What to Do When Your Buddy’s Girlfriend Dumps Him

January 30, 2011 at 1:00 am 207 comments

Foreign affairs is not my strong point. I’m better versed in domestic issues. But I do see a current American dilemma boiling down to the following scenario:

You’ve known your buddy for years. You’ve had good times. When you see your buddy treat his girlfriend pretty shabby, you look the other way. After all, your buddy is one of the only guys in his neighborhood whom you feel you can count on. Suddenly one day his girlfriend says she’s had enough. She burns his clothes and tosses them out the window. She goes running out the front door. He chases her out of the house. Does he have a gun? A baseball bat? Maybe he’s just shaking his fists? What do you do? You love the guy after all. But you’ve got standards. You see how he’s mistreated her all these years. You know she has every right to protest. She has every right to want him out of her life. So the best you can do is tell him to stop shaking his fist, or to put down the bat or the gun. You love the guy but you don’t want everyone thinking you condone his bad behavior. Then again, he is one of the only dependable guys in the neighborhood. Man, you’re in a spot, aren’t you?

For the past thirty years, we’ve been buddies with Hosni Mubarak. We’ve stood by as he has promised governmental reform to his people and never delivered. Now in a wave of protest that started in Tunisia and spread to Egypt, Mubarak’s people are pissed and they’re not going to take it anymore. But as in the case of the guy whose buddy’s abused girlfriend finally leaves him, President Barack Obama had to walk a fine line this week of pledging support to Mubarak while warning him not to run after his “girlfriend” with a baseball bat or a gun.

This business of allies is quite complicated. Sometimes you make friends with the best of a bad bunch. In an ideal world, would we really be friends with Hamid Karzai or Asif Zardari, two men who repeatedly snub us in both word and action?

Well, as I said, I’m no foreign affairs expert. I just know it’s a real pain when your buddy’s been acting like an ass and finally gets called on it. Now you’ve got to choose between loyalty and virtue. This week, it looks like we tried to have our cake and eat it too.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

About these ads

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

The Night of the SOTU: From the Sublime to the Ridiculous Being on the Right Side of History

207 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 1:57 am

    In my own shallow vanity, for one split second and one paragraph, I thought an analogy being drawn in the most tactful way the owner could muster. Rutherford has had enough.

    His dependable and always present commenter has thrown one too many punches, cast one too many disparaging insults, browbeat one too many shared blog owner ideologues – and he’s being dumped by his “partner.” The marriage is over – and so is the blogging friendship.

    Shucks! And I was going to beg you for a second chance! :smile:

    ———-

    On a more serious note, what a tangled web we have weaved. I guess my only suggestion for my country, my elected leaders, and even myself is now is the time to lay low, perhaps even remain silent and take no sides.

    I don’t have a good answer, and I’m not sure anybody but the Lord does. I would tell you to pray for your own country, as this may very well be the beginning of the end for our life as we know it. But who do you pray to?

    Like I said previously tonight elsewhere. I can not think of a better ball field to measure with proof which one of us has been right all along.

    Are most Muslims seeking freedom and liberty, the pursuit of happiness. Do they have the same character or compunction that we do? Is sharia law or global submission the end game?

    Don’t know the answer Mr. Rutherford as for the U.S. to how best to proceed. I really don’t.

    But walk softly and carry a big stick do come to mind.

  • 2. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 30, 2011 at 7:49 am

    The US needs to stand on the right side of history for a change.
    Across the globe nationalist movements eventually win. That had already happened for the most part in South America. It happened in SE Asia – probably more than most realize. Having just been in two “communist” counties there – Laos and Vietnam – the people have won more than the surface might indicate. Both are thriving/exploding market economies. Communist? Hardly – in name only.

    My largest concern by far now is Saudi Arabia. The US and many other counties has sucked up to the theocratic family fiefdom there for many years for one reason: OIL. That fiefdom will fall – it is only a matter of time. So the question is which side will we be on? Can we afford to be wrong? or put another way will the US continue to stall on energy independence or will we wait and have $10 gasoline. Wind and solar are the only choices. Nukes are an “easy” and wrong answer. “Drill Baby Drill” is a fool’s song. We need a “to the moon” program on energy now. Funding? Start with those oil company subsidies which encourage all that is wrong with our current policies.

  • 3. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    Wind and solar are the only choices.

    Then you better get ready move back to the proverbial log cabin, because solar power accounts for less than .2% of the national power produced, and also requires rare metals like silver to construct.

    Wind accounts for .6% of the total amount of energy produced in this country, would require an estimated 2 trillion dollar investment to be fully utilize in the U.S. power grid as the logistics not in place, and the power loss across lines cost prohibitive.

    As a comparison, wood accounts for 2% of the energy produced and utilized in the U.S., or more than twice solar and wind combined.

    A nice hypothetical for proposal and a liberal’s wet dream. And a pipe dream at present.

    Natural gas or nuclear power, unless someone has come up cold fusion plan. America’s choice…if we are serious about lessening our dependence on crude oil.

    And scientific ignorance from loons from the Left masquerading as scientists and fact gatherers doesn’t help the matter. The same goons trying to slap a carbon tax on energy, as crude approaches $100 a barrel and the middle east pushes toward chaos. If you want to be real cold as you sit in the snow, or use your entire paycheck to heat or cool your home, I would suggest we discard with the stupidity and get serious about finding alternatives.

  • 4. an800lbgorilla  |  January 30, 2011 at 12:22 pm

    Wind and solar?

    I always knew you were full of hot air…

  • 5. poolman  |  January 30, 2011 at 4:06 pm

    I hope the Egyptians throw off their oppressive regime. I just don’t think Israel, along with it’s puppet the US of A, will stand for that. As Tex notes in comment 1, it IS a tangled web WE have woven. Chickens coming home to roost, anyone? These are certainly exciting times. We HAVE been carrying a big stick, but we have not been walking very softly. Our footprint is quite widespread and deep.

    Solar energy has been opposed by those profitting from the exploitation of our earth’s natural resources for decades. That is why it isn’t more widespread. Here in Az we have some homes that are powered that way. Cost for the average home is about 40K. We have considered it, to get us off the grid. Most that have it don’t have battery storage, but are still tied to the grid, selling to the energy provider any excess power produced.

    Except for the selling of the panels, not much profit can be derived beyond that. It has been much easier to profit from the mining, refining, and selling of oil, gas, and coal. Even the technology of super efficient machines developed to minimize the use of these natural elements has been quashed by the energy companies. Patents bought, technology sat on. Energy companies have much invested in keeping things the way they are.

    Look at how far Nikola Tesla’s inventions got. He was able to produce energy without ANY combustible fuel – essentially free power. That was a century ago. That kind of stuff doesn’t bode well in a capitalist world system.

  • 6. an800lbgorilla  |  January 30, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    Do any of you people understand the repercussions of Egypt falling? Do you have any idea what that will mean for both regional and global stability?

    Chickens and such aside, this is NOT a good thing for anyone…

  • 7. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    I would say any additional instability is a bad thing Gorilla for the United States. I thought that with Tunisia. It would appear to me that no matter what we want, Mubarak is gone.

    And at least in the short term, that’s a bad thing for us.

    The question I have, is where does this all stop? Could Qaddafi be far behind? I could see this whole thing blowing up into a regional war, with the only winner being sharia and Iran.

  • 8. fakename2  |  January 30, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    I agree with Gorilla in Comment 6, That’s why we have to walk a fine line (see:Afghanistan). See Iraq. Where we support people who eventually become our ememies. It’s a wager…never a sure thing. I think what we’re poorest at is judging the moment when the worm turns.
    Meanwhile…God, Christianity, Islam, the Bible, the Koran, Obama, liberals. Thought I would just cut to the chase and save everyone a lot of time. Because it will for sure get there.
    Probably not before I get called some other sexually repulsive name straight out of Roget’s. I”m just sayin”

  • 9. poolman  |  January 30, 2011 at 5:20 pm

    Yeah, Gorilla. I hear the drum beat.

    Revelations 6:6 tells me today’s news…

    …if you have ears to hear. :wink:

  • 10. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 30, 2011 at 5:32 pm

    There’s a reason we support dictators—their iron fists tend to bring stability to the areas they control.

    Popular uprisings like this are potentially dangerous because a charismatic figure can easily swoop in and take control over it after the heavy lifting has begun, as with the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

  • 11. fakename2  |  January 30, 2011 at 6:05 pm

    Huck you are no doubt right, but it’s a strategy that has come back to bite us in the ass more than once. Time for a new strategy. If we are going to be the beacon of freedom, then let’s do it and quit equivocatijg.

  • 12. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 30, 2011 at 6:17 pm

    At face value, it is easy to agree with such an idea.

    But are you willing to give up some of your freedoms for others to gain theirs?

    We support Middle East dictators to keep oil flowing so that Americans have the freedom to freely travel around, heat our homes, and make our stuff as cheaply as possible.

    I’m not saying don’t have that idea. But see it realistically for what it is and what it will bring–a change to your everyday life.

  • 13. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 6:28 pm

    Time for a new strategy. If we are going to be the beacon of freedom, then let’s do it and quit equivocatijg.

    Sounds a lot like that self-blame of America being the instigator on 9/11 from the American hating Left. I’ll save you the trouble (fill in the blank).

    So how would you suggest we proceed (fill in the blank from Roget’s). I can hardly wait for the misandrist to define for us how to proceed, because Liberals will always get back to blaming America first (see Iraq).

  • 14. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    Here’s what I’m going to do for you cowardly liberals, and most of you are disgusting dishonest and blind, and you tacitly diss our military under the guise of political dissent, I’m going to remind you of real, genuine dishonesty of two years of your golden boy Barack Obama.

    Case #1 – White House quietly exempts pampered politicos

    What does it take to be exempted from Obamacare?

    Last year, we learned that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had granted 111 waivers to protect a lucky few from the onerous regulations of the new national health care overhaul. That number quickly and quietly climbed to 222, and last week we learned that the number of Obamacare privileged escapes has skyrocketed to 733.

    How can you get your own free pass from Obamacare? Maybe you can just donate $27 million to President Obama‘s campaign efforts. That’s what Andy Stern did as president of SEIU in 2008. He has been the most frequent guest at Mr. Obama‘s White House.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jan/28/tawdry-details-of-obamacare-420960137/

  • 15. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 6:53 pm

    Case #2 to the Israeli haters – The Steady Erosion of Women’s Rights under Islam and Egypt: A Photographic Story

    http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2010/01/28/the-steady-erosion-of-womens-rights-in-egypt-a-photographic-story/

    Poolman has accused this of being a “Zionist” site. :eek:

    Hard to lie about a picture, though.

  • 16. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 7:00 pm

    While He Fiddled On Obamacare

    Having prostrated the United States before the world in the first months of his administration, and then having largely abandoned that world while focusing on Obamacare, we have watched a de facto Iranian takeover of Lebanon via Hezbollah, and a spread of Iranian and Islamist influence. It remains to be seen in which direction the Egyptian crisis moves, but all signs point to creater instability in the region and greater influence of Islamists.

    http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2011/01/while-he-fiddled-on-obamacare.html

    I would call that a classic case of equivocating. Looks like we might be moving to a repeat of Jimmy Carter’s Iran.

  • 17. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 7:09 pm

    Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, former Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency and a candidate in the Egyptian presidential elections, of receiving funds exceeding $7 million (US) from Iran’s leadership as support for ‘political reform in Egypt’.

    http://planet-iran.com/index.php/news/23291

    This has been in the works for awhile.

    Let’s examine the hero from the American Left, frequent cirtic of the War in Iraq, friend of of the American Left, and winner of the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize (Yasser Arafat and Al Gore come to mind).

    He had a 12-year run, ending in 2009, as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) where his primary legacy was to bring Iran to the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons.

    Leftist, I have absolutely no confidence in the current administration’s ability to not equivocate – and that would be the best case scenario.

    I have a sneaking suspicion, they would happily sell America out if it meant more campaign financing for the 2012 Obama election. Yeah Hamas!

  • 18. poolman  |  January 30, 2011 at 7:34 pm

    Hard to lie about a picture, though.

    Of course if a lib used a photo it is probably photo-shopped, right?

    I guess you are showing because of the clothing, these gals are more oppressed. Is that the gist? Of course it also shows that the in the latter photos, the women have bigger smiles and there are more of them. That is an interesting note.

  • 19. poolman  |  January 30, 2011 at 7:40 pm

    I have a sneaking suspicion, they would happily sell America out if it meant more campaign financing for the 2012 Obama election.

    You don’t think your “allies” haven’t already sold us out? We are bankrupt, bud. We’ve been sold out. Wake up and smell the carnations.

  • 20. fakename2  |  January 30, 2011 at 7:49 pm

    Huck. Are those our only two choices? Give up some of our freedom so others can have more? I don’t see that as the case. Freedom is not in limited supply, so that in order for other people to get some you have to give yours up.

  • 21. poolman  |  January 30, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    We have a glut of oil. Peak oil was bullshit. Hell, half of west Texas and OK sit on capped wells, just waiting for the “right” price. If it was sooooo rare, do you think they would have allowed all the spewing and spilling of it everywhere. The price of oil is controlled not by supply and demand, but by the ones who own it.

  • 22. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 30, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    The regressives squall. Meanwhile the dominoes fall and one one can stop them. Who will be next? Certainly Karzai – the CIA puppet is on the short list.

  • 23. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 8:59 pm

    Poolman, I came from this industry, even drilled in this industry for 20 years. This is without doubt the biggest crock of shit I’ve ever read here. Are you that uninformed, or that dishonest?

    We have a glut of oil. Peak oil was bullshit. Hell, half of west Texas and OK sit on capped wells, just waiting for the “right” price.

    West Texas is great for gas – it isn’t shit for oil; from Ft. Hancock to the panhandle, I’ve been all over West Texas and the Permian basin, Pecos to Paris Texas. It would take a $60 – $80 barrel oil to break even on most of that capped crap; it’s tapped buddy. Just to recover it, we have to inject a water soluble polymer.

    Would you get your facts right dammit? Remember, this isn’t Fat Grannies. Keep your blog straight where truth counts more than fiction.

    Here’s the REAL facts. The peak production right now is about 86MM barrels per day. Demand reached 88MM barrels in December, mostly due to increased demand from China and India. Unless you’re willing to convert shale, the days of easy oil are over – and no, peak oil wasn’t a lie.

    You think oil companies are going to drill in 5,000ft of water if oil were easily captured?

    Good grief. I won’t tell you how to build pools. You don’t pass that horseshit to me as fact.

  • 24. poolman  |  January 30, 2011 at 9:53 pm

    Poolman, I came from this industry, even drilled in this industry for 20 years.

    Oil field trash? Ahhhhh…. that does sync. I know we must have mutual friends. Are you familiar with Sitton Drilling?

    Get real, bud. Like the big wigs give you hands a clue. Sheesh.

    Russians oil is Abiotic. Fossil fuels is bogus, aka “junk” science. You still think we’re running on dinosaurs, sinclair. :lol:

    Google it.

  • 25. an800lbgorilla  |  January 30, 2011 at 9:57 pm

    I wonder how long that idiot sits there and ponders these dimwitted one liners he tries to flush around. The bitch is about as sharp as a marble…

  • 26. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 30, 2011 at 9:57 pm

    “The price of oil is controlled not by supply and demand, but by the ones who own it.”

    It wasn’t speculators that launched the Oil Weapon against America in the 70s.

    Prices are set by those who own it. Prices are influenced by supply and demand. Anyone who says anything different is lying. Plain and simple.

    “I don’t see that as the case.”

    When you are making a decision about what you can’t purchase because you need gas then will you think it is the case?

    Don’t get me wrong. I’d love to see Egyptians oust Mubarak and get real freedom. I’d just also like people to be honest with themselves about the ways it can go for both them and for us in the aftermath. There is potential for bad shit on both. And that shouldn’t be ignored or glossed over.

  • 27. poolman  |  January 30, 2011 at 10:21 pm

    Huck, you probably believe Sadat was taken out by his own people, too, right? Islamic extremists. Just like they told us. The handy “evil force” that threatens all world peace. Yep. Of course He WAS a threat to Israel. Mubarak never has been.

  • 28. Tex Taylor  |  January 30, 2011 at 11:29 pm

    Poolman, I never thought I’d meet anybody here I thought slower and more gullible than the Bartlesville Yellow Dog from above. But then I remembered who I am conversing with – 9/11 hoaxes, Building 7, hidden messages in Simpson cartoons, and abiotic oil.

    I honesty can’t believe there are people like you in the world that are roaming free and not institutionalized. :twisted: I sincerely hope I never pass you on the road with you behind the wheel. You must be a real piece of work in real life.

    Russians oil is Abiotic. Fossil fuels is bogus, aka “junk” science. You still think we’re running on dinosaurs, sinclair.

    No, I don’t think we are running on dinosaurs – I know from the organic chemistry, something you have no clue what I speak, that we are running on dinosaurs, ferns and every other source of carbon under intense pressure and heat that lived in primordial swamps 300MM years ago. That’s about 75 year old science.

    I have a question Poolman. Try to put on your thinking cap for a minute. Companies have been looking for oil for 100 years. If all this abiogenic stuff is there, why haven’t they found it? Those Russians spent several million dollars, drilled to over 30,000 feet and came up with 84 barrels. 84 barrels!!! :lol:

    Do you have any idea how deep they’ve drilled in West Texas to find deep pools of oil? Well, they are still looking for it after millions of dollars in wildcatting.

    I can’t wait to pass your comments on the geochemists, geophysicists and geologists I worked with past tense. I’m going to send this verbatim.

  • 29. poolman  |  January 30, 2011 at 11:57 pm

    Actually they drilled 43,000 feet and repeated it hundreds of times.

    Must have been those 30 foot joints, 5 gallon buckets of dope, and all the safety meetings you attended that messed with your mind. :lol:

    Explain then how pumped dry wells replenished themselves.

  • 30. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 12:01 am

    I can’t believe I’m being drawn into this ambiogenesis argument of petroleum again, but I must.

    Here Poolman – I guarantee half of this you won’t understand, but I’ll post it anyway to put your horseshit to rest:

    Dr. John Clarke, a geologist and astrobiologist from Australia

    (his bio is at this link: http://aca.mq.edu.au/People/jclarke.htm

    A rebuttal to Abiotic theory of Petroleum

    The fact remains that the abiotic theory of petroleum genesis has zero credibility for economically interesting accumulations.

    99.9999% of the world’s liquid hydrocarbons are produced by maturation of organic matter derived from organisms. To deny this means you have to come up with good explanations for the following observations.

    1) The almost universal association of petroleum with sedimentary rocks.
    2) The close link between petroleum reservoirs and source rocks as shown by biomarkers (the source rocks contain the same organic markers as the petroleum, essentially chemically fingerprinting the two).
    3) The consistent variation of biomarkers in petroleum in accordance with the history of life on earth (biomarkers indicative of land plants are found only in Devonian and younger rocks, that formed by marine plankton only in Neoproterozoic and younger rocks, the oldest oils containing only biomarkers of bacteria).
    4) Progressive destruction of oil when heated to over 100 degrees (precluding formation and/or migration at high temperatures as implied by the abiogenic postulate).
    5) The generation of petroleum from kerogen on heating in the laboratory (complete with biomarkers), as suggested by the biogenic theory.
    6) The strong enrichment in C12 of petroleum indicative of biological fractionation (no inorganic process can cause anything like the fractionation of light carbon that is seen in petroleum).
    7) The location of petroleum reservoirs down the hydraulic gradient from the source rocks in many cases (those which are not are in areas where there is clear evidence of post migration tectonism).
    8 ) The almost complete absence of significant petroleum occurrences in igneous and metamorphic rocks (the rare exceptions discussed below).
    The evidence usually cited in favour of abiogenic petroleum can all be better explained by the biogenic hypothesis e.g.:
    9) Rare traces of cooked pyrobitumens in igneous rocks (better explained by reaction with organic rich country rocks, with which the pyrobitumens can usually be tied).
    10) Rare traces of cooked pyrobitumens in metamorphic rocks (better explained by metamorphism of residual hydrocarbons in the protolith).
    11) The very rare occurrence of small hydrocarbon accumulations in igneous or metamorphic rocks (in every case these are adjacent to organic rich sedimentary rocks to which the hydrocarbons can be tied via biomarkers).
    12) The presence of undoubted mantle derived gases (such as He and some CO2) in some natural gas (there is no reason why gas accumulations must be all from one source, given that some petroleum fields are of mixed provenance it is inevitable that some mantle gas contamination of biogenic hydrocarbons will occur under some circumstances).
    13) The presence of traces of hydrocarbons in deep wells in crystalline rock (these can be formed by a range of processes, including metamorphic synthesis by the fischer-tropsch reaction, or from residual organic matter as in 10).
    14) Traces of hydrocarbon gases in magma volatiles (in most cases magmas ascend through sedimentary succession, any organic matter present will be thermally cracked and some will be incorporated into the volatile phase, some fischer-tropsch synthesis can also occur).
    15) Traces of hydrocarbon gases at mid ocean ridges (such traces are not surprising given that the upper mantle has been contaminated with biogenic organic matter through several billion years of subduction, the answer to 14 may be applicable also).
    16) The close link between the biomarkers in source rock and depositional environment (source rocks containing biomarkers of land plants are found only in terrestrial and shallow marine sediments, those indicating marine conditions only in marine sediments, those from hypersaline lakes containing only bacterial biomarkers).

    The geological evidence is utterly against the abiogenic postulate.

    Cheers,

    Dr. Jon Clarke (reprinted with permission)

  • 31. fakename2  |  January 31, 2011 at 12:55 am

    All I can say is, I’m driving a car that gets 38 mpg on the highway.26 in the city, less than advertised. but still. We are nowhere near living without oil. So…”oil politcs” are a necessity.

  • 32. fakename2  |  January 31, 2011 at 12:57 am

    And just to think…we claimed the Iraq war was not about oil.

  • 33. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 31, 2011 at 1:26 am

    “So…”oil politcs” are a necessity.”

    What do you think I have been talking about?

  • 34. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 31, 2011 at 1:34 am

    “And just to think…we claimed the Iraq war was not about oil.”

    I said we support dictators to bring stability to keep oil flowing.

    Where exactly does invading a country, causing it to become unstable, and killing its dictator fit into what I said?

  • 35. poolman  |  January 31, 2011 at 1:41 am

    Well Tex, your link didn’t go anywhere. I did google the guy and interestingly found the same info you provided here:

    http://www.oilempire.us/abiotic.html

    They explore all ends of the spectrum on this subject and conclude that the jury is still out on the issue. Clarke is certainly on one end of the spectrum with physicist Thomas Gold on the other. Good references and an overall interesting website, too. Seems that they take both extremes of a lot of issues and boil them down to the known facts and what is speculation. Pretty extensive in scope. It will get more perusing from me.

  • 36. fakename2  |  January 31, 2011 at 1:59 am

    Sheesh, Huck. Could you liighten up long enough to thimk? I agreed with you. I mostly always do. But I kind of get why you would be suspicious. Around here, attacks are more common than logic. But you might calm down and give me a bresk.

  • 37. an800lbgorilla  |  January 31, 2011 at 6:52 am

    FN, shut up…
    ;)

  • 38. an800lbgorilla  |  January 31, 2011 at 7:34 am

    I don’t know where my smilely face went, but that was a joke…

  • 39. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 10:13 am

    Well Poolman, the internet verdict is “all over the board” about controlled demolitions of Twin Towers, and “all over the board” about the grassy knoll, and “all over the board” about space aliens landing in New Mexico in the late 40s.

    It would really do you liberals some good to recognize a few facts. We wouldn’t be going to war in the gulf if oil were simply rising from our mantle. Our leadership, both Dimocrat and Republican, recognize this.

    A minority of reservoirs might replenish the hole to some degree due refill to the science of the rock drilled and “fracked” – permeate and porosity, in conjunction with gravity and pressure.

    Abiotic oil is a false promise, and I will now show you why very simply, so that even you can understand.

    Carbon is the basic element of life. You, me, plants, dogs, cats, lizards, cells, etc…

    See this?

    The strong enrichment in C12 of petroleum indicative of biological fractionation (no inorganic process can cause anything like the fractionation of light carbon that is seen in petroleum).

    That’s the basic of organic chemistry. That’s why petroleum is called hydroCARBONS. And until you can prove to this “white trash” oil guy the source of your abiotic CARBON in quantities that would amount to billions of barrels, I am going to continue to laugh at you.

    You’re the most gullible lollipop I’ve ever conversed with Poolman. You’re the kind of guy that always gets burned by fads and marketing ponzi schemes, always believes you’re being poisoned (most have a cigarette in their mouth while making their claim) by the water, is the first one in line for some homeopathic health promise, probably buying lottery tickets by the bushel, and the proverbial guy seeking out the fountain of youth.

    Rube baby, rube… :razz:

  • 40. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 10:25 am

    The Gulf War was about oil and keeping the oil flowing.

    The second Iraq War had little or nothing to do with oil.

    At the time of the start of the Iraq War, Iraq accounted for approximately 4% of U.S. imported crude, or about 2.5% of all the feed stock used to produce domestic petroleum products. It’s even less now.

    The second war with Iraq’s primary motive was to remove a brutal dictator, who continually thumbed his nose at 16 U.N. resolutions.

    Anybody that thinks it was about increasing the U.S. oil imports at a cheaper price, or to drive the price of crude oil up, does not understand world oil markets.

  • 41. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 10:35 am

    While Obama dreams up worthless gov’t health care schemes, and talks of infeasible and unproven technologies that won’t significantly change our total energy capacity but are incredibly inefficient and expense to produce, China pushes for technology like this:

    http://energyfromthorium.com/2011/01/30/china-initiates-tmsr/

    And some Americans wonder why China is catching up? :roll:

  • 42. an800lbgorilla  |  January 31, 2011 at 1:21 pm

  • 43. fakename2  |  January 31, 2011 at 1:24 pm

    Gorilla…the smiley face is there:)

  • 44. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 1:43 pm

    So – as expected – the regressive energy plan is to wait until the oil runs out – be it that the world moves past peak oil into a steep decline or it is shut down almost overnight by a Saudi people’s revolution. Market forces work. Expensive energy has already killed off many monster trucks. Just think what $10.00 fuel will do. A walk in the cold and dark anyone?

  • 45. Rutherford  |  January 31, 2011 at 1:48 pm

    This is a hit and run since I have stuff to do today (already behind) so I won’t be back until much later ….. but I’d like to ask the following question:

    Are there societies unfit for democracy? The United States formed its democracy based on prevailing philosophies of the day and long evolving tradition of Western culture. Afghanistan, for example, has not moved one iota toward enlightenment in centuries.

    It could be argued (I know this will piss off some here) that there was a thriving middle class in Sadam’s Iraq. He was a despot, but he kept order and his country was functional. How does the Iraq of today compare to the Iraq of 11 years ago in terms of economy and per capita income of its population?

    Are Egyptians ready for a true democracy? Do we make a mistake in thinking one size government fits all?

    Any thoughts?

  • 46. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 31, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    “So – as expected – the regressive energy plan is to wait until the oil runs out..”

    !!!STRAW MAN ALERT!!!

    Can you point us to the comment in this discussion that even hinted at that conclusion?

    Maybe you didn’t turn on the news today, dog. Shit is happening TODAY. Right now…as we speak.

    Is your renewable energy infrastructure ready to take over for king oil today…right now…as we speak? Are you prepared to give up everything in your daily life that this washed up commodity we call oil brings you?

  • 47. Hucking Fypocrites  |  January 31, 2011 at 2:32 pm

    “Are Egyptians ready for a true democracy?”

    It would appear thus far that they are.

    Those ready for true democracy are those who rise up and take it. Those who are not ready for democracy are those who the gift was given.

  • 48. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    Those who are not ready for democracy are those who the gift was given.

    Isn’t that the truth…all of us here take our liberties for granted to some degree.

    But at least most of us aren’t trying to give it away either. Some from the Left and more specifically one here, seem to be racing to see how fast they can bow to King George.

  • 49. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 4:01 pm

    JUST IN!

    Obama Care, the one gigantic achievement of American Liberalism, has been emasculated – ruled unconstitutional; entire act ruled null and void.

    Congratulations Barack Obama and to you regressives who at this time last year were wetting your pants over the big victory! :lol:

    Where’s Nancy Pelosi’s Bam Bam gavel now? If you had any brains, you’d frogmarch that witch to the curb. :twisted:

    Your party philosophy reminds me of Wiley E. Coyote with a huge dose of arrogance thrown in for good measure. Always foiled at the most inopportune time, left holding the anvil while falling head first off the cliff.

  • 50. El Tigre  |  January 31, 2011 at 4:13 pm

    Tex, it ain’t “nothin’ but thing” until the SCOTUS rules on the issue.

  • 51. El Tigre  |  January 31, 2011 at 4:14 pm

    Huck @ 47, Bingo!

  • 52. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 4:17 pm

    “Is your renewable energy infrastructure ready to take over for king oil today…right now…as we speak? Are you prepared to give up everything in your daily life that this washed up commodity we call oil brings you?”

    Once again proof that regressives indeed want to wait. When I see them actully supporting alternatives and putting money into it – and taking it away from big oil I will think something different. So far they kick and scream all the way – just scroll up.

  • 53. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 4:23 pm

    Tigre,

    True. But it had to get there to make it official. :smile:

    I give 5-4 odds BongoCare is toast…about the same odds I give Yeller Dawg can feed himself.

  • 54. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 4:49 pm

    Decent affordable healthcare for everyone. It is not the regressive me me me way. Keep flogging REPEAL though – every time you do the GOP numbers go down and Obama’s go up – they already are.

  • 55. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 4:54 pm

    every time you do the GOP numbers go down and Obama’s go up – they already are

    Brought to you by the same useful idiots who told us Conservatism was dead in 2008. Regressives by another name.

  • 56. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 6:15 pm

    Even the regressive shill RAS shows Obama on the upswing.

  • 57. an800lbgorilla  |  January 31, 2011 at 6:27 pm

    So – as expected – the regressive energy plan is to wait until the oil runs out – be it that the world moves past peak oil into a steep decline or it is shut down almost overnight by a Saudi people’s revolution. Market forces work. Expensive energy has already killed off many monster trucks. Just think what $10.00 fuel will do. A walk in the cold and dark anyone?” – The Bitch

    Never letting facts get in the way of poor rhetoric…
    Top 10 Best-Selling Cars of 2010

  • 58. an800lbgorilla  |  January 31, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    Special for the bitch…

    Obamacare Unconstitutional

  • 59. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 6:43 pm

    And why are cars getting more economical? Because the cost of fuel is going up – MARKET FORCES – not a plan. Hummer is dead as well. Is there any regressive who does not think it is thier right to have a monster truck? Just think what the market forces will look like with $10.00 gas. Gee perhaps someone will even consider public transit or something other than oil??? Comes right back to solar and wind – both of which can power 10x US needs and unlike nukes and coal are not environmental nightmares. Wind is already economical, solar nearly there. With the oil companies and thier regressive shills fighting every step of the way.

  • 60. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 6:46 pm

    Special for the monkey. Healthcare reform will never be repealed – suck it up. But keep trying. It helps Obama.

  • 61. Rutherford  |  January 31, 2011 at 6:53 pm

    Huck …. good point … when democracy is demanded from the people themselves, the readiness is there. I think I can sign up for that theory.

  • 62. Rutherford  |  January 31, 2011 at 6:56 pm

    We will see a pattern as every low level court moans and groans about the Affordable Care Act, folks like Tex will hoot and holler. But as Tigre points out, the show ain’t over until the fat lady sings and she sits on the Supreme Court (in fact two fat ladies last time I counted :-) )

  • 63. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 7:06 pm

    Healthcare reform will never be repealed – suck it up.

    Not repealed, revoked – as in unconstitutional. One more step “Dr.” and it’s all she wrote. Like your miserable existence… :smile:

  • 64. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 9:04 pm

    Hope the public sees these idiotic comments. Down goes the GOP ratings. Would never have even come to a vote in the House if they believed it meant crap. GOP leadership is scared to death of this issue.

  • 65. fakename2  |  January 31, 2011 at 9:17 pm

    Correction. A Federal judge in Florida ruled the Health Care Reform Act unconstitutional, as had one other judge before him. However two others ruled that it was, so it’s two for two. At least according to tonight’s CBS evening news. I can’t say I’m as confident as yellowdog, but my best guess is that if anything is repealed, it will not be the entire law. And if you have any sense, you’d be glad of that. As both R and Tigre state, we have to wait for the fat lady. It’s way too soon to gloat.
    Now then (also CBS News tonight) there is a bill making its way through Congress giving the President the authority to shut down Internet access in the U.S. (as was done in Egypt) in case of “cyberemergency”. That ought to give you some food for thought (and hysteria).

  • 66. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 9:39 pm

    From the White House:

    The judge’s decision contradicts decades of Supreme Court precedent that support the considered judgment of the democratically elected branches of government that the Act’s “individual responsibility” provision is necessary to prevent billions of dollars of cost-shifting every year by individuals without insurance who cannot pay for the health care they obtain. And the judge declared that the entire law is null and void even though the only provision he found unconstitutional was the “individual responsibility” provision. This decision is at odds with decades of established Supreme Court law, which has consistently found that courts have a constitutional obligation to preserve as a much of a statute as can be preserved. As a result, the judge’s decision puts all of the new benefits, cost savings and patient protections that were included in the law at risk….

    We don’t believe this kind of judicial activism will be upheld and we are confident that the Affordable Care Act will ultimately be declared constitutional by the courts.

    History and the facts are on our side. Similar legal challenges to major new laws — including the Social Security Act, the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act — were all filed and all failed. And contrary to what opponents argue the new law falls well within Congress’s power to regulate economic activity under the Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the General Welfare Clause.

  • 67. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 9:39 pm

    My gloating is not so much directed at Obama because I find him somewhat likable, but directed at the reprehensible schmucks like Yeller Dawg, who have tried desperately for twelve months to rub our noses in the failures of progressive politics. This is twice now Yeller Dawg has watched his own undeserved arrogance explode in face – the first happened Nov. 2nd.

    We all knew that his would head to the Supreme Court. It is likely Kagan will be required to recuse herself from the decision, because before being nominated SCOTUS, she openly campaigned for Obamacare.

    For those of us who thought Obamacare an abomination, I like our chances. And even if we lost that, the battle far from over because the program has to be funded, and eventually the will of the people will win out.

  • 68. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 9:42 pm

    The funniest part of this is that the part of the law that has been ruled against is a part the GOP and the insurance companies put in. It forces people to buy thier product. There is a much better alternative that cuts the insurance companies out totally – it;’s called “One Payer”.

  • 69. bvilleyellowdog  |  January 31, 2011 at 9:45 pm

    I really like the iggy feature on WordPress. It filters schmucks like that Mississippi guy right out.

  • 70. Vmaximus  |  January 31, 2011 at 9:50 pm

    As it has played out I think we dodged a bullet so to speak.

    Mubarak is out of power and Egyptian military has installed the man they want. I feel that is certain.

    Omar Suleiman is well respected and would be a good president. The Military approved this message. This dodges the radical’s taking over part, this keeps the military in charge and things stable. Everyone but the radicals likes stable.

    (Rampant speculation alert) The way I see it it will go one or 2 ways, Omar Suleiman assumes role of President, starts initiating reforms. If he is smart he will open up the economy. The Egyptian system suppresses private economic activity as well as political expression. If the people like the new economic freedom he will be reelected President.

    Or he starts political reforms that is where it gets dicey. I think the safest bet there would be to restore the powers taken away from parliament in 2005. Perhaps elect or appoint a new Prime Minister, or just announce that he will be sharing powers with Ahmed Shafik, like Mubarak is supposed to be doing now. That would build some good will with the people in the streets.

    The less safe bet is announce new elections, throw the dice, see what happens.

    The wild card is what does the Egyptian military want? I am guessing they want to remain the silent power that they are. Well liked by the people. I do not think they are wild eyed radical extremists, and that is a good thing for the Egyptian People and the world.

  • 71. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    Yeller, I don’t think your handling your messiah’s rejection well. :smile:

    Face it “Dr.” (snicker). It ain’t just “Okiehoma” that can’t stand people like you – like ZZ Top once said…

    …it’s nationwide.

  • 72. Tex Taylor  |  January 31, 2011 at 10:12 pm

    Well, Dawg was rolling down the road in a junker he had to steal
    He had a Playgirl in the front and just one hand upon the wheel
    He was going down the wrong way in middle of the night
    A bottle of Mad Dog in his lap, cop motioned from the Right
    Oh, He’s sad, He’s hated nationwide
    Yes, He’s sad, He’s hated nationwide

    Other side of the highway, the cop witnessed the sad sack
    Empty bottle on the dash, three more stashed in the back
    Dawg was wearing a short dress, some spike-heel shoes
    Looked more like dyke while wearing Graychin’s nylons too
    ‘Cause Dawg is bad, he’s hated nationwide
    Yeah, Dawg’s bad, he’s hated nationwide.

  • 73. an800lbgorilla  |  January 31, 2011 at 10:15 pm

    First off, it only takes one judge to say unconstitutional and it gets thrown out. This isn’t the best of 7 series, its single elimination.

    The bitch is wrong as usual. 10x the power needs of the US? Put the crack pipe down since neither address 1% of current production. As for the environment, do you have any idea how environmentally unfriendly the production of solar cells is? Of course you don’t, that would require facts and such.

    Obamacare hurts Obama- it doesn’t help him. The longer this gets dragged through the courts, the more damage it’ll do to him and the Dems. It was largely Obamacare that got the Dems thrown out of the House just 3 months ago, but I guess to the bitch those dogs years seem long gone…

  • 74. an800lbgorilla  |  January 31, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    Tex, you have other skills too!

  • 75. an800lbgorilla  |  January 31, 2011 at 10:20 pm

    The funniest part of this is that the part of the law that has been ruled against is a part the GOP and the insurance companies put in. It forces people to buy thier product. There is a much better alternative that cuts the insurance companies out totally – it;’s called “One Payer”.” – The Bitch

    What? You do realize that as you bemoan Wall Street, they give overwhelmingly to Dems right? You do realize that as you bemoan the insurance industry and big pharma, they likewise give overwhelmingly to Dems. Then there’s the bloodsucking trial lawyers who give roughly 96% of all their donations to Dems.

    All your strawmen are in your pocket…

    As for the complete fabrication that anyone but Dems put the individual mandate in the bill, well, that requires a special dosage of something clearly developed in someones garage…

  • 76. poolman  |  January 31, 2011 at 10:23 pm

    Egypt’s museum vandalism done by government employees. I suspected this. It is a common thing to get world opinion against the protesters.

    This stuff scares governments all over the world. I don’t doubt they want to shut down the internet and other forms of communication. They have been agressively trying to regulate it here for years. We have lost plenty of freedom already due to “threats against national security”. Our government ought to be freaking out. If the people get control, that messes with all their plans for his global central government that has been coming down the pike.

    If Americans were not so duped, fat, and lazy, they would not have let government get this far. Do you think they will not try to extend the Patriot Act again? The only difference with our populace and Egypt is most Americans are armed and therefore considered dangerous.

    Very interesting times we live in…

    When he broke the third seal, I heard the third living being say, “Go!” I looked, and there in front of me was a black horse, and its rider held in his hand a pair of scales. Then I heard what sounded like a voice from among the four living beings say, “Two pounds of wheat for a day’s wages! Six pounds of barley for the same price! But don’t damage the oil or the wine!”

  • 77. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:10 am

    Vmaximus, welcome and thanks for your assessment. From what I’ve seen in the MSM, I don’t find much fault with your approach. The dude ElBaradei has been called “weak” in a lot of the stories I’ve seen … not really able to take a leadership position.

    Chris Matthews got schooled tonight when he went way out of his depth. He assumed the Muslim Brotherhood was sympathetic to Al Qaeda but was told by an expert on the matter that they actually hate each other. I think so long as the Muslim Brotherhood has a role proportional to their presence in the country, and they don’t outright take over, things might end up ok.

  • 78. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:14 am

    I’d put good money that the dude who introduced “emergency shut down of the Internet” was a GOPher. :lol:

  • 79. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:16 am

    I’ve heard China is getting antsy now and wants all social network talk of Egypt censored.

    Could we be seeing a pandemic of freedom and democracy around the world in the age of Obama?

    Wow would that set ole Tex and the rest of you dudes pants on fire.

    Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha :lol:

  • 80. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:18 am

    Gorilla …. the mandate was in Romney’s health care. If I’m not mistaken the mandate was introduced by Dole decades ago.

    So Dawg is right …. the idea of the mandate was Republican before it was Democrat.

  • 81. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:22 am

    Could we be seeing a pandemic of freedom and democracy around the world in the age of Obama?

    I can assure you that won’t happen in the weak age of Obama.

    Far more likely is we witness a repeat of Jimmy Carter days – probably Americans will be endangered throughout the world, as Obama bows to kiss some more rings.

    But this is one time I wish you were right. I predicted one of Obama’s legacies will be witnessing the first American city nuked while he shoots baskets and eats cheeseburgers.

    I fully expect a shout out by Obama to good job Hillary before he gets to the speech.

  • 82. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:46 am

    Damn I’m bored. I went to Fat Grannies and noticed their blog master had said “we never ban anyone!”

    Hell, they “banned” me three times in one day. :smile:

    I left them another message. It probably won’t stay five minutes. I have enjoyed becoming a major pain in the ass at that place just to spite “the lying grandson.”

  • 83. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 3:35 am

    Since crude oil in $100.00 a barrel, I thought in fairness to you boaters (like us), perhaps this is a better alternative…

    http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/3q6r

  • 84. an800lbgorilla  |  February 1, 2011 at 5:32 am

    Three branches of government… Chuck once again proves that liberals have no fucking idea what they are talking about…

  • 85. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 9:17 am

    G said, “First off, it only takes one judge to say unconstitutional and it gets thrown out. This isn’t the best of 7 series, its single elimination.”

    I don’t understand what you mean here. We’re at the trial court level (federal district). Thre is only one judge that sits in the trial court.

    The appeal will go to the 11th Circuit here in Atlanta Ibleivle de novo (anew — meaning its ruled strictly on legal grounds with no weight givent to the trial judge’s determination). The appellate court has a majority opinion that binds. Then it will (in all probability) be sent to the SCOTUS by writ of certiorari and heard by all qualifying justices (which I understnad excludes Kagan becuase of her political support of the bill).

    Throughout, the proviisions of the bill will remain intact. I think the Wh’s statement that the decalartion of unconsitonality in the mandated coverage portion of the bill “can’t be” becuase its ruling strikes down the entire bill (rathert than juts a part: a/k/a severability) is flawed becuase the the entire bill’s provisions and effect are intertwined.

    Anyway, the fat lady’s hardly sung. But I go with Tex’s odds on this one. I think it could be struck down hard. Dems like Yellowdog shouldn’t be so smug about it given its current posture. In fact they never should’ve been despite their solemn adherence to whatever the dimwits at MSNBC said about how ironclad the bill was.

  • 86. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 9:19 am

    (Sorry for the typos. I was slamming this down before running out the door without spell checker).

  • 87. an800lbgorilla  |  February 1, 2011 at 10:15 am

    It only takes one in the sense that it doesn’t matter that other courts found it ok, this one said unconstitutional. You’re right, different levels mean different things, but if the 9th Circuit said it was OK but the 4th Circuit said it was unconstitutional, then the 4th Circuit ruling stands until the Supreme Court rules.

    I only point this out because libs, particularly the WH, keep up this mantra that so many other courts sided with us, when that doesn’t matter. It only takes one to side against you…

  • 88. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 10:47 am

    Gorilla, gotcha. Agreed. Numerosity in the determination of constitutionality doesn’t count. A conflict (and there are many among the circuits on a variety of issues) makes it justiciable and therefore subject to review. Same with affirmance though.

    I am mostly struck by the arrogance of dimwit libs that wouldn’t even recognize the constitutional issue embedded in the plan. It was obvious and immediate to the legal community. The liberal bloggers however were impressed with the patently false analogy that States can mandate auto insurance to drive to a Federal mandate to purchase health insurance coverage. Stupidity. As Judge Vinson (whom I have argued before) noted, the more apt analogy would be a federal mandate that all citizens buy a GM because of the US investment in the corporation.

    And we wonder why the libs don’t understand — indeed mock — the intended limitations on the reach of government government imposed by the Constitution.

  • 89. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 11:23 am

    I left them another message.

    Yeah I saw your msg as Matthew B.S. LOL you’re too much!

    One question though … has Sensico banned you? Why didn’t you post at her place as Tex vs Keyboard Cowboy? Or was it just on a whim?

  • 90. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 11:29 am

    First time “R” at Sensico. I was so bored last night with the impending blizzard, I just started linking to blogs from you site.

    With the downfall of the Obama “regime”, half of them are out of commission anymore. :lol:

    My, how the mighty have fallen.

    I can’t even get out of my house right now – and I mean, I can’t get out of the house. Every storm door has at least six inches of sleet and snow against it and it’s 10 degrees with 30mph winds outside.

    I was in a t-shirt last Saturday.

  • 91. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 11:44 am

    I find it very hard to believe that was your first time at Sensico but be that as it may, I hear you from a weather perspective. Today is the kid’s sixth snow day. The superintendent just wrote us to say we may have to have make up days during spring break. I’ve got so much snow on the back elevated deck that I’m scared it’s gonna collapse. Or perhaps if I go by Hank Johnson’s science, my house might tip over. :-)

    Hey we’ve had four or five relatively mild winters in a row. I just figure this is Mother Nature’s payback and as we know, payback is a bitch.

  • 92. poolman  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:04 pm

    The ice age cometh.

    We are actually going to get down to 30 degrees tonight and for the next several nights have a freeze warning. Brrrr. It doesn’t do the plants well. But no ice or snow, at least not here in the valley. High country might get some. Us Phoenicians are wimps when it comes to cold. Many are in denial, still running around in shorts. :grin:

  • 93. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:05 pm

    R, since you’re snowed in, you should spend some time with Judge Vinson’s opinion in the Obamacare case. Not that you will agree with it, but it does some extensive analysis of the limitations and roles of federalism and the Congress under the commerce clause. It’ll make you more knowledgeable, or at least more knowledgeable than those that ascribe to the “Constitution as I Would Like It” course offered by the truly ignorant Olbermann:

    http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/___Politics_Today_Stories_Teases/PPM153_vin.pdf

  • 94. fakename2  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    Here’s a quick read on Judge Vinson’s reasoning from the WSJ. It was, in fact, very educational.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703439504576116090813454296.html?mod=wsj_share_facebook

  • 95. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:35 pm

    Nope “R”. Have never left a comment at dingbat’s blog. That was my first that I remember – promise. :wink: For some reason, I had never much ventured over there.

    I’m going to have to climb out a window to get to my snow shovel, and then I don’t know if I can get in the shed. Like I said, 72 hours ago, I was in a t-shirt.

    We are actually in blizzard conditions and even ambulances are having to receive assistance by snow plow to make feet. Would not be a good day to have a heart attack.

  • 96. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 12:36 pm

    Fakename and R, I suggest you go the 78 page opinion if you have time rather than just rely on the Cliff Notes. Again, you might not agree, and as is the case with all opinions (particularly of this length and significance) it is selective in its citation and rationale. However, there is alot of grist for the mill. Rutherford’s professed ignorance of states rights and constitutional law would be well-served with a little swim in the pond and consideration of the critics of Judge Vinson’s opinion.

  • 97. fakename2  |  February 1, 2011 at 1:00 pm

    Tigre, I don’t know if you read the link from the WSJ but it was not critical of his opinion. You have any suggestions for places to go that are? (Perhaps I should skip to the chase and read the NY Times.)
    Speaking for myself, the reason I would not read the entire 78 page opinion is that I don’t have the background to grasp all the references and citations.
    The issue I found most interesting was that the government itself argued against severability, thereby putting itself directly in the path of Vinson’s decision. Perhaps they might want to change strategy?
    The favorable parts of the law (no denying insurance for pre-existing conditions, no lifetime caps on coverage) may still stand. The problem is that without the mandate, it just won’t be affordable. And the GOP claims that’s what they’re all about–reducing the cost of health care.

  • 98. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 1:01 pm

    Is Obama even relevant to Dimocrats anymore? Is Bill Clinton the New Barack Obama, messiah and king? What happened? :lol:

    Undoubtedly, MSNBC must think so.

    http://www.nbcumv.com/mediavillage/networks/msnbc/pressreleases?pr=contents/press-releases/2011/01/31/presidentofthew1296501542202.xml

    That’s got to burn Libs! Two years ago, you were prostrating yourselves at Obama’s greatness. Do you Obama current and former sycophants have any idea how particularly pathetic this sham of Presidency has become?

    I’ll tell you what. Even with me riding his lame, weak ass for two years, I don’t think Obama a complete sleazebag. He’s probably fun to shoot baskets with. But the serial adulterer Clinton? Hell, Chris Matthews was absolutely rude to Hillary Clinton in 2008, and now he’s got the audacity to blow Clinton? Libs have absolutely no pride or scruples.

    It sucks to be a Dim anymore… :twisted:

  • 99. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 2:32 pm

    “Tigre, I don’t know if you read the link from the WSJ but it was not critical of his opinion.”

    I did read the WSJ link and never said it as critical at all. I meant to encourage Rutherford, who will “want” to be critical of it, to acquire ammunition of a higher caliber than what MSNBC will offer him tonight. In other words, take a look-see and then hear what others are saying about it.

    Whoops. Am I allowed to use terms like ammunition and caliber, or his that violent rhetoric?

    Fake, BTW, there’s no reason to avoid reading the opinion even if you grasp only a portion of it. It is the source and has a lot to it that simply “is what it says it is.” An analysis of the parameters of federal power. Give it a try. Frankly, it’d be refreshing to have some discussion of the merits of these arguments around rather than shit like, “but he went to Yale and agreed with Olbermann that it was wrong” or “I don’t need to be a weatherman to know which was the wind blows” or you guys are just like all lawyers” etc. etc. I sure heard a lot of non-lawyers confidently saying there were no constitutional issues, that saying there were was some kind of Tea Party spin, etc. — all the while knowing there was something to it, regardless the final decision.

    Coming up next: The final version of the Interim Report by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on the investigation of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case. Rutherford will recall that the whole discussion of the DOJ’s investigation and enforcement wound-up becoming the basis for G-chin labeling me a racist. Rumor has it that the Report concludes what I suspected and why it was worthy of discussion. But hey. . . why bother with substance when you can just call someone a racist, homophobic, misogynist or. . . heaven forbid, a lawyer.

  • 100. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 3:16 pm

    Another lib with hook in lip – in this case the nasty lips of Rachel “Butch” Maddow.

    Butch wanted this so bad, she could taste it…

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/atlantic/20110201/cm_atlantic/rachelmaddowandnbcstrugglewithsatire6795

  • 101. fakename2  |  February 1, 2011 at 3:54 pm

    Tigre. I’m unable to find a source for the full opinion. I don’t recall anyone here saying there are no constitutional issues involved; clearly there are.
    As for lawyer-bashing, you should be used to that. Bashing lawyers seems to be a popular sport–until you need one. Then it’s a different story, isn’t it?
    As for spin, it’s there. Both lawyers and judges are human and have personal opinions which color their opinions. Complete objectivity is quite impossible.
    I personally hope health care reform stands, but I recognize that it may not.

  • 102. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 4:40 pm

    Fake, I provided a link to the opinion above (93).

    When I said “no constitutional issues involved,” I meant the ones that provide the basis for Judge Vinson’s decision. They were sure scoffed at by many, many vocal libs (specially the dick-weeds at MSNBC).

    Uninformed is different than opinionated.

  • 103. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 4:54 pm

    “I personally hope health care reform stands, but I recognize that it may not.”

    Would you want it to stand if it were unconstitutional?

  • 104. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 5:03 pm

    BTW, it’s avoidance, not lawyer-bashing that I was getting at. I don’t give flying f*&ck what anyone here thinks of lawyers. It’s true that everyone hates lawyers except their own.

    BiW wrote a detailed retort to one of Rutherford’s MSNBC Olbermann experts (whose commentary was thoroughly distorted bu Olbermann). I don’t believe Rutherford even acknowledged it had been written. As I recall, Rutherford was satisfied that the guy’s credentials made any opinion (or spin placed on them by Olbermann) irrefutable.

  • 105. fakename2  |  February 1, 2011 at 5:44 pm

    I have to laugh at myself…I didn’t even look at your link in 93 because I assumed it was msnbc bashing. I’ve saved it and will read it.
    Whether or not I would want health care reform to stand if it were judged unconstitutional is moot. (I refer back to the human nature part.) If it is judged unconstitutional, it will not stand, but then there is a remedy for that too. Constitutional Amendment. I personally don’t see that as a necessity. My reading of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”..the “life” part, does not just include the right not to be murdered. Of course, that is the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution, but as long as we’re quoting the Federalist Papers…
    I’ve heard many people argue that health care (along with education) is not a right, but it should be.

  • 106. poolman  |  February 1, 2011 at 5:51 pm

    fakename, I whole-heartedly agree with your last statement at 105. If we consider our MIC “providing for the common defense”, how can we not consider healthcare for all American citizens part and parcel to our founder’s intent.

  • 107. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 5:57 pm

    I’ve heard many people argue that health care (along with education) is not a right, but it should be.

    Fake, our Forefather’s never even thought the Great Society a right, Social Security a right, Medicaid or Medicare a right….

    Be grateful for the cradle to grave stuff you receive now. I noticed its the benefactors always calling bennies a “right” – those of us who get to pay more than we receive call it a burden.

  • 108. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 6:12 pm

    A couple of things. First, I understand your assumption Tigre that i had hours to burn today but unfortunately since I have a home office there is no such thing as being snowed in and unable to work. :-( To the extent that I comment here during the day, it is a measure of my lack of self-discipline. I’m way too lenient a boss and have already fired and rehired myself a couple of times in the past 12 months. :-D

    So, I haven’t read the 78 pager yet … haven’t even had time for the WSJ cliff notes version but I DO have a question inspired by MSNBC coverage.

    If the ACA is unconstitutional why is Medicare not unconstitutional? The government takes away your hard earned income and you are forced to participate in a health care payment plan for the elderly when your time comes. That is the forced purchase of a service. So why does that pass muster but the mandate within the ACA does not?

    Feel free to tell me it’s in the 78 pager and I need to go to my homework.

  • 109. fakename2  |  February 1, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    I don’t know where you get that cradle to grave thing. In between this cradle and grave life I’m living, I’m paying out the nose for health insurance. Health care for all Americans, including the mandate, benefits me by making it cheaper, and regardless…it’s a social good. I compare it to Methadone programs. Yes it’s an addiction, but which would you rather have? Addicts getting cheap methadone, or breaking into your house to steal your TV so they can buy heroin? (Or technically, these days, oxycodone.)
    I refer you back to my comment about visiting an ER. I had that
    unfortunate experience in 2007. I cut my hand down to the bone and was bleeding profusely, shall we say, and ER was my only optoption. It was a Sunday. I was surrounded by people with coughing babies. They were there, I thought, because they had no other choice. And get this…the MINIMUM charge was $800. That doesn’t count anything they did. Triage, exam, stitches, etc. So anyone who thinks we aren’t already paying for other people’s health care is dreaming.

  • 110. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 6:37 pm

    “Whether or not I would want health care reform to stand if it were judged unconstitutional is moot.”

    There was reason I asked the question. I was looking to find out how constitutional limitations factor into your values when it comes governmental involvement. Obviously you are in favor of health care as a universal right (whatever that means) and if struck down Obamacare does not stand.

  • 111. fakename2  |  February 1, 2011 at 6:44 pm

    R, I can answer your question! Medicare and Social Security ARE unconstitutional! (So we are told.)

  • 112. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 6:53 pm

    Tex, before it gets deleted, pop over to H&M’s to see Claire’s contribution and my response.

    The problem is NOT pro-life vs pro-choice. The problem is inappropriate justifications for abortion. I could not believe what I was reading.

  • 113. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 6:56 pm

    Addicts getting cheap methadone, or breaking into your house to steal your TV so they can buy heroin? (Or technically, these days, oxycodone.)

    How about no addicts at all? First time offense – caning; Illegal distribution – chair. China has few problems with drugs or addiction. We could learn something from them.

    Anybody caught stealing my TV? Dead from double ought – I’ll be responsible for the Spackling. I hate thieves even worse than I hate liberals. :smile:

    It is law that everybody in America must be served by an ER, whether they can pay or not. Since we are already paying as you noted, don’t mess with the 80% of the people who are perfectly satisfied with their health care.

    Anybody that thinks government does anything particularly well hasn’t been paying attention. I would rate most government programs one step behind the Keystone Cops in effectiveness.

    And why liberals don’t understand this is beyond me. Truly, Left’s lack of good judgment is a menace to society and a drag on everyone’s well being.

  • 114. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    Very good “R”. There might be hope for you yet.

    Claire is but one of the amoral harpies at M&H. I suspect many of them make sport of abortion, hate men, and are not fit to be mothers. I’ll bet a few have partaken in assisting the butchering – probably proud of it. They are truly from hell.

    I would have asked Claire if she was smart enough to get herself fixed, but you can count on she didn’t. She kills her own baby and pats herself on the back for her “decision.” There’s a special place in hell for people like that.

    Those people are truly sick and now they’ve raised an even sicker version of children. Woe to this country.

  • 115. fakename2  |  February 1, 2011 at 7:28 pm

    So…China should be our model?
    I’d be interested to talk to a member of that alleged 80%. My guess is: don’t have insurance, don’t think they need it, or “I got mine”. Sink or swim. Unfortunatley we are all sinking.

  • 116. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 7:36 pm

    Sadly FN, that is the GOP mantra — sink or swim, each man for himself, pull yourself up by your boot straps. Don’t have boots? Pity, that.

  • 117. Rutherford  |  February 1, 2011 at 7:40 pm

    Tex even though she deservedly felt guilt her whole life, I ultimately felt sorry for Claire. Terrible burden to bear. My pouring salt in the wound was probably I’ll advised but I just couldn’t let her comment stand. The mood of the comment was too damn casual — kinda pissed me off.

  • 118. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 8:15 pm

    So…China should be our model?

    Right now with Obama at the helm, their kicking our ass at economics. We could learn a thing or two from other countries.

    It’s an arrogance to think we do everything the best. Israel has taught us several things; Japan has taught us several things; Mexico gave us Tequila.

    ———–

    Rutherford, casual is exactly right. Did you notice as soon as she was excused by of all people the “sibling”, well then everything was okay.

    M&H is a testament to immorality, peacocking their way to hell.

  • 119. dead rabbit  |  February 1, 2011 at 9:59 pm

    Is there something going on Egypt? :)

    I’m doing it all at home, as my wife isn’t allowed to lift a thing. Food shopping, the baby, my job, her job, cleaning, diapers, endless trips to the eye specialists, laundry…etc. etc. etc. etc.

  • 120. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 10:21 pm

    R, saw your Oscar Peterson clip at BiW. Alice Cooper to Peterson? You are an enigma. I’ll never forget seeing him at the Vanguard circa mid 8os and damn near crapped myself. Royalty. I just spent an hour surfing youtube watching old blue note vids.

  • 121. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 10:26 pm

    Rbbit, hope your old lady’s hanging in there. And you too.

  • 122. El Tigre  |  February 1, 2011 at 10:27 pm

    Is the M&H blog satire? It’s beginning to look bogus to me.

  • 123. Tex Taylor  |  February 1, 2011 at 10:56 pm

    Rabbit,

    How is your wife doing?

  • 124. dead rabbit  |  February 2, 2011 at 12:59 am

    Tex, she is still blind in that eye, but the doctor’s are optimistic she will get some vision back. Lot of the blindness may be just from the blood in the back of eye. Plus she is dilated at all times.

    As bad as it is, she is lucky.

    This product design of this band in particular is insane. It may have been intended to be pulled off the market.

    I’m being advised on the whole thing so can’t go into it too much. All I can say is the severity of the injury is unreasonable. The pamphlet that came with it is just as suspect.

  • 125. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 1:19 am

    Tigre, I saw Oscar twice in the 80’s when he played Stamford, CT. His album “We Get Requests” (I think on the Verve label) is one of my favs.

    Saw your comment at BiW’s. Many thanks.

  • 126. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 1:24 am

    Rabbit, reading between the lines, all I can say is you GO boy and get what’s rightfully yours. I was nearly killed in a clear case of hospital negligence and did nothing about it. Considering my current financial challenges, I’m kicking myself now.

    On a less combative note, glad to hear your wife is on the mend even if the recovery might be slower than you’d like. Has Bronson’s fever broken yet? One sick family member at a time is plenty!

  • 127. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 1:29 am

    Tigre and Tex, I know we all protect our identities with aliases but if the scam of M&H is as elaborate as I’ve been led to believe, I actually find it offensive. What I’m wondering is are the regulars in on the scam or do they buy the “old ladies” deal hook line and sinker?

    It’s funny, a guy purporting to be the Grandson was accused of NOT being the grandson and I think his post was deleted.

  • 128. Tex Taylor  |  February 2, 2011 at 1:47 am

    Rutherford,

    That whole M&H thing is a sham with a bunch of rubes as company. I can’t believe what passes for science and fact over there, and always goes unchallenged.

    That’s what eventually got me boot “the first time.” :smile:

    I told one of their “brains” and more popular commenters, she was full of shit and then and went and proved it. Then magically, all my posts were missing on that particular thread and everything began to be moderated.

    It pisses them off worse to be proven wrong than it does to be called shrews, nags, hags, and harpies. And that is what got me to thinking about exactly who it was I was debating with – the whole set up is a ruse.

  • 129. an800lbgorilla  |  February 2, 2011 at 6:54 am

    (Daily Caller)- In Washington, bigwigs can misspeak and misstep a million times without drawing attention. And then there are the seemingly harmless moments that stick to a person like super glue: Joe Wilson barking “You lie!”; Jesse Jackson mumbling into a hot mic that he wants to castrate Barack Obama; Dan Quayle trying to spell things.

    Like coal crushed into diamonds by the pressure of a million eyeballs, such moments are forever.

    During an exclusive dinner hosted Monday by the Alfalfa Club, Obama adviser Valerie Jarret had just such a moment. And were it not for an irritated tipster, Jarret might have walked away from the dinner unblemished.

    According to our tipster, Jarrett was seated at the head table along with several other big-name politicians and a handful of high-ranking military officials. As an officer sporting several stars walked past Jarrett, she signaled for his attention and said, “I’d like another glass of wine.”

    Garçon!

    White House economic adviser Austan Goolsbee, who was seated next to Jarret, began “cracking up nervously,” our tipster said, but no one pointed out to Jarrett that the man sporting a chestful of medals was not her waiter.

    “The guy dutifully went up and got her a glass of wine, and then came back and gave it to her and took a seat at the table,” our tipster said. “Everyone is in tuxedos and gowns at this thing, but the military people are in full dress uniform.”

    “There was no shortage of waiters either,” the tipster added.

  • 130. an800lbgorilla  |  February 2, 2011 at 7:42 am

    OK R, two days ago, while listening to talk radio, the question was asked if this was Obama’s 3 A.M. phone call.

    My response to that question:

    We have heard from several pundits- mostly conservative- how the crisis in Egypt is Obama’s 3 A.M. phone call, and more importantly, that he has done a poor job in answering that call. I think that is incorrect and to judge Obama’s handling of Egypt in this environment a bit premature. Obama could not have failed to answer the 3 A.M. call from Egypt because the Egypt call was at about 6 A.M.- Tunisia was the 3 A.M. call and Obama slept right through it.

  • 131. Tex Taylor  |  February 2, 2011 at 12:51 pm

    Old Rutherford is actually sounding quite reasonable at Fat Grannies. Maybe that is why I have always thought Rutherford (except for the sordid Loughner affair – shameful) was several steps ahead of the rest of the Libs that have posted on this board and elsewhere I’ve read.

    Perhaps this is the start of an eye opener – just how spiteful and dishonest most Libs really are. How about “R”? Time to rethink your indoctrination?

    And “R” – I’ll guarantee you half those sad stories you are reading are lies. I’ve read those stories for years on Planned Parenthood propaganda. :wink:

  • 132. bvilleyellowdog  |  February 2, 2011 at 12:59 pm

    It’s no wonder the regressives heart Mubarak – they see themselves in him. Like him thier time is short. Facism is on the decline. Tick tock.

  • 133. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 2, 2011 at 1:26 pm

    “It’s no wonder the regressives heart Mubarak…”

    Can you name one of them?

  • 134. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 2, 2011 at 1:29 pm

    “Facism is on the decline”

    Now that I can agree with. Our midterm elections put you liberal fascists on the decline, big time.

    2012 is coming. Tick tock….

    As for Mubarak. Maybe you should turn on the TV. This is quickly going the way of 2009 Iran. Shall I remind you how that turned out?

  • 135. poolman  |  February 2, 2011 at 2:15 pm

    Yeah, turn on the Zionist media and get the real picture. :roll:
    Israel sent 3 planes with “crowd control” stuff there over the weekend. Now we have violence again. Who do you think is supporting Mubarak? Sheeple. Even Jews are speaking out against the Zionist regime, the beast that it is.

  • 136. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 2, 2011 at 2:32 pm

    Poolman, wtf does that have to do with what I said?

    Do you disagree that this movement doesn’t have legs? That, now that it has turned violent, the movement will lose steam because it lacks a central core leadership to give it direction and cohesion through the times ahead that are sure to get tougher?

    Or is rhetoric about the Jooooooooooooooooooooos as good as it gets?

  • 137. poolman  |  February 2, 2011 at 3:08 pm

    I think the USA and nation of Israel wants to have continued control in the region. I think the people rather want true independence and a more democratic government. I see the mainstream media trying to discredit the legitimacy of the revolution and paint the protesters in a bad light so they garner less sympathy. I have seen some reports on Al Jezeera that seem more realistic. Why do you think internet and cell phones are shut down? Providers can’t control what is broadcast. It is all about control.

    Even Jooooooos are speaking out against the Zionist media…

  • 138. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 3:08 pm

    Old Rutherford is actually sounding quite reasonable at Fat Grannies.

    Well let’s see, so far one has called me a “dick” and a few others have said I am heartless. Oh well, there goes my illusion that only conservative web sites harbor jerks. LOL

    The funny thing Tex is I haven’t even dropped my nuclear bomb on them yet and I don’t think I will. The nuke is very simple … you don’t need to f*ck to live. You’re in a situation where you know you simply cannot afford to get pregnant. So you either get the tubes tied, tell your dude to get snipped or you walk, or …. wait for it …. STOP F*CKING!!! She found herself pregnant … she just happened to fall repeatedly upon a hard dick with her legs spread and damn, she got pregnant. If only that dick hadn’t been in the way as she bounced up and down. :evil: (Sorry to be so vulgar but I’m a bit pissed off.)

    I’m done with that site. I don’t go as far as you do to say the stories are fabricated and my experience there has not changed my mind that government walks a very dangerous path when it gets involved in this issue … BUT I have no use for mindless ideologues who think calling a fertilized egg “a bit of tissue” gives them their feminist bona fides.

    I’m really quite disgusted … and I’m sorely tempted to get to the bottom of the M&H scam and expose it for what it is (assuming Muffy’s account is accurate). Then again, I really don’t want to play the ChenZhen blog wars game. I’m almost 50 years old for goodness sake.

  • 139. bvilleyellowdog  |  February 2, 2011 at 3:19 pm

    “Can you name one of them?”

    YOU.

  • 140. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    OK I lied …. I had to go back in and launch one more volley. :-(

  • 141. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 3:40 pm

    I hoped that violence in Egypt was not inevitable but it appears I was wrong.

  • 142. bvilleyellowdog  |  February 2, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    I see little to compare with 2009 Iran…. Those folks were windmill jousting from the start.

    I Israel getting involved? Probably. They have more vested interest than most. Perhaps Obama need to give them a call and tell them to butt out.

  • 143. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    I see the mainstream media trying to discredit the legitimacy of the revolution and paint the protesters in a bad light

    I can’t agree with this. I’ve watched coverage on the dreaded MSNBC and the protesters have in no way been delegitimized. However, the very valid point has been made …. what comes after Mubarak? Do weapons stay out of Gaza? Does the Suez Canal still allow American priority passage?

    It’s one thing to support the protesters and quite another to gamble on what comes next. The US and Obama are in quite a fix IMHO.

  • 144. poolman  |  February 2, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    Lol, Rutherford. I found your comments at M&H amusing and the reactions, too. I think your comment was taken as a judgment against someone’s decision many, many years ago. Folks will certainly stand up for Claire. She has been there much longer than you or I. I don’t think you meant them as judgment, only because I know you a little better than the rest over there. And there are staunch supporters of abortion, many fought hard for Roe v Wade and see any criticism as a threat to what was considered a victory for women. The GOP has been trying to reverse that since it was made law. Now they are trying to redefine rape.

    Either way, this is a very explosive issue and I don’t see anyone convincing another how to think regarding it. It is best to leave it alone, imo.

    Claire clearly said she was married and had other kids already. What we don’t know is how much of this could be the husband’s fault. She obviously is not bringing him into the mix. I think you wrongly state in 138 how the deed was likely to have been done. Don’t base the scenerio on your own marriage, or today’s accepted sexcapades. He could have been the one to tell her to get the abortion and the one that ignored the “rhythm” of her method. Men had a lot more authority over their spouses back then. Some want to go back to that dominant/submissive way that was the norm. It is/was a woman’s place to take care of her husband, and kowtow to his every desire.

    Just sayin…

  • 145. Tex Taylor  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    A few things for sure. Claire is careless, stupid, and a lib. Nobody tries to use the rhythm method for birth control…her kids sound as awful is she is.

    And the husband or shack up more likely is equally culpable and a complete asshole. No clipping the vas for him – he’s a typical, gutless lib, and sorry excuse for a man.

    Poolman, you are without doubt the new vestige of the 3rd Reich….good thing you don’t have any power but a vote. Jew hater extraordinaire and Dhimmi to boot.

    This is one time, I think the media has actually handled an event properly – I’ve heard nobody actually taking much of side – just reporting the news. Hell, just yesterday these “freedom fighters” pummeled Anderson Cooper – and he’s certainly not some fire breathing Christian loon.

    It’s a revolution – and if I were betting, it will end up Iran ’79.

  • 146. El Tigre  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:12 pm

    Personally, I think Palin and all of the right-wing rhetoric is to blame for the situation in Egypt.

    Actually Rutherford, you made me go look at the H&M blog. I pissed my pants laughing at the response to your comments. And I don’t mind saying that. . . in a way. . . you deserve it! That self-righteous, “you’re not qualified to speak so shut the fuck up,” is quintessential liberal approach to attacking contrary viewpoints so frequently employed around here.

    Shhhh. Can your hear it? “Scary black man”. . . “referring to the black community is racist” . . . “what’s an affront to feminism can only be determined by females”. . . “the rent is too damn high. . . ”

    (okay, I don’t understand the last one either).

  • 147. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:20 pm

    LOL I’m somewhere between Poolman and Tex on this one. My big mistake, if I made one, was addressing a woman’s personal story. If she hadn’t told it the way she did, my reaction would have been different. And Poolman is right, no minds will be changed so I’m basically wasting my time. Unfortunately, some of the counterarguments are just too annoying to ignore so I’m having trouble extricating myself.

  • 148. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:23 pm

    Oh …. and by the way, nothing pisses off a liberal male who defends women’s rights more than being accused of being a male chauvinist pig. I think part of why I’m so annoyed over at M&H is my “credentials” are being challenged. :-)

  • 149. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:24 pm

    her kids sound as awful is she is.

    Nah Tex I disagree on that one. The girl’s mother told her something that caused her deep shame and the kid said what a loving kid would say. I find no fault with the daughter’s reaction.

  • 150. poolman  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    This report essentially states the Mubarak supporters, many allegedly paid, are behind starting the violence.

    http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/02/201122124446797789.html

  • 151. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:32 pm

    146 … LOL Well Tigre I do get your point. I still have a problem with guys who never have and never will deal with pregnancy “internally” mouthing off about it. And honestly, even though I guess I’m splitting hairs, what bothered me most about Claire was not that she had an abortion, it was the way she talked about the event with no sense of personal responsibility and used “the rhythm method” as some legit approach to contraception. It’s like saying “well, I RAN across the street when the DON’T WALK sign was lit up so I shouldn’t have been hit by a car.”

    Some of those women seem to think I don’t even have a right to counsel the people I love on the matter. That’s going too far.

  • 152. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    Poolman … MSNBC (again) reported from the very beginning of today’s violence that it was started by Mubarak supporters. I’ve also heard the police may be behind some of it.

  • 153. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    Personally, I think Palin and all of the right-wing rhetoric is to blame for the situation in Egypt.

    Tigre, Sarah beat you to the punch on that one. At a recent gun rights gathering she joked that she hoped the lib media would boycott her for a month so at least she wouldn’t be blamed for Cairo. ;-)

  • 154. poolman  |  February 2, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    Rutherford, If that is what MSNBC is reporting, kudos to them. I wonder how Fox is reporting it. I haven’t checked their coverage. I am definitely biased in my opinion of them. I must admit I don’t watch much of any mainstream media anymore. My wife still watches MSNBC and the local Fox network. Mostly though, we get our news on line.

    It is a fine line we have to walk here, I’ll agree. We have been MANipulating the situation for quite some time. I understand our interest in maintaining stability in the area. But I can also sympathize with the people who have just had it with Mubarak and his government and want real change and representation.

  • 155. Tex Taylor  |  February 2, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    “R”,

    The girl’s mother told her something that caused her deep shame and the kid said what a loving kid would say. I find no fault with the daughter’s reaction.

    So much shame, she shares it with the world – there’s no shame. Perhaps a little regret once upon a time. Any sibling that tells her mother its cool to abort, should tell you one thing Rutherford.

    When ancient Israel was commanded to not just kill the adults but the children too, now you know why. Bad seed. :smile:

  • 156. poolman  |  February 2, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    This further states why these “thugs” were riding camels and wore Arabian garb…

    Moreover, many consumers of Western news will see the camel pictures and think to themselves:

    There go those camel jockeys again.
    (“Camel jockey” is a racist slur for Arabs used by Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and their ilk.)

    In other words, people who get their news from Limbaugh, Coulter, Fox News and the like will see the pictures and decide that the entire Egyptian struggle for freedom can be written off as dusky Arabs fighting other dusky Arabs.

    Maybe I’m taking it too far. Maybe there wasn’t a decision to use propaganda in such a scripted manner.

    But – at the very least – it is important to understand how these images will be interpreted by many busy people in the West who have no time to learn the facts.

  • 157. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 6:01 pm

    Speaking of Coulter, she’s a kick. Her latest comment is that if we constitutionally mandated that everyone buy a gun and a bible they’d be better off than being forced to buy health care.

    LOL Coulter’s one of those few obnoxious conservatives who is so bad I just can’t help but love her. Damn, she’s entertaining. I think it’s because she transmits a joy in her meanness that you just don’t find in, say, Michele Malkin. :-D

  • 158. Rutherford  |  February 2, 2011 at 6:03 pm

  • 159. Tex Taylor  |  February 2, 2011 at 6:44 pm

    Bigots making racist statements, read by other bigots, accusing people of racism. You can’t make this shit up! :smile:

    Stormfront types – people like Jesse Jackson and the unnamed commenter, who use terms like kike and Hebe behind closed doors, usually holding their King James Bible in the other hand while doing so.

  • 160. poolman  |  February 2, 2011 at 7:18 pm

    Talk like an Egyptian…

    The past few days I have heard so many stupid things from friends, blogs, pundits, correspondents, politicians, experts, writers that I want to pull my hair. So, I will not beat around the bush, I will be really blunt and give you a handy list to keep you from offending Egyptians, Arabs and the world when you discuss, blog or talk about Egypt. Honestly, I would think most Progressives would know these things, but let’s get to it.

    http://sarthanapalos.wordpress.com/2011/01/31/a-guide-how-not-to-say-stupid-stuff-about-egypt/

    Try a different perspective, you graduates of 20th and 21st century American style world history. :wink:

  • 161. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 2, 2011 at 9:33 pm

    ““Can you name one of them?”

    YOU.”

    We already knew writing wasn’t one of your strong points, but I guess we can add reading to that list, too.

    “Don’t get me wrong. I’d love to see Egyptians oust Mubarak and get real freedom.”

    Is there something you don’t understand about that statement way up at #26?

    “I see little to compare with 2009 Iran”

    Then you aren’t looking hard enough. Popular uprising vs a leader digging in instead of giving in. Loyalists taking to the streets in place of the police and army. Soon you’ll see a movement that is losing traction because it has no leaders to tell them to hang tough as they are getting their skulls cracked. Before long, they will all get tired and hungry and it will be over.

    I am just waiting for Mubarak to invoke martial law. Then his dictatorship will be complete and within the bounds of the Egyptian constitution. Then there won’t even be an election in Sept.

  • 162. El Tigre  |  February 2, 2011 at 10:26 pm

    Rutherford, the way you feel about Coulter is the way I feel about Carville.

  • 163. Tex Taylor  |  February 2, 2011 at 11:08 pm

    Damn,

    Al-Poolman links to a site in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood?

    You’ve got to be shitting me? Enemy of the state…

  • 164. poolman  |  February 3, 2011 at 12:58 am

    Tex, they are not on the US terrorist watchlist. They have sworn off violence since 1970. But I’m sure since they are Muslim, they are pure evil in your eyes. Yeah, they are anti-Zionist, too. But don’t worry, OK passed a legislation against sharia law. You can still worship the beast to your heart’s content.

  • 165. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 1:45 am

    They have sworn off violence since 1970.

    U R a STupid man Al-Poolman. I’m not kidding. You’re either the dumbest SOB on the planet, or the most gullible RUBE.

    Who cares if they are not the U.S. terrorist watchlist? Even the damn Washington Post is recognizes what they are:

    Officially, the U.S. government has long shunned the Muslim Brotherhood because of doubts about its stated commitment to non-violence and democratic principles.

    ——–

    I’ll tell you how much they’ve “sworn off violence.” Since 1970, they’ve helped to assassinate Anwar Sadat, were the spiritual mentors to Ayman al Zawahiri, 2nd in command of Al-Qaida, and have threatened to push Israel into the sea, have pronounced as recently as this year jihad the way to heaven. All that happened “after they swore of violence.”

    What has the Brotherhood said about its vision of governance?

    According to Brotherhood General Guide Mohammed Badie and your brother-in-arms of Israeli Jew hatred, violence is justifiable when it agrees with the cause.

    “They cry to us: freedom is not granted from an occupying usurper, not is it implored at negotiations tables,” the group’s leader said in a March sermon. “Throughout history an occupying usurper will only depart through resistance. The people will only obtain their freedom through Jihad. The history of freedom is not written in ink but in blood.”

    In 2007, when it was under the control of more reform-minded leaders, the Brotherhood called for a “Supreme Ulama Council” – a group of religious scholars – which would vet government decisions to ensure they are consistent with Islamic law.

    The following year, MB Secretary-General (now its deputy leader) Mahmoud Ezzat gave an interview in which he explained that “in Islam there is no difference between politics and religion … I personally feel astonished when I hear that reform can be achieved without resorting to Islamic principles.”

    Women and religious minorities, including Coptic Christians, would be prohibited from holding positions of power. And the group’s opposition to violence has its limits. Israeli intelligence sources say the Brotherhood has been funneling money and facilitating the covert flow weapons to Hamas in Gaza. One of its most influential theologians, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has repeatedly sanctioned suicide bombings by Palestinians and by Iraqis fighting American soldiers.

    He has called the Holocaust a punishment of Jews for their corruption and expressed his dying wish to kill an Israeli and be killed by an infidel in order to achieve martyr status. Qaradawi is no fringe voice within the movement. He has repeatedly been offered the post of Brotherhood spiritual guide.

    And his views on suicide bombings were echoed in a July sermon from Badie, the general guide. “Jihad and resisting the occupier are not terrorism,” Badie said, “and martyrdom seeking operations are not suicide.”

    The only beast I see here Al-Poolman is a very bad ending for you. You are straight out the gates of hell, you phony SOS. The proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing.

  • 166. an800lbgorilla  |  February 3, 2011 at 6:50 am

    Poolman, they have not renounced violence. HAMAS is a chapter of the MB, in September of last year, Muhammad Badi- the new leader of the group- stated that jihad against the US and Israel was a mandate from Allah that could not be ignored.

    The Brotherhood motto:

    Allah is our objective.
    The Prophet is our leader.
    Qur’an is our law.
    Jihad is our way.
    Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

    I can guarentee that when the MB takes power, and they will either justly or unjustly now that Mubarak is out of the way, that peace in the Levant will collapse. HAMAS will no longer be isolated to the Gaza Stript, rocket and suicide attacks against Israel will increase exponentially and we’ll see another push for the conglomeration of a super-state in the Middle East, only this time it’ll be pan-Islamic rather than pan-Arab.

    We are in the process of watching 1979 all over again, only this time instead of the US President being incompetent, the US President is an accomplice to the fact.

  • 167. an800lbgorilla  |  February 3, 2011 at 6:54 am

    Here is a great reason why we should not only be opposed to any Islamist organization, but appalled by them:

    (HNY) — A girl named Hena, age 14, was murdered by local Sharia Committee at Shariatpur in the southern part of Bangladesh. The daughter of poor farmer named Darbesh Kha, Hena was forcefully abducted and raped on January 30, 2011 during late at night by Mahbub, age 40. During this abuse, villagers arrived in response to the cries of Hena. At the same time, the imam of the local mosque, a man named Mofiz Uddin, and a few teachers of Madrassa [Koranic School] led by Saiful Islam, also arrived; instead of taking any action against the rapist, the Muslim clergymen took Hena inside the Madrassa and locked her in a room.

    The following day, the same imam and some of members of the Sharia Committee in the village sat for a trial of Hena on charges of “immoral sexuality” before marriage. Later the committee decided to punish Hena with 200 lashes, and took financial penalty of only TK. 10,000 [US$ 150] from the rapist.

    During the lashing, Hena became unconscious; when she was rushed to the nearby village hospital, the attending doctors declared her dead.

  • 168. an800lbgorilla  |  February 3, 2011 at 7:01 am

  • 169. an800lbgorilla  |  February 3, 2011 at 7:25 am

    Some good reading for the class…

    Muslim Brotherhood Declares War on US

    Obama’s 1979

    Obama Following Very Risky Strategy with Egypt

  • 170. El Tigre  |  February 3, 2011 at 9:26 am

    Rutherford, still an alpha-male-wannabe showing up at M&H’s porch to “partake of free pie and tea along with you compeers” I see. Looking for acceptance and acknowledgment of a point by your peeps. . . from a penis-toting “white male?” Bwahahahahah. I beginning to think that group guided by hopes and dreams doesn’t like you. Or does all of the vitriolic rhetoric prove they’re imposters?

    Please don’t stop. I am laughing my ass off. A dose of your own medicine, but ten times stronger. Or should I say, pie and tea. Delicioso. :laugh:

  • 171. El Tigre  |  February 3, 2011 at 9:29 am

    whoops, I meant :lol:

  • 172. bvilleyellowdog  |  February 3, 2011 at 10:04 am

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/03/world/middleeast/03jihad.html?_r=1&sq=muslim brotherhood&st=cse&adxnnl=1&scp=6&adxnnlx=1296741694-bkTIAN9v5V0jtViLvj2vTQ

    Bottom line the MB is not violent. It is secular – not religious. It is hysterical how the regressive neocons try to twist the story when it does not fit thier meme. it is ignorance or is it willful?

  • 173. bvilleyellowdog  |  February 3, 2011 at 10:19 am

    And Boner supports Mubarak – how facist of him….

  • 174. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 10:21 am

    Ignoring the typical stupidity of Yeller Dawg and Al-Poolman, two of the most incompetent men I’ve ever read and a danger to our society, I ask myself why America has come to this, where men of both good and evil will don’t even recognize wickedness anymore.

    I went looking for this early this morning and found it. It is an excerpt from the last speech the great Vince Lombardi gave in June 1970, shortly before dying. He realized our problem long ago. And men like Yeller Dawg and Al-Poolman have been the end result.

    Let me just get away from that a moment. Right now in a large sense I think, we’re engaged in a struggle which is far more fiercely contested than anything, and it’s a struggle for the hearts and it’s a struggle for the souls and minds of all of us. And it’s a game in which there are no spectators, only players, and it’s a struggle which is going to test all of our courage, and all of our stamina, and all of our teamwork. At the same time, I want to say too that I think we live in an age for heroes.

    At no other time in our history have the prizes and the perils at one and the same time been so great. But I think we have to decide whether we want to provide a full life for humanity or destroy ourselves with our own problems. And the test is going to be whether man mistakes the growth of wealth and power with the growth of spirit and character. Or like some infant who is playing with matches destroys the very house he may have inherited.

    You know, we talk — right now — one of the great topics is American freedom, and I think we confuse it with license. There is a great difference. I think before we can embrace freedom we first have to embrace those things which underline freedom, and they are duty, respect for authority, and a development of a mental discipline.

    I’m sure you’re shocked like everybody else with what seems to be complete breakdown of law and order and a complete breakdown of our moral code. It is almost beyond belief. I’d like to read something to you. I won’t tell you where this came from until I am through. It says, “Corrupt the young people. Get them interested in sex, make them superficial and destroy their ruggedness. Get people’s minds off their government by focusing their attention on sex, plays and immoral movies. Divide the people into hostile groups, destroy the people’s faith in their natural leaders by holding the latter up to contempt and ridicule, preach true democracy but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as possible, encourage them in extravagance, produce fear of inflation with rising prices and general discontent. Incite unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders, and force a lenient and soft attitude on the government towards disorders. Cause a breakdown of the overall virtues of honesty, sobriety, self-respect, faith in the pledged word and ruggedness.”

    That’s not something I extracted from the Washington Post or from the New York Times last week. This was printed in 1919 at Dusseldorf, Germany and is the Communist Rules of Revolution — it was 50 years ago. It is of widespread concern. I want to say that right now!

  • 175. bvilleyellowdog  |  February 3, 2011 at 11:34 am

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/fox-hosts-slam-aljazeera/?utm_source=Raw+Story+Daily+Update&utm_campaign=87b410eb61-2_3_112_3_2011&utm_medium=email

    And O’Rally too – fascist to the end.

  • 176. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 12:09 pm

    Bottom line the MB is not violent. It is secular – not religious. It is hysterical how the regressive neocons try to twist the story when it does not fit thier meme.

    Hey Yeller Diarrhea? Are you dyslexic, or what? THEIR

    “PEACEFUL” Muslim Brother want to end Egypt -Israeli Peace Deal

    http://en.rian.ru/world/20110203/162433368.html

    Yeller Dawg. You are profoundly stupid.

  • 177. bvilleyellowdog  |  February 3, 2011 at 1:00 pm

    The violence that erupted yesterday between opposition protesters and supporters of the beleaguered reign of Hosni Mubarak may mark the early stages of a transition from autocratic rule to the possibility for open democracy in Egypt. The once leaderless opposition protesters have appeared to coalesce around Mohamed Mustafa ElBaradei. An Egyptian law scholar, an international diplomat, and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, ElBaradei said for the first time yesterday that he is preparing a bid for the presidency. Despite ElBaradei’s proven track record as former head of the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), he faces no shortage of Republican critics in the U.S., most notably from former Bush Administration officials. The conservative ire stems mainly from ElBaradei’s denunciation of Bush’s rush to war in Iraq and his administration’s fearmongering rhetoric on Iran. Conservatives are taking every opportunity to vociferously smear ElBaradei as an anti-American radical Islamist. But in doing so, they risk alienating a potentially crucial figure in America’s diplomatic engagement strategy in ensuring a stable and legitimate government. Whether ElBaradei assumes power and can successfully achieve what he professes, he is currently a critical player in helping to bring about a more democratic Egypt

  • 178. Rutherford  |  February 3, 2011 at 1:35 pm

    Well, I have to admit that Dog confounds me a bit when he calls Muslim Brotherhood secular.

    What troubles me more though is yet again it is hard to get at the TRUTH of the matter. An authority on Hardball the other day said the MB and Al Qaeda hate each other. Now some of you guys are posting stuff saying MB funnels money to Al Qaeda.

    I hate to sound all Poolman-paranoid but I am really getting tired of not knowing who to trust anymore. Where is the f*cking truth? Are the folks condemning MB paranoid Islamaphobes or are the folks praising them radical Islam apologists? Which is it? Where is the truth?

    New post coming probably tonight on a greater philosophical issue surrounding all this.

  • 179. Rutherford  |  February 3, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    Ohhhhh snap! El Tigre has entered the fray over at M&H. Just couldn’t resist, could you? :lol:

    P.S. Nice to have some reinforcements albeit from a usually political rival. ;-)

  • 180. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 3, 2011 at 2:03 pm

    “HAMAS will no longer be isolated to the Gaza Stript…”

    Hamas isn’t isolated to the Gaza Strip now. They are also in the West Bank, it just isn’t their stronghold. Their leaders run things from Syria.

    “Well, I have to admit that Dog confounds me a bit when he calls Muslim Brotherhood secular.”

    As we have already established, reading comprehension isn’t one of dogs big skills. The fact that they are called MUSLIM (that’s a religion, in case you didn’t know, dog) Brotherhood should have been his first clue that they are not secular.

    “Where is the f*cking truth?”

    Usually somewhere in the middle.

    Dog, I don’t know from where you are echoing #177, but it is a ridiculous assertion. This movement is NOT coalescing around ElBaradei, despite his pretty lax attempt to piggyback on it. The article tells us all about what he wants to do regarding running for president, but doesn’t say word 1 about him binding the people together beyond its initial claim.

    Can you provide any examples of a collective sway to ElBaradei? I have yet to see even a glimpse of such, and I have been following this story almost on a 24-hour basis (literally).

  • 181. El Tigre  |  February 3, 2011 at 2:10 pm

    Nope. Couldn’t resist. I also wanted to watch you on your spiritual journey to enlightenment.

  • 182. dead rabbit  |  February 3, 2011 at 2:24 pm

    Don’t worry R. Yellow Dog won’t explain to us how the Muslim Brotherhood is now secular in nature. Its the internets. The sky isn’t blue anymore, let’s discuss the sky.

  • 183. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 2:33 pm

    The Muslim Brotherhood is the Taliban by another name.

    Dawg, in his profound stupidity and his meaningless nature, scans FOX News every morning. If somebody on FOX News explains the radical nature of some jihadist brotