like me think…. The left are the intellectuals of America…

    I have colleagues who would probably agree with that. I won’t. I disagree with you guys on most issues – but I have to admit you are a pretty smart bunch (especially now that Elric is gone). There are plenty of intellectuals on the right – carrying the legacy of William F. Buckley. Krauthammer is probably the leading conservative intellectual out there now – but there are plenty of others.

    You can point to liberal arrogance all you like – and that probably bears some of the blame – but you have to blame yourselves as well. In an effort to play to the common man you repeatedly trot out intellectual midgets like Sarah Palin and Joe the Plummer. They really do a disservice to your brand.

    – hp

  • 112. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:16 pm

    HippieProf,

    Fair enough. I might agree with you that in trotting Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber it would appear to be a disservice. But that ignores one thing. Most people in America aren’t involved or interested in global affairs like the members of this board are.

    While you and I were debating the dangers of the financial collapse of the banking industry, most guys were pissed that gas was $4.00 a gallon and felt like they were getting hosed. Doesn’t make them dumb – just different.

    Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber “connect” with a far larger demographic than you and I do.

  • 113. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    For the benefit of you guys, here is the full set of O’Reilly Stewart links (unedited). This is good stuff because it is two relatively insignificant guys (one is a comedian, and one should be) talking from opposite ends of the political spectrum. There’s humor and lots of truth (even some truth from Bill-O). I know it’s about 45 minutes worth but it’s fun for anyone who really likes politics. Five parts (listed from 5 to 1, 1 should embed in this comment) Enjoy (or don’t):


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPJICGwwvvc

    On Neal Cavuto, Stewart says “I’m from Jersey. It’s like saying ‘hey, I’m not sayin’ your mother’s a whore, I’m just sayin’ she has sex for money with people’” ROTFLMAO

  • 114. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:40 pm

    R,

    Your constant propensity to cast Sarah Palin as the only voice on the right that matters disturbs me. Make no mistake. I like her, a lot, largely because she is the living and breathing embodiment of EVERYTHING the left has told women they cannot be if they want to be successful and fulfilled for the last 40 or so years. I adore her because she reduces the left’s talking heads to shreiking apopaleptic fits at the mere mention of her name. I love the fact that she can live her faith in the face of the best the left can throw at her, and come through not only unscathed, but without giving the shrillest of her critics the dignity of a reply.

    And yet, she is not the only voice on the right, and certainly not the only person I would consider for an elected office, including the Oval Office.

    Ask yourself a serious question, R. Why are you so threatened by her that you have to repeat the left’s mantras against her at the mention of her name? Why did the left campaign against her with much more zeal than they did McSame in the last election? Why are they still campaigning against her? I can’t remember another VICE Presidential candidate that inspired such ferverent and undying vitriol in an opposition party, can you?

    What is telling is that the current administration has intelligent highly educated men like BiW so unnerved that they are ready to turn their country over to Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber.

    R, you forget that my first degree was in Political Science. I have also actually worked in government. Have you? What I, and other intelligent people, highly educated or not, know is that there is far less that is in shades of grey, or that is highly nuanced than the expertocracy of the nation’s self-appointed political class would have us believe. The reason why isn’t a mystery: Limited government actually works, and is an essential component of the freedom this country was always intended to provide. The problem this creates for the self-appointed intelligensia is that when the people know that they can govern themselves, there will be no need for a political class and the trappings of power they have come to enjoy.

  • 115. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:45 pm

    I work with a very healthy number of folks with Ivy league diplomas, none have impressed me.

    No possibility that the huge anti-intellectual chip on your shoulder doesn’t effect your conversations with these people?

    BTW, I do agree with you about Olbermann. Cornell state school grads are real lame when they try to ride the ivy league college’s coattails. True Ivy Leaguers like me laugh at them bwahahahaha. :evil:

  • 116. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:48 pm

    Rush ain’t got nothing on these nut jobs…

    G, please, put down the hookah pipe! Limbaugh and Olbermann are at best a close tie. No one at MSNBC exceeds Limbaugh’s insanity. And let’s not start talking about Glenn Beck.

  • 117. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:49 pm

    Look what I found. A 1980 political commercial condemning Ronald Reagan as stupid, shallow, shoot-from-the-hip and weak – ala Jimmy Carter (another ‘intellect’ like Obama).

    Next time charges of stupidity are brought up about Sarah Palin, play this commercial for your lib friends.

    History repeating itself?

  • 118. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:52 pm

    Oh, come on “R”. You can do better than that.

    Your comparison of Rush Limbaugh to Queef Ogremann is like comparing Ronald Reagan Sr. to Jr. Queef is a drop in the ocean compared to Rush Limbaugh.

    What’s Limbaugh’s daily audience? Fifteen to twenty times as large as the Queef?

  • 119. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:55 pm

    G! For all that is good and holy!!!! Sarah Palin can’t be wrong on policy issues because she does not discuss them!!!!! She talks in vague generalities that any fourth grader could mimic.

    Please, Gorilla, don’t take my word for it. Take a gander at the look on Chris Wallace’s face immediately following his interview with Palin. He rolls his eyes. He thinks she is a JOKE.

    You and your boys need to stop this! I understand you viscerally hate Obama. I get that. So find someone worthy of carrying your scorn to its logical conclusion and beating the guy in 2012. Sarah ain’t it. I know it. YOU know it. Stop defending her and move the f*ck on!

    For the sake of humanity, didn’t this past weekend make this crystal clear to you? Are you really so dumb that you need “hopey-changey” to inspire you? I know you’re not so stop it! PLEASE!

  • 120. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 1:56 pm

    BIC, I think you’ve touched on the shrill sound from the left concerning Sarah Palin – Rutherford and Hippie are but an insignificant shriek compared to the females. I’ve been trying for months to figure out the feminist vitriol. And I think you just nailed it friend and it is worth repeating:

    largely because she is the living and breathing embodiment of EVERYTHING the left has told women they cannot be if they want to be successful and fulfilled for the last 40 or so years. I adore her because she reduces the left’s talking heads to shreiking apopaleptic fits at the mere mention of her name. I love the fact that she can live her faith in the face of the best the left can throw at her, and come through not only unscathed, but without giving the shrillest of her critics the dignity of a reply.

    Perfect.

  • 121. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:00 pm

    Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber “connect” with a far larger demographic than you and I do.

    That doesn’t mean they should run the friggin country.

    Your grocer probably “connects” damn well too. You ready to nominate him for Pres?

  • 122. an800lbgorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:03 pm

    I’m just curious, what did Joe the Plummer do to deserve such hate? I’ll admit, I’m not a Joe follower, so I’m not familiar per se, but I wonder, was it his simple question that exposed Obama’s intent to redistribute wealth?

  • 123. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    I like her, a lot, largely because she is the living and breathing embodiment of EVERYTHING the left has told women they cannot be if they want to be successful and fulfilled for the last 40 or so years.

    Oh no my friend, on the contrary she has singlehandedly set the women’s movement back 40 years.

    We are now back to the days where you could be a pretty bubble-head with a wink and a smile and parrot whatever sh*t might get you popular, and success was yours. Nothing about hard work or intellect. GOP men love her because she is NOT a threat to them in any way. She is an easy-on-the-eyes talking points tape recorder. She confirms every male chauvinistic view that all you need to do is look good and repeat after me. She doesn’t need depth, she’s got boobs.

    Yeah she’s told women what they CAN be alright. An uneducated, mean spirited, wacko-side-of-Christian, faux family woman who can make a buck by being a “sensation”.

    I can hear NOW cheering for her as we speak!

  • 124. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:12 pm

    Tex, I was not a big fan of Reagan but to compare him to Palin does him a grave disservice. Folks close to Reagan say the man educated himself. No one, and I mean no one, says that about Palin. Shame on you, and right after his birthday too!

  • 125. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:14 pm

    LOL Tex, you are one of the few and the brave to use the word “queef” :lol:

    Who’s talking ratings? The discussion was about rhetoric.

  • 126. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:16 pm

    I don’t hate Joe the Plumber. I feel bad that the new “let’s promote ignorance as common sense” brigade pushed the poor guy out into the limelight. I actually think he’s kinda funny. I hope he made some money in his 15 minutes and invested it wisely.

  • 127. an800lbgorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:18 pm

    Hold on a sec, how can you ask me to move on when it is you who won’t let Palin go? I don’t ride her coat tails, but I love watching her drive you guys nuts.

    Secondly, Obama is guilty of being pretty damn vague, so please. You take his teleprompter away and he turns into a bumbling idiot…

  • 128. an800lbgorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:23 pm

    But you hold him beside Palin, who you hold obvious vitrial for, so what gives?

    So if it was Saul Palin, instead of Sarah Palin, saying all the same things, then he’d be origional and conservative at heart, but since it isn’t Saul- its Sarah- she’s just parroting talking points and trusting her tits towards her goals? Really, it sounds like you, not conservative men, are threatened by her…

  • 129. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:31 pm

    Rutherford,

    I’m going to show you once and for all how shallow Jon Stewart really is. Now I give him kudos for cleverness in comedy and cynicism. Very talented in that capacity. “O’Really” has become a running joke with me, because he is another in a long list that believing because he attended Harvard, therefore he is brilliant. Brilliant, my ass – though he does good work exposing activist judges.

    You will note from the clips that Jon Stewart, who calls himself Jewish which is a joke as Judaism is a faith – not a nationality I don’t care how many of them make that claim, appears completely indifferent about Iran getting the bomb. Stewart’s reasoning? Iran’s survival and how Iran would never do anything of the sort because they would be incinerated if they do. Some mutually assured destruction presupposition. Stewart couldn’t be more wrong and you can not conveniently ignore this because you now have skin in this game.

    First, the more obvious problem with Stewart’s logic. After the Stewart interview, I did a little research and calculated Israel has approximately .2% of the land mass of the U.S. and approximately 10 times the population density. Would Stewart be so indifferent about Mahmoud having the bomb if Mahmoud had 500 of them positioned on the Canadian border, aimed at American cities with a proclamation it was his intent to destroy America?

    What is it that guys like Stewart don’t understand about land mass, proximity and population density? For Israel’s survival from a regime that has stated for all the world to hear that they will destroy her, Israel has no mutual destruction policy – it’s fire first, or never get the chance to fire back.

    But even taking the illogical conclusion of Stewart’s theory into account, this is what Stewart, you, Obama, the peaceniks,the left don’t understand. Many on the right don’t either. And it really bothers me that an intelligent guy like you is so incredibly naive about Iranian leader’s core beliefs. It is their intent to be fired upon. That is the wish.

    ———————————————

    You have on occasion made fun of Evangelical’s support of Israel (or at least Curator certainly was with you cheerleading him on) believing their intention was simply selfish – to user in the 2nd coming or whatever you irreligious folk reason. You were wrong – it is commanded of Christians with no other guarantees. Simple as that.

    Where you should have been pointing fingers with your accusations to those types of charges was Islam; more specifically the Shiite version. The Shiite fundamentalists believe that if they can start a war where Christians and Jews will be defined as the evil one, then a new era of Islam will take over the world under sharia. This is what drives UBL.

    You should educate yourself about the 12th Imam quickly. You will note the blatant ripoff of The Book of The Revelation. The whole Koran appears to be some mishmash of Judeo-Christian concepts without mercy, without forgiveness, without salvation, and an impersonal god named Allah.

    Here’s a brief explanation I Googled. Discount it if you wish but your foolish if you do:

    http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/12th-imam.htm

    This is what should really terrify you – not Sarah Palin.

  • 130. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:34 pm

    GOP men love her because she is NOT a threat to them in any way.

    Tell that to this guy:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Murkowski

    Nothing about hard work or intellect.
    Said the guy who has never done anything remotely close to say…working on a fishing boat.

    An uneducated, mean spirited, wacko-side-of-Christian, faux family woman who can make a buck by being a “sensation”.

    Riiiigght. Her college credits weren’t earned at an Ivy League school, so they don’t count. Tell me, R the theologian, what is a non-wacko-side of Christian?

    I thank you for proving my point…a damn near Pavlovian response, but no answer to my question. Why is she such a threat that the left can’t help but to take shots at her?

  • 131. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:36 pm

    “R”,

    Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber “connect” with a far larger demographic than you and I do.

    That doesn’t mean they should run the friggin country.

    Your grocer probably “connects” damn well too. You ready to nominate him for Pres?

    How’s that any different that your infatuation with somebody that has already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt he’s not capable and a bumbling, stumbling idiot without a prepared speech

    You’re just connecting with somebody you perceive as capable, but unlike Palin who has performed admirably in her capacity to lead as governor, Obama has nothing but dismal results to show for his record? Take a look at his “distinguished” record as Not Present Senator? Illinois is falling apart and Obama’s home turf is Somalia by another name.

  • 132. an800lbgorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:40 pm

    Will Smith Sing: Ring my bell, ring my bell

  • 133. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:40 pm

    your/you’re….you can tell I type without proofreading much anymore. :oops:

  • 134. an800lbgorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:44 pm

    Tex, check your email…

  • 135. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 2:50 pm

    Gorilla, thank you. I received the email and will get back with you later.

  • 136. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 4:03 pm

    So if it was Saul Palin…

    Oh, you’re coming real close to a revelation here. If Saul Palin had dared to write easy-to-remember talking points on his palm for a totally pre-configured “Q&A” session, you would have dismissed him right off the bat.

    And I’ll tell you. I haven’t heard one single intelligent thing come out of John Boehner’s mouth so you may have your Saul Palin right there.

  • 137. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 4:14 pm

    BiW, you just dig your grave deeper and deeper.

    1. Fishing boat today, White House tomorrow …. oh wait, I forgot, she can see Russia from her fishing boat.

    2. No, her college credits weren’t earned at an Ivy. No prob with that. Yours weren’t either (I think) BUT you didn’t need to attend five friggin schools to get one degree. Or did you?

    3. The woman has a f*ckin’ witch doctor who prayed over her. Her congregation thinks Alaska will be a bus stop in the final days to ascend to heaven or the rapture or whatever. And, they believe (like Islam) in world domination. I consider Tex a non-wacko-Christian …. pretty mainstream. Hey Tex my friend, wanna step in here and tell us all how “normal” Sarah’s brand of Christianity is?

  • 138. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 4:26 pm

    but unlike Palin who has performed admirably in her capacity to lead as governor…

    More evidence of how Fox News warps the mind. Tex, what about “quit” do you not understand? She quit because she lost support from both parties in her state, because she was …. wait for it …. corrupt. And we now know her husband was essentially co-Governor.

    Tex, c’mon man. You and Rabbit are beginning to see the light. Don’t get lured back to the dark side. You KNOW Palin’s 15 minutes should be up. Just being honest on this one point doesn’t make you a liberal. ;-)

    By the way, and I can promise this easily cos I know it won’t happen. If Sarah Palin disappears today and returns in September with a press conference in which she delivers the most detailed policy speech of her life, clearly indicating that she hit the books, talked to the right people, and learned something, I will be the first to blog about it and endorse her as a serious challenge to Obama in 2012. That won’t happen. As it stands now, she may be a serious challenge to Obama but for all the wrong reasons … and VERY scary ones.

    Hey … at least if Sarah were Pres, Elric would get his wish. We’d be bombing I-Ran tomorrow. :-)

  • 139. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 4:34 pm

    You take his teleprompter away and he turns into a bumbling idiot…

    The meeting he had with Republican reps disproved that once and for all. You’re repeating dumb talking points. I’m beginning to understand better why you support Palin.

    My renewed anti-Palin fervor was prompted by the Tea Party Convention last weekend. Let me give you an example of some rhetoric that gave real insight into her.

    At the tea party she said “how’s that hopey-changey stuff workin’ for ya?” Putting aside the fact she sounded like a kindergartener, THINK about what she said. Think about many people who did have hopes and dreams pinned on Obama. What she said basically was “I’m so glad your hopes weren’t realized and you’re still miserable and unemployed”. That goes beyond mean-spirited. That is plain cruel. We want someone who mocks hopeful people to be our leader? She’s the f*ckin neighborhood gossip that no one likes. Unfortunately she gets a regular spot on Fox news and we have to put up with her for another 3 years at least.

  • 140. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 4:39 pm

    1. Fishing boat today, White House tomorrow …. oh wait, I forgot, she can see Russia from her fishing boat.

    And the lefies at SNL wish they could so handily affix another on of their “Not ready for prime time” lines in the mouth of any other candidate they don’t like. You do know that it was Tina Fey and NOT Sarah Palin who said that, right?

    2. No, her college credits weren’t earned at an Ivy. No prob with that. Yours weren’t either (I think) BUT you didn’t need to attend five friggin schools to get one degree. Or did you?

    R, once again you assume that she was somehow academically deficient. Coming from such a rabid supporter of the Chicago Messiah&trade who refuses to let us see his grades, I find this odd. Especially when working people and parents frequently make decisions on their continuing education based on when classes are taught, the cost to attend, and proximity to their home. The fact is that neither of us knows why she went to five different schools, but unlike you, I can at least acknowledge, upon noticing the gaps in times of attendance, that there may have been reasons other than her academic prowess for the changes in schools.

    3. The woman has a f*ckin’ witch doctor who prayed over her. Her congregation thinks Alaska will be a bus stop in the final days to ascend to heaven or the rapture or whatever. And, they believe (like Islam) in world domination. I consider Tex a non-wacko-Christian …. pretty mainstream. Hey Tex my friend, wanna step in here and tell us all how “normal” Sarah’s brand of Christianity is?

    Jeebus. Where to start?

    The woman has a f*ckin’ witch doctor who prayed over her.
    Spoken like an anti-religious bigot who is completely unfamiliar with the book of Matthew. I’d quote it for you, but the combination of your complete inability to grasp the meaning of such things and your propensity to make wild-assed leaps of illogic and unreason leads me to believe that I would only be doing you a greater disservice on this topic…if that is possible.

    Her congregation thinks Alaska will be a bus stop in the final days to ascend to heaven or the rapture or whatever.

    I haven’t heard that. Likely because it is a classic Rutherford mischaracterization.

    And, they believe (like Islam) in world domination.
    Baloney. All the understanding of a flea.

    I consider Tex a non-wacko-Christian …. pretty mainstream. Hey Tex my friend, wanna step in here and tell us all how “normal” Sarah’s brand of Christianity is?

    Leaving it to anti-religious bigot to determine what is and what is not a “mainstream” expression of any religion is like having an addict define degrees of sobriety.

  • 141. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 4:44 pm

    More evidence of how Fox News warps the mind. Tex, what about “quit” do you not understand? She quit because she lost support from both parties in her state, because she was …. wait for it …. corrupt.

    Yeah, that’s why she’s weighed down by all those indictments and convictions…oh wait! That’s right. She isn’t, and the State of Alaska no longer has to bear the burdens of the costs of her defending the baseless charges that came rushing like a plague of locusts when she had the unmitigated gall to offer an effective countepoint to 40 plus years of feminist lies.

  • 142. Alfie  |  February 9, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    I don’t like Palin and believe she is going nowhere UNLESS people like Rutherford keep going on like they do.
    Talk about moving on man.You even offer that as advice to your conservative threaders ,perhaps youshould heed that advice.
    The only thing I want to defend is the leftist war on speech regards the hopey-changey thing.
    It wasn’t a dig at the unemployed you moron. The left and that clearly includes Rutherford just doesn’t get it. It isn’t Obama getting repudiated on a daily basis. It is a leftist agenda. Hope and change never showed up because it never existed. uuuggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 143. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:10 pm

    I haven’t heard that. Likely because it is a classic Rutherford mischaracterization.

    No, you haven’t heard that because when you see anything regarding Palin that starts to go south, you turn the page.The wacko christian stuff is well documented but since you won’t quote scripture for me, I won’t show you my sources either. Believe me, the stuff this nut-case witch doctor was saying doesn’t resemble anything in Matthew and I don’t even need to know Matthew through and through to say that,

    Baloney. All the understanding of a flea. That line was typical of your entire response. “Na-na-noo-noo I’m gonna hold my breath till I turn blue …. you’re a liar liar pants on fire.” LOL Jeesh, and this level of debate from an attorney!

  • 144. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:18 pm

    Alfie, there is no getting around what she did. She mocked people, some of whom for the first time in their lives believed government could change and work better. It was cruel, plain and simple. It was spiteful, plain and simple. Joan Walsh captured it beautifully when she tweeted:

    Palin is one of the meanest people on the public stage today. She wallows in it. She loves it! Also? Possibly one of the dumbest. But mean works, and so does dumb.

  • 145. Alfie  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:29 pm

    R I don’t know if your tripping on some bad meds from your last bout of whatever but you’ve gone somewhere I can’t respect. cheers!

  • 146. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:29 pm

    Baloney. All the understanding of a flea. That line was typical of your entire response. “Na-na-noo-noo I’m gonna hold my breath till I turn blue …. you’re a liar liar pants on fire.” LOL Jeesh, and this level of debate from an attorney!

    No, that was the recognition of futility in discussing such things with someone who has stated that the Bible requires men to “Subjugate” their wives.

    You can’t grasp the little stuff. Discussion of the big stuff would be pointless.

  • 147. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:35 pm

    She mocked people, some of whom for the first time in their lives believed government could change and work better. It was cruel, plain and simple.

    Anyone who believe that change and making government work “better” comes from making it bigger and giving it more power without the consent of those to be governed deserve the buyers remorse that is starting to manifest itself on the left. And you’re wrong to boot. She was addressing the audience comprised of those who knew better, and didn’t vote for someone incapable of meeting the challenges that existed, but had to manifacture a need to meet those that did not.

  • 148. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:35 pm

    Rutherford said…. Alfie, there is no getting around what she did. She mocked people, some of whom for the first time in their lives believed government could change and work better. It was cruel, plain and simple. It was spiteful, plain and simple

    Wow – Runtherford – you just took the words out of my mouth. I have been thinking long and hard about why I detest Palin so – compared to, say, Mike Huckabee who is pretty close to her on the issues.

    (Well – he plays bass – he gets some points for that….)

    It all comes down to how she just drips with smarmy sarcasm – kinda like Carvey’s Church Lady with slightly better looks. She is mean and nasty and she MOCKS core values of her opposition. “Hope and Change” means a a lot to a huge block of voters who have fely disenfranchised for generations – yet she MOCKS it? In a speech to a bunch of blue bloods who paid 600 bucks to protest how had their lives have become? Here is a hint – if you can afford to pay $600 to attend a political even then your life isn’t so very hard.

    You know – comedians mock political values…. columnists and commentators mock political values….. but for a vice-Presidential candidate to do so? For a possible Presidential candidate to do so?

    Sorry – it is just not a Presidential way to act.

    Yeah – so THAT is why I detest her.

    – hp

  • 149. Dead Rabbit  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    I’ll tell you why Palin’s “hope and changy thing” line was lame. It’s becuase it has been a well known bumper sticker for a year now.

    Shit was played out and recycled.

    Apparently some old internet joke is enough to “offend” Rutherford.

    All those people who “believed” and had hope in the jack ass are now hurt.

    At this point, I gag.

    That’s becuase I read all the things Rutherford said about Tea Party people.

    Sad.

  • 150. Dead Rabbit  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:49 pm

    Yeah hippieprof, you’re really into calling out the missteps of Presidential candidates.

    Cue the crying of the bastard child as Mom shops for brand name toddler clothing with campaign money.

  • 151. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:49 pm

    OH Rutherford,

    You and your hermaphrodite co-host (which by the way, I’m sure Ms. Palin would have also noted the error) cackled on and on about Obama’s rousing performance. Typical lib bait and switch. And it is pure baloney:

    The meeting he had with Republican reps disproved that once and for all. You’re repeating dumb talking points. I’m beginning to understand better why you support Palin.

    I went back and watched that. The Republicans couldn’t even ask follow up questions to the fool, so there was no way to expose Obama. Zero provided platitudes and nothing more – then, next question. If Obama is so good as you attest, why were the three debates before the election about even with somebody as incompetently lame as McCain? Obama was terrible debater during the entire ordeal (as was McCain).

    You mock Sarah Palin for notes on her hand. When I used to attend Toastmaster’s, that is an actual recommendation they promote to remind yourself in case of nervousness. A word or phrase, written down on something, reminding you what you want to talk about and what you want to highlight. You clowns are fishing for something to be enraged about. You focus on the cliche and miss the entire message while doing so.

    You tell me what Sarah Palin has ever said as stupid as what your cohost said last Saturday night? There’ s no such thing as a hermaphrodite? Sixth graders know better than that and this is who you use to carry on dialogue. Yet, I don’t see you hammering Sandi’s stupidity. You tried to hint, but you didn’t correct her. You’re the original double standard and selective memory king Rutherford.

    Good grief, some of the things you’ve said here about Christianity, a fourth grader could refute. And I’m not beating you up much because you’ve never been trained or shown an interest. In fact, you’re so clueless, I generally don’t even mention anymore because you wouldn’t understand the insult. Now does that make you stupid? I don’t think it does – but it shows your priorities are out of whack.

    Finally this:

    Palin is one of the meanest people on the public stage today.

    Your little tweater is contradicting herself by her own insinuation that “dumb” sells – as in the whole constituency paying attention to Palin is dumb. A mindless hack with a following of mindless hacks. I can see where you think it beautiful, being you’ve been showing a side of condescension as of late.

    Like somebody noted on BIC’s blog the other day, and it was a great point. How many times does your side demonstrate and brag about looking out “for the little people”, not recognizing that is the description of condescension?

  • 152. Dead Rabbit  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:51 pm

    Hey…is it Presidential to set the video cam up so that it shows your balls slapping of the ass of a whore while your wife fights cancer?

    Where’s the consistent outrage?

  • 153. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 5:55 pm

    Hey…is it Presidential to set the video cam up so that it shows your balls slapping of the ass of a whore while your wife fights cancer?

    DR – I have no idea what you are referring to with this example or the previous one (cue crying child). Both sound pretty outrageous to me – so I will go ahead and condemn them even though I have no idea who I am condemning.

    Now – care to fill in the names?

    – hp

  • 154. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:03 pm

    OK – since you guys don’t seem to get why Palin’s mocking tone bugs me – let me give you an example….

    Suppose a left-leaning Presidential or Vice Presidential candidate – someone who was a pacifist – stood in front of a group of pacifists and said (in a smarmy sarcastic voice) “Hey – how is that whole Real American Patriot thingy goin for ya?”

    I guarantee you would be outraged – not only by the content – but by the tone of the delivery.

    – hp

  • 155. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:03 pm

    Rutheford, you are so full of shit, I don’t even know where to begin:

    More evidence of how Fox News warps the mind. Tex, what about “quit” do you not understand? She quit because she lost support from both parties in her state, because she was …. wait for it …. corrupt. And we now know her husband was essentially co-Governor.

    First, let me state I didn’t agree with Palin’s decision. If it were me, I would have finished out the term. But this crap about how she had lost support is a wet dream from knuckleheads such as yourself. You want to know why Palin really quit Rutherford, so you don’t go on sounding like a complete dunce?

    Two reasons:

    (1 Palin and her husband had 13 different frivolous lawsuits filed against them against by the perversion of the left – all of which were bogus – and she was $500K in personal debt defending the horseshit. This is common knowledge. Palin had no more lost support of Alaskans than Obama has lost his arrogance.

    Second, Palin jumped the ship when it became apparent her image could garner millions from a book deal. She’s paid more than ex-Presidents for 30 minute speeches. She’s a hot commodity – fad, or not. Smart business decision pal and it fries the ass of nit-witted liberals who have nothing to offer to combat her.

  • 156. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:10 pm

    Now – care to fill in the names?

    John ‘Silky Pony’ Edwards and the child he had by his no-she’s-not-ok-yes-she-is mistress…while his wife had cancer and was campaign prop because of it.

    Spare me your indignation.
    I know the “Joe the Plumbers” of the world. They are my clients. They are my neighbors. And they don’t want government to “make things better” for them. They want government to quit coming up with new taxes, and new fees, and new regulations, all of which take more and more time from plying their trade and require them to devote more and more of their time for compliance, often times to satisfy nonsensical rationales, and benefit those who don’t take the risk and do the work for the increasingly meager reward that “their” government lets them keep.

    Instead of sneering a derision toward the idea of going Galt, you really should thank God that many of these people haven’t yet reached the point where they will simply through up their hands and walk away. If that day comes, government will cease to function, and those who benefit from government’s largesse with other people’s money will no longer have Uncle Sugar to ensure their continued well-being. What will you do then?

  • 157. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:16 pm

    Hippie – would it be like this same mocking tone? Know need to make up analogies when you’ve got The Chosen telling us why and how us little people think.

    Here’s how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long, and they feel so betrayed by government, and when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn’t buy it. And when it’s delivered by — it’s true that when it’s delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama (laugher), then that adds another layer of skepticism (laughter).

    But — so the questions you’re most likely to get about me, ‘Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What’s the concrete thing?’ What they wanna hear is — so, we’ll give you talking points about what we’re proposing — close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama’s gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we’re gonna provide health care for every American. So we’ll go down a series of talking points.

    But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

    Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you’ll find is, is that people of every background — there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you’ll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I’d be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you’re doing what you’re doing.

  • 158. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:17 pm

    know/no gad.

  • 159. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:17 pm

    I guarantee you would be outraged – not only by the content – but by the tone of the delivery.

    Your guarantee is busted. Having someone on the left speak coinscendingly of patriotism to other lefties carries no shock. Its like offer free drinks to the fellow bar patrons. What would get my attention is a lefty paying lip service to patriotism in some fashion other than to claim that they really do have some. That would be shocking.

  • 160. Dead Rabbit  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:19 pm

    hippieprof, I didn’t think you would get it.

    How telling.

    Go on back to being outraged over Palin now.

  • 161. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:23 pm

    BiW Spare me your indignation.

    Then spare me your derision. You seem to think you know a lot more about than you do – based on a whole bunch of stereotypes.

    I detest John Edwards and have for quite a long time – from well before the sexual scandals broke out.

    Did you see the recent NYT bit comparing him to Palin – calling them both “political grifters.” Pretty much summarizes my feelings about both.

    Besides – I am telling you why I don’t like Palin. It is my opinion and I have every right to it. I am not trying to convince you that you shoud have it too – in fact since she is not mocking your values I wouldn’t expect you to ever share my opinion.

    – hp

  • 162. Dead Rabbit  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:33 pm

    If you think Palin and Edwards are somehow comparable, even in the remotest sense, you have no values.

  • 163. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:44 pm

    She was addressing the audience comprised of those who knew better,

    Wrong again BiW. Her full quote was:

    Now, this was all part of that hope and change and transparency. And now a year later, I got to ask the supporters of all that, how is that hopey-changey stuff working out for you?

    (Emphasis added by me) She was NOT addressing her audience. She was, as I said before, mocking people who believed in our country’s capacity to change for the better,

  • 164. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:51 pm

    She was, as I said before, mocking people who believed in our country’s capacity to change for the better,

    and believe that government is the solution to our problems by indebting our children, pandering to our enemies, demonizing our opponents while claiming “tolerance”, and normalizing marriage between two men.

    I’m sure you meant to include that, so I fixed it for you. :wink:

  • 165. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:53 pm

    Did you see the recent NYT bit comparing him to Palin

    I have about as much use for the NYT as R has for a Bible.

  • 166. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:54 pm

    Actually Tex, I DID correct her on the hermaphrodite thing, I just didn’t call her a raving numb-scull … it’s called being polite.

    And I enjoyed your dodge. So please repeat the following phrase in a comment and I will rest my case regarding the religious matter:

    “I Tex Taylor, do solemnly swear that I believe that Sarah Palin’s church in Alaska represents mainstream Christianity.”

  • 167. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:57 pm

    Rabbit …. you don’t get it!!! Edwards is toast. He’s done. He’s over. And quite frankly Edwards is in a whole different brand of sick-bastard that he’s irrelevant to this conversation.

    Palin is detestable for reasons unrelated to the use of her vagina (so far). Throwing Edwards around is a mere distraction.

    P.S. Did the MSM get Edowards horribly wrong? Absolutely! One of the worst instances of media bias in history. No defending it.

  • 168. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 6:58 pm

    Rutherford, I have often noted that you and your own have little tolerance for being punched back in the nose by public figures; Tex, not so much.

    What is different about Cheney and Palin, besides a public willingness to bully the bullies that sends you into stroke? Show me anything nastier than Al Gore accusing Republicans as considering blacks 3/5 people.

    Like the old saying goes: If you can’t run with the big dogs, don’t get off the porch.

  • 169. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:02 pm

    Dodge? All I’ve done all day is demonstrate your baseless charges “R”.

    Before I answer that question, please relay to me the following: (1) how you Rutherford define “mainstream Christianity” and (2) define your charges by example so that I may know how to address your insipid question.

  • 170. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:02 pm

    DR said….. f you think Palin and Edwards are somehow comparable, even in the remotest sense, you have no values.

    So – I am curious – are you consistent in your condemnation of sexual indiscretion, Rabbit?

    I can’t stand Bill Clinton to this day – not because getting a BJ is such a gawdawful sicko thing as some on your side seemed to suggest – but because getting it in the Oval office was incredibly disrespectful of his position as President. He demeaned the office.

    Of course, sexual indiscretion isn’t limited to democrats.

    As I remember, Newt Gingrich has a extramarital affair and a nasty divorce while his wife had cancer. Do you condemn him?

    What about Sanford. Do you condemn him?

    For the record, I condemn the behavior of all of them.

    – hp

  • 171. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:04 pm

    I know the “Joe the Plumbers” of the world.

    Yup and they must be pretty dumb-ass plumbers indeed. Without government intervention we would have hit a Great Depression that would have put all your savvy plumbers out on their asses.

    They hate government EXCEPT when government helps them, and you know it.

  • 172. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:07 pm

    Tex you threw out that old Obama chestnut again about guns and religion? The funniest part is you quoted it fully so that in context it makes perfect sense and is not the least bit condescending.

    Nice try.

  • 173. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:12 pm

    Rutherford,

    Your denial of the obvious condescension is telling in itself. I might note that Obama himself has stated that he wished he would have said it differently, and has tried numerous times to explain what he meant.

    Nice try.

    Now, on to “mainstream” Christianity. I await your definition so I can beat your pointy head like a tent stake. I’ll forewarn you if you wish to back out now. I’m going to make you look the fool. It’s not like you to take second rate opinion and pose it as fact in a subject you know nothing about. It’s like when you talk medicine or finance. :wink:

    You’re slipping.

  • 174. Rutherford  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:14 pm

    Oh btw, someone on this thread cited the WSJ as one of the only fair media around (besides Fox [gag, gag]). Have you not forgotten that conservative in finance’s clothing web site IBD? I know one of you (either Gorilla or BiW) loves to quote from that publication on a regular basis. :-)

  • 175. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:15 pm

    I just heard Obama speak of “isotopes.” I’ll bet a hundred bucks here on the board Obama knows as much about “isotopes” as Rutherford knows about “mainstream” Christianity. :lol:

  • 176. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:17 pm

    “R”,

    That would probably be me. I was using examples we would all be familiar. Did you want me to list Pajamas Media too? :roll:

  • 177. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:17 pm

    Got to go. BBL

  • 178. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:20 pm

    I can’t stand Bill Clinton to this day – not because getting a BJ is such a gawdawful sicko thing as some on your side seemed to suggest – but because getting it in the Oval office was incredibly disrespectful of his position as President. He demeaned the office.

    What was more disrespectful to the Oval Office was lying about it under oath. If someone wants to keep their sexual pecadillos private, I have no beef with that. I don’t need to know if a politician is banging an intern like a Kansas screen door in a Tornado, but once you are put under oath, you don’t lie about it. Period.

  • 179. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:26 pm

    Yup and they must be pretty dumb-ass plumbers indeed. Without government intervention we would have hit a Great Depression that would have put all your savvy plumbers out on their asses.

    Just we had to pass the spendulous bill to keep unemployment from exceeding 8 percent. And I’ll call you in the morning. And sure, baby, I’ll still respect you, and, I’ll definately pull out, and spending buckets and shovelfulls of money will save or create jobs.

    Pull the other leg. It plays ‘Jingle Bells’.

  • 180. an800lbgorilla  |  February 9, 2010 at 7:45 pm

    Thank you BiW, this is the thing that always amazes me when it come to Clinton. They always talk about how the blow job just wasn’t so serious, while convienently leaving out the whole PERGERY bit. Clinton wasn’t suspended by the BAR for getting his crank yanked…

    P.S., I often refer to IBD, and while you bemoan their conservative nature, I’ve yet to hear you actually point out anything they’ve been factually inaccurate on.

  • 181. dead rabbit 2.0  |  February 9, 2010 at 8:21 pm

    Wow. Edwards was a c-hair away from becoming a Vice President, was one of the big three for President and a total SOCIOPATH!

    This was so much more then simply giving into a sexual urge.

    Dude was making porno tapes while on the stump for President of the United States. While his wife had cancer!

    Dude paid someone to be a fake dad as he continued running for President with hundreds of die hard supporters behind him and believing in him.

    (Of course, some knew the whole time…..demagoguery…got to love it)

    He paid the whore with campaign funds. Bought her a secret house.

    Sent flowers to the hospital under a fake name when his daughter was born. Never visited the baby.

    The audacity of it all is beyond words.

    Sociopath!

    Where was and is the outrage?

    The notion of Edwards getting so far in politics should raise the hairs on the back of all our necks.

    I’m sure, if he thought he could have gotten away with it, he would snuffed out the baby with a pillow.

    Edwards was big time. BIG TIME.

    How many other total sociopaths are in our government?

    Ok, I get it. You think Palin is a dummy.Me too.

    But to hear someone bemoaning Palin’s lack of presidential behavior while not even batting an eye about that “other guy” from 2008 is crazy.

    Edwards is done.

    Sure enough.

    But he leaves behind a legacy of a Democratic party that was once very smitten with him.

  • 182. dead rabbit 2.0  |  February 9, 2010 at 8:29 pm

    Rutherford is the type of guy who would have snuffed out Edward’s baby if given the marching orders.

    I’m convinced of it.

    He barely sees babies as human anyways.

    Give him 50,000 grand a year job as a campaign adviser, a campaign tee-shirt, the feeling of belonging, a vague ideology and a down pillow.

    He is a thigh licker.

    He bows down to other men.

    Fodder for demagogues.

    I hope I never become so enamored with anybody in a postilion of power.

  • 183. dead rabbit 2.0  |  February 9, 2010 at 8:40 pm

    I think I went too far in my last post, as I sometimes do and am requesting it’s deletion. My apologies to Rutherford.

  • 184. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 9:11 pm

    Tex cites the famous guns and religion quote….. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

    Tex – if you are indeed offended by that it is your right. I am not going to try to talk you out of being offended.

    I do see two big differences with what Palin said though…

    First, Obama’s remarks were part of a private campaign meeting and were not meant for the public. You speak pretty loosely when you think you are in private. I suspect Palin says some pretty strange things when she has privacy….

    Second, Obama is talking about ways to reach out to the disenfranchised – to connect with those who feel the system has passed them by. You might not agree with his assessment – but he is making an honest effort. Palin? Is she reaching out to the disenfranchised? To the ones who dared to hope? No – she is mocking them and flipping them the bird. Seems like a pretty big difference to me.

    – hp

  • 185. Dead Rabbit  |  February 9, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    You were duped.

    How’s Gitmo going?

    You like all those nukes?

    You like war?

    Lack of transparency?

    Lack of leadership costing you your beloved health care scam?

    You like an administration that brags about doing it’s job the day after a bomb fails to explode on an airplane?

    You like a president who goes prime time to pitch health care and instead defends his homie from da 5-O, sans facts?

    Seriously, how’s the hope and change working for you?

  • 186. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 9:40 pm

    DR – the only one that bugs me is the lack of leadership on health care – but frankly on that one the “duped” part I am angry about is how the insuranceindustry has duped the public into being afraid of a bill that will help them.

    BTW – just saw this poll:

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/09/poll-majority-want-work-to-continue-on-health-care-reform-bill/?fbid=s88FIvRxy_w

    It ain’t over yet…..

    Not sure what you were implying on the “defends his home part from the 5-0″ part. Must be some obscure reference to John Edwards.

    – hp

  • 187. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 10:02 pm

    Hippie,

    You’re a good guy and fun to debate. If every lib had your approach, I might even be civil. I used to be. Did I mention I did actually thought I was looking at Jerry Garcia on your website, until you explained it was you? Very cool.

    I am going to be totally honest with you here. Hopefully, I don’t leave your chin on the floor or damage our relationship. My intent is not be crass, but truthful.

    You take Obama’s private speech,which by the way Obama had no idea was being taped, as seeking out the disenfranchised. I take it as an honest display of Obama’s true nature – arrogant, patronizing, dishonest, self-serving, elitist. I neither respect the man, nor trust the man. Neither do I believe him the brilliant man so many of you attempt to frame Obama. I think he’s shallow, dishonest, a narcissist with a socialist agenda. I think he hates white America. I believe he dangerously naive and incredibly weak. And I’m willing to take the short-term pain to see his entire progressive agenda destroyed, hopefully for many years.

    Palin’s speech was for all to see. Like it or not, I doubt that speech was much different than what you would hear in her living room. While she made the attempt to be cutesy which made me cringe, if that was hate mongering as you propose, how is it any different than virtually every speech we heard from the left for eight years about Bush and his agneda?

    This sense of selective outrage the left plays is frankly sickening. They made their bed several years ago – if they don’t like the game, they should have thought about the consequences of their own actions. Critical mass has arrived. And this time, I hope the Conservatives decide to go full bore and play it for keeps.

  • 188. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 10:05 pm

    agenda…

  • 189. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 10:13 pm

    Hey Hippie,

    I just bounced over to your blog. Am I your Conservative “friend” who said I wanted the Saints to win the Colts because Indiana voted for Obama on your twitter account? :lol:

    Sorry, completely petty (not the comment – me noticing the tweet) on my behalf but I noticed it on your blog.

    If anything, I hope I have communicated to you my disdain for Obama and the left. No apologies but I was flattered. Would you like some more material? :smile: I can be even more chicken shit than that.

  • 190. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 10:15 pm

    Can I ask you libs a real question. Curiosity. Do you think this cabinet of Obama’s, including his Czars (both communist and socialist) have served Obama well?

  • 191. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 10:17 pm

    I’ve got to quit watching TV while I write. That should have read Saints to beat the Colts…sorry

  • 192. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 10:52 pm

    Tex…

    Yeah – I confess – you were the mysterious conservative friend I mentioned. It was actually meant to be funny – not sure it came off that way. Note that I called you a friend – and I meant that – I suspect we would enjoy having a beer together, despite political differences.

    Don’t ever worry about offending me by speaking your mind. I actually think it is really interesting that we have such different reactions to the same speeches. One thing Psychology does tell us is that our perceptions are filtered through our existing attitudes. You have pre-existing negative attitudes toward Obama – and you perception of his words will most often mirror those attitudes. The same goes for me and Palin.

    Actually – the same thing applies to our earlier discussions about media bias. We tend to believe something is biased when it disagrees with our existing views – and thus given our different views we will tend to see bias in different places.

    – hp

  • 193. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 10:58 pm

    I’m sitting here watching this Robert Gibbs buffoon, another Obama reject, mock Sarah Palin about writing on her hand. Now remember, this is the spokesman for THE CHOSEN. I’ve never been impressed with Gibbs, as I have been completely unimpressed with Obama’s entire cabinet short of Gates, but I sure hope Gibbs keeps doing this. These idiots really do not get it. :lol: Obama is groveling to the Tea Party crowd today to make amends (too late Zero), while his cabinet is dissing them in the other corner. And you Dims think this is smart strategy?

    I can actually see a time in about nine months where Dimocrats lose every state without a coastline and every state with a coastline south of New York, excluding California.

    I am going to start writing on my palm all of these disses so I can absolutely tear every Dimocrat lackey a new asshole come November with a steel-toed boot. Patience is a virtue.

  • 194. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 10:58 pm

    Interesting question about Cabinet…. haven’t thought about it a huge amount.

    Hillary I think has generally been good.

    Geitner got off to a rough start but I think he is doing ok now.

    Holder – I am not impressed – can’t exactly say why though

    Keeping Gates on was a good idea

    Hmmmm…. will have to give it some additional thought.

    – hp

  • 195. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:01 pm

    Ah Hippie,

    I was flattered you remembered me. It gave me a good laugh. If I’m going to give you a load, I do have to expect it return. Shoot, you and Rutherford are two of the few from the left that aren’t attempting to censor me.

    I haven’t had this much at another’s expense since they hanged Saddam.

  • 196. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:02 pm

    Grrrrrrrrrrrr…

    This much FUN at another’s expense since they hanged Saddam. I’m even blowing the punch lines.

  • 197. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:08 pm

    Tex said…. I can actually see a time in about nine months where Dimocrats lose every state without a coastline and every state with a coastline south of New York, excluding California.

    Yeah – I can too. I hope that in the meantime my party used the time to do the heroic thing and push through a progressive health care bill. It is a sacrifice I would willingly make.

    – hp

  • 198. Tex Taylor  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:18 pm

    HP,

    Would you be in favor of the following:

    (1) Tort Reform
    (2) Removal of barriers to interstate competition of medical insurance?

    Healthcare reform as Obama knew it is DOA. Even if you managed to pass something, with all the goodies given to individual states, my state was ready to file a “grievance” of discrimination. It would have been tied up in the courts for years. God, I love the south.

    I knew health care dead as soon as Nebraska got their perpetuity and Louisiana was purchased with slush money. All that did was insure Nelson and Landreiu were baked well done. Kind of like a bonus! :razz:

  • 199. hippieprof  |  February 9, 2010 at 11:48 pm

    Tex asks if I would support:

    (1) Tort Reform
    (2) Removal of barriers to interstate competition of medical insurance?

    Yes – I would support both. I have even blogged on it. Insurance companies have lobbied hard against #2 though. They don’t relish competition.

    I absolutely detest Lieberman, Landreiu, and Nelson. The personal power games they played delayed the entire thing – it could have all been done now had they not – and now Scott Brown is relevant.

    Not sure the discrimination lawsuit would fly – putting pork in federal bills has such a long history I suspect it has been tried and failed before.

    Of course, if you do manage to hold it up people will die as a result – about 45k per year. Hope you can sleep with that.

    – hp

  • 200. Tex Taylor  |  February 10, 2010 at 12:04 am

    Except I know that 45K number is bogus as a medical professional. It’s a made up number because it depends on how you count untreated. And here’s the dirty secret – medicine can’t be all things to all people. Provide any care you wish and it won’t change that fact. As it is, health care will be broke – just faster under Obama Care.

    I’ve witnessed first hand people that are not saved when there’s little hope. Care and comfort are provided, but somebody comes in at 88 with a massive myocardial infarction caused by ischemia, they are through.

    Here is another dirty secret Hippie – it isn’t that we aren’t living long enough. We are living longer than humans should. The last 18 months of care before death account for approximately 50% of the total costs. Death panels or whatever we call them are done everyday by physicians.

    Modern medicine has become so proficient at keeping the terminally ill alive, the inevitable dying is often prolonged unnecessarily.

    Perhaps we should become more accepting death as part of life? Sounds cold, I know – especially when it is your own loved one. And there isn’t a politician alive with the guts to make that statement.

  • 201. Rutherford  |  February 10, 2010 at 12:06 am

    No Tex, this is not about how I define mainstream Christianity. You have written enough on these pages over the years (LOL it IS becoming years) that I suspect you’re a mainstream Christian. So this is about how YOU define mainstream Christianity. And I submit Sarah’s congregation would not pass your test. I hate to give sources since one of the games we play here is to condemn the source, but here’s something to chew on:

    The first two duplicate similar material and come from pubs you disrespect (HuffPo and WaPo). The third one is from a religious blog and is more balanced.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-s-mcelvaine/christian-author-warns-of_b_125811.html

    http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2008/09/palin_should_address_disturbin.html

    http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2008/09/palins-religion-whats-scary-wh.html

    And let’s not forget witch doctor Muthee (Father make a way for her to be successful politically. And get rid of “every form of witchcraft”):

  • 202. An800lbGorilla  |  February 10, 2010 at 12:18 am

    London Telegraph Analysys of B.O.’s State of the Union

    State of the Union: Barack Obama gets an F for world leadership

    By Nile Gardiner Last updated: January 28th, 2010

    As expected, Barack Obama’s 70 minute State of the Union address focused heavily on the economy and the domestic political agenda. This was hardly surprising in the aftermath of last week’s catastrophic defeat for his party in the Massachusetts special Senate election, where the Republicans scored an historic victory. American voters are turning strongly against the president’s health care reform package as well as his big government vision for the economy, which has contributed to spiraling public debt and mounting unemployment, now standing at over 10 percent.

    But the scant attention paid in the State of the Union speech to US leadership was pitiful and frankly rather pathetic. The war in Afghanistan, which will soon involve a hundred thousand American troops, merited barely a paragraph. There was no mention of victory over the enemy, just a reiteration of the president’s pledge to begin a withdrawal in July 2011. Needless to say there was nothing in the speech about the importance of international alliances, and no recognition whatsoever of the sacrifices made by Great Britain and other NATO allies alongside the United States on the battlefields of Afghanistan. For Barack Obama the Special Relationship means nothing, and tonight’s address further confirmed this.

    Significantly, the global war against al-Qaeda was hardly mentioned, and there were no measures outlined to enhance US security at a time of mounting threats from Islamist terrorists. Terrorism is a top issue for American voters, but President Obama displayed what can only be described as a stunning indifference towards the defence of the homeland.

    The Iranian nuclear threat, likely to be the biggest foreign policy issue of 2010, was given just two lines in the speech, with a half-hearted warning of “growing consequences” for Tehran, with no details given at all. There were no words of support for Iranian protestors who have been murdered, tortured and beaten in large numbers by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s thuggish security forces, and no sign at all that the president cared about their plight. Nor was there any condemnation of the brutality of the Iranian regime, as well as its blatant sponsorship of terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    As the example of Iran showed, the advance of freedom and liberty across the world in the face of tyranny was not even a footnote in the president’s speech. I cannot think of a US president in modern times who has attached less importance to human rights issues. For the hundreds of millions of people across the world, from Burma to Sudan toZimbabwe, clamouring to be free of oppression, there was not a shred of hope offered in Barack Obama’s address.

    Obama’s world leadership in his first year in office has been weak-kneed and little short of disastrous. He has sacrificed the projection of American power upon the altar of political vanity, with empty speeches and groveling apologies across the world, from Strasbourg to Cairo. He has appeased some of America’s worst enemies, and has extended the hand of friendship to many of the most odious regimes on the face of the earth. Judging by the State of the Union address tonight, we can expect more of the same from an American president who seems determined to lead the world’s greatest power along a path of decline.

    =

  • 203. Rutherford  |  February 10, 2010 at 12:21 am

    Hey Rabbit, regarding my tendencies toward infanticide in the name of ideology, don’t sweat it. If I deleted the comment, I’d then have to delete the apology.

    Lots of other stuff here I’m gonna wanna comment on but I’ll leave that for the morrow. Still trying to treat myself better with adequate sleep.

    Later!

  • 204. hippieprof  |  February 10, 2010 at 12:37 am

    Here is another dirty secret Hippie – it isn’t that we aren’t living long enough. We are living longer than humans should. The last 18 months of care before death account for approximately 50% of the total costs. Death panels or whatever we call them are done everyday by physicians.
    Modern medicine has become so proficient at keeping the terminally ill alive, the inevitable dying is often prolonged unnecessarily.
    Perhaps we should become more accepting death as part of life? Sounds cold, I know – especially when it is your own loved one. And there isn’t a politician alive with the guts to make that statement.

    Tex – not a dirty secret to me – I already knew this and I essentially agree. “Man – but if a Democrat were to say something like this out loud there would be Sarah or someone screaming about death panels.

    – hp

  • 205. Tex Taylor  |  February 10, 2010 at 1:47 am

    I looked at the Beliefdotnet article Rutherford. I’m not going to bother to read the other two because the authors would be no different than you, complete conjecture, and if there is anything that makes me more angry that false doctrine, it is some author from some crap site like PuffHO that pens about false doctrine masquerading as expert. I meet them all the time and shoot them down quickly.

    I can find nothing wrong with what Sarah Palin believes from the article, and in fact I think the author of the article is shallow in his own understanding of the Christian faith. I”ll try to explain.

    Christians are commanded to pray for everything – guidance, Obama (holds nose), specific situations, praying incessantly, even for gas lines. Now I know you find that ludicrous – and you should because you are willingly deceived and willingly blind. But you’ll note that the author objected his own opinion as factual and added nothing from scripture proving her wrong. So I’ll prove Sarah right:

    “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 4:6-7).

    You can’t be a Christian and criticize a Christian without using scripture as your basis for objection. Otherwise, it is simply opinion Rutherford and not worthy of discernment. And if I were to venture a guess, I would call this site you call “balanced” a form of human secular theology if the comments an indicator. Note the Obama lackey claiming to be a physician who goes off on all the Democratic talking points: separation of church and state (check), pro-choice (check), literal interpretation theology (check), evolution education (check). For all I know, she’s an Obama troll. Surely reads like it.

    Now about the video. That would appear to be a charismatic church where laying of hands (biblical) is common during the service. I know nothing of this preacher as he sounds from Africa, but if I’m right and he is, witchcraft is just a synonym of his culture for Satan.

    I call myself Evangelical – this is not my type of service and I probably wouldn’t be comfortable in it. But neither do I condemn it. If churches stay within “literal” guidelines the Bible, oops there is that evil word, then I can find no fault with the matter.

    I would be interested in what BIC or Wickle thought, and perhaps I missed something, but given the choice in choosing between the wisdom of Doctor Muffee (or whatever) and you, give me the good doctor.

    Now, you never answered my question from the other day. Would you like your answer to your constant condemnation of Christ as to why bad things happen from Almighty God? You never answered, so I’ll post this again because this man is my favorite apologist as of late and I believe you will be surprised at the source. Five minutes Rutherford, and you have the answer you so desperately need to hear:

    If God is so powerful and so good, why do bad things happen? – Voddie Baucham

  • 206. Tex Taylor  |  February 10, 2010 at 11:17 am

    A good summation why progressive politic has been proven as empty as the suit making the promises and his insufferable wife. And to Rutherford, I only have his to say. “I TOLD YOU SO.” :wink:

    In just about every speech at their 2008 convention, Democrats promised voters that a change in the White House would, in Barack Obama’s formulation, restore “our moral standing” in the world. Replace the unilateralist cowboy at the top with a humbler multilateralist, and the path would finally be cleared to fix vexing international issues such as curbing carbon emissions and dealing with the mullahs in Iran. Like many of the party faithful’s long-nurtured beliefs, this hope has disintegrated on contact with reality.

    “America is losing the free world,” said a January headline in the Financial Times. While that statement is exaggerated, the sentiment behind it has been gaining traction around the globe, especially in the wake of the climate conference debacle in Copenhagen. It’s not just that the less confrontational American president has been unable to deliver results. He can’t even get his phone calls returned.

    Read it all

    Democratic fantasies face the bracing slap of reality

    http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/08/back-to-the-drawing-board

  • 207. Rutherford  |  February 10, 2010 at 11:53 am

    For those, especially Rabbit, who wonder why John Edwards got a free pass, I think Andrew Sullivan sheds a pretty good light on it:

    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/02/my-john-edwards-failure.html

  • 208. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 10, 2010 at 12:58 pm

    Yeah, let’s not mock those great Americans who believed in Hopenchange, because they only believed in making the country better, and they might get offended.

    Instead, let’s mock those dumb motherfuckers who believe in limited government, because they are only racist teabaggers who deserve no less than a visit by Captain America. Who cares if they get offended.

  • 209. Tex Taylor  |  February 10, 2010 at 1:13 pm

    Why is that a good explanation Rutherford? That Androgynous Andrew halfheartedly admits without meaning to that he’s got selective outrage, bias and an intense hatred of Sarah Palin? That Andrew couldn’t believe a Dimocrat could do such a thing?

    From a party that canonized a murderer (T. Kennedy), staunchly supported a serial rapist (Clinton), immortalizes a self-absorbed fraud (Al Gore), celebrates a male prostitution ring (Barney Frank), builds altars to a thief and libeler (John Murtha), condones tax evasion (Charlie Rangel), believes arrogance and narcissistic saintly (Barbara Boxer/Barack Obama), admits Grand Wizards (Robert Byrd), and anoints botoxed shrews worthy of leadership (Nancy Pelosi). Is there a crime the left doesn’t support, as long as they are left, gay and/or irreligious?

    Please. This is typical Sullivan sanctimony. 90% of the article is excuse making, the Obama blow job, and righty bashing.

  • 210. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 10, 2010 at 1:33 pm

    “She was NOT addressing her audience. She was, as I said before, mocking people who believed in our country’s capacity to change for the better,” – Rutherford, #163, 6:44 pm.

    Isn’t that exactly what you are doing here?

    “Yup and they must be pretty dumb-ass plumbers indeed. Without government intervention we would have hit a Great Depression that would have put all your savvy plumbers out on their asses.

    They hate government EXCEPT when government helps them, and you know it.” – Rutherford, #171, 7:04 pm.

    People who voted for Obama = Believe in change for the better.
    People who oppose big government = Hate all government.

    Do you not see the gross hypocrisy you have displayed in the span of 8 comments and 20 minutes?

  • 211. Tex Taylor  |  February 10, 2010 at 1:47 pm

    More great moments defining liberal intellect while attempting to marginalize the one they can’t keep talking about: (from the incomparably stupid Joy Behar and the degenerate author of the mind numbing Vagina Monologues Eve Ensler):

    BEHAR: Isn’t that how her daughter got in trouble in the first place?
    ENSLER: I thought it was abstinence myself.
    BEHAR: Oh yes, abstinence, that really works.
    ENSLER: Really successful technique.

    It’s been my experience that abstinence is pretty successful in preventing pregnancy, but then I’m only one person two prodigy. Was Eve Ensler a product of immaculate conception and somebody forgot to tell us?

  • 212. hippieprof  |  February 10, 2010 at 1:59 pm

    Huck says….

    Yeah, let’s not mock those great Americans who believed in Hopenchange….

    Huck – I actually did a whole blog post on the topic this morning. It is here:

    http://hippieprofessor.com/2010/02/10/ahhh-sarah-about-that-hopey-changey-thing/

    Not to be a blog whore – but drop over there and leave a comment if you like. That is a sincere request. I would like to have an honest exchange of ideas about this….

    – hippieprofessor

  • 213. hippieprof  |  February 10, 2010 at 2:09 pm

    Tex….

    I have a medical-related question for you before this discussion heads off in some other direction.

    You mentioned yesterday that physicians make “death panel” decisions all the time – and suggested it was a big dark secret. It isn’t a secret to me because it happened with my father. It was over 20 years ago, and he was in the late end stages of terminal cancer – essentially in a coma. I had to travel from across the country to be at his bedside. Once I arrived, the doctor told me “now that you are here we can up the morphine dose and move things along a little quicker.”

    It didn’t quite register at the time, but obviously the doctor was talking about something pretty close to active euthanasia. It has never bothered me much – we really were in the end stages – but I guess I was surprised that the doctor was so open about it.

    My questions…

    1) How common do you think this is? My sense is that indeed it is very common.

    2) I have toyed with the idea of blogging on this topic – but I am unsure what the reaction might be. Chances are nobody would notice the blog – but I also don’t want the AMA or someone calling me and demanding the name of the physician. What do you think?

    – hp

  • 214. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 10, 2010 at 2:28 pm

    Tex, what do you expect from a pair who think that earthquakes and tsunamis are caused by climate change?

    I guess the warmer weather makes plates sweat and move around more? Or does it excite the molecules deep inside the Earth?

    I wish these 2 bastions of science would explain their thesis a bit more.

  • 215. hippieprof  |  February 10, 2010 at 2:40 pm

    hmmm… wondering of we are seeing the return of Elric in the persona of Huck….

    … we will have to see if Huck slips and starts using nicknames….

  • 216. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 10, 2010 at 2:44 pm

    Hippie Professor, before we can have an honest exchange of ideas on the topic of the ideals of Hopenchange supporters vs the ideals of Tea Party supporters (Palin included), you will have to acknowledge that the the latter are being held to a higher standard in their rhetoric than the former.

    Unless we begin with that baseline, an exchange of ideas will be anything but honest.

  • 217. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 10, 2010 at 2:52 pm

    Rutherford can attest that I am not Elric.

    I am a right-leaning academic pursuing a future in academia, who unfortunately feels the need to hide his real name and past moniker for fear of future reprisals brought on by pre-employement Google searches.

  • 218. Tex Taylor  |  February 10, 2010 at 3:10 pm

    Hippie,

    My questions…

    1) How common do you think this is? My sense is that indeed it is very common.

    Probably more common than people believe – but that is only opinion and I have no data; just one persons observations. And I struggle with that because it goes against my better nature, and a good argument can be made it goes against a physician’s oath.

    Where I really struggle Hippie is that we do it for our pets out of love everyday. I did it twice last year for my 13 year old and much beloved labs. I knew it was the humane thing to do – and I knew I made the right decision. But those were my pets of which I have dominion. To escalate that analogy to people? Hard for me to feel comfortable. But I also ask, would it better to provide no pain medication at all and let them suffer? Very, very difficult question and one frankly, I have no good answer.

    2) I have toyed with the idea of blogging on this topic – but I am unsure what the reaction might be. Chances are nobody would notice the blog – but I also don’t want the AMA or someone calling me and demanding the name of the physician. What do you think?

    You know, I don’t really know. I’m no coward but in our litigious society, if I were a practicing physician, I surely wouldn’t want my name mentioned. If you ask my personal opinion, I would side with the physician’s decision as saying he did the right thing because his intent was out of goodness. If I were a family matter, I may not feel necessarily feel that way.

  • 219. hippieprof  |  February 10, 2010 at 3:27 pm

    Huck said…. I am a right-leaning academic pursuing a future in academia, who unfortunately feels the need to hide his real name and past moniker for fear of future reprisals brought on by pre-employement Google searches.

    Huck – I do understand your feelings – when I went into academics years ago I was much more conservative than I am now. In grad school I openly supported Reagan, for example. I took some flak for it – but never felt I was discriminated against. It can certainly make one nervous though.

    For what it is worth – I like to think that “political purity tests” are not really as much of a part of academia as some suggest. I have been at this job for over 20 years and I have never seen it done – and I have served on a ton of search committees in that time. It is probably worse in some disciplies than in others – but I honestly have never seen it.

    As another anecdote – one of my most conservative RL friends just made full professor at a major state university – a university not known for being particularly conservative. He is very outspoken on his views – and it shows in his professional writings too. Obviously, his political views didn’t hurt him too much.

    Good luck with your academic pursuits – it isa great career. Let me know if I can help with anything.

    – hp

  • 220. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 10, 2010 at 5:12 pm

    You can’t be a Christian and criticize a Christian without using scripture as your basis for objection. Otherwise, it is simply opinion Rutherford and not worthy of discernment.

    Butbutbutbutbut…R knows that he can lean totally on his own understanding to declare how whether or not people he does not understand practice a “mainstream” version of a religion he doesn’t like and doesn’t understand, without any regard to the idea that what liberal atheist declares to be “Mainstream” may not in any way desirable to people well-acquainted with scripture. You just aren’t being tolerant, Tex. You have to see it his way. He is the expert, afterall. ;-)

  • 221. Rutherford  |  February 10, 2010 at 5:51 pm

    I can testify that Huck is not Elric unless Elric has changed e-mail addresses (something he’s not creative enough to do :-) ).

    However, Huck could you do me and yourself a favor and be consistent on which name you use. It’ll keep you out of my moderation bin and get your comments posted faster (i.e. “LOL” and Huck are the same person … choose one and stick to it.)

    Oh and while I’m here … when did I ever say global warming caused earthquakes?

  • 222. Rutherford  |  February 10, 2010 at 5:59 pm

    I love how Tex and BiW have everything tied up in a nice little bow. If I’m not a Christian, I can’t talk about Christianity …. and if I am a lapsed Christian (which admitedly, I’m not), there is something wrong with me and I can’t talk about Christianity.

    OH and if I am a believer, than any difference I might have with another Christian is just a sign of my ignorance of scripture.

  • 223. Tex Taylor  |  February 10, 2010 at 6:21 pm

    Rutherford, you’re really having to bend the truth now. Never once have I stated you can’t talk about Christianity because you’re not a Christian – any Christian welcomes it. Indirectly, one purpose for staying as long as I have was to have you open your eyes. You may be a skeptic, but you are an incredibly lame one. I don’t even bother anymore to challenge your drivel with respect to Christian faith, because at least in this regard, there is no challenge.

    But if you can find me making personal accusation from my post which attempted to answer your questions, please direct me. The fact you thought you had me trapped was simple ignorance on your part. I answered your question, probably exposed your ill intent, BIC picked up it, and he aptly hammered you when you didn’t like the answer.

    Like Jim McMann once said about the complexities of quarterbacking in the NFL Superbowl, “this isn’t brain surgery.”

  • 224. Tex Taylor  |  February 10, 2010 at 6:23 pm

    Guess that was Jim McMahon….

  • 225. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  February 10, 2010 at 7:45 pm

    I love how Tex and BiW have everything tied up in a nice little bow. If I’m not a Christian, I can’t talk about Christianity …. and if I am a lapsed Christian (which admitedly, I’m not), there is something wrong with me and I can’t talk about Christianity.

    OH and if I am a believer, than any difference I might have with another Christian is just a sign of my ignorance of scripture.

    R, I don’t object to you talking about Christianity. I object to how you criticize it without understanding it. Ignorance and arrogance make for an ugly package, and when I’m met with it, yes, I’ll hammer back at it. You keep trying to define something that you don’t understand and you poo-poo correction from those who do. To put it another way, it would be like me declaring who is a good or bad Harvard grad. I simply to have the knowledge or the frame of reference to make that decision, and me picking up bits and pieces of knowledge about Harvard isn’t going to change that.

    You have incorrectly quoted scripture to justify your cockeyed views about Christianity in the past, and yet you position yourself as qualified to judge whether a believer’s practice is mainstream, based on a few critical blog posts that you have read, and a video that shows something you clearly do not understand, but feel free to mock. It is offensive to have someone who doesn’t understand what it is about having the audacity to define for us what it is and what it means.

    After scanning the articles you linked, I’m fairly certain that I could refute quite a lot of it with scripture, much in the same way that Tex did. The question is “Would it matter?” After reading previous Rutherford rants on religion in general, and Christianity specifically, I believe the answer to be “No.”, and I’m actually ok with that. Given your stated lack of belief, and positions you have taken, I’d be more worried about your approval of Christianity rather than your disapproval. The threat to the church isn’t from without; it is from the false teachers within. They would be the ones espousing the doctrines that I can imagine that you would find “mainstream”. Have you read the Humanist Manifesto I yet?

  • 226. Alfie  |  February 11, 2010 at 5:04 pm

    HP 154 Get your feelings out of things,you’ll be happier.Although you are totally entitled to your opinion I think part of the irrationality I (and perhaps others) see in your loathing of the hopey changey line is how it is about feelings.
    R 171: You crazy little misguided Keynesian you. Plumbers don’t need government although I imagine they all are very happy with the sinister low flow toilets government stool samples have cursed us all with.
    HP 219. Actually the hatred of the right and the oppressive thumb of the left on those that trend right is pretty clear. Also the certifying entity that powers sociology courses is decided left and actively anti conservative,big or little C.c
    R 222. Would that bow be anything like the bows of other interest groups? Blacks,Muslims,gays etc etc.?,?

  • 227. Rutherford  |  February 11, 2010 at 6:38 pm

    Alfie, yes, the bow applies to anyone who gets defensive about their position.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


February 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jan   Mar »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
Bookmark and Share

Categories

Rutherford on Twitter

The Rutherford Lawson Blog is a member of

WordPress Political Blogger

My Sister Site

Town Called Dobson Daily Preview
AddThis Feed Button
http://www.blog4mobile.com/

Recent BlogCatalog Readers

View My Profile View My Profile View My Profile

Archives


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 711 other followers

%d bloggers like this: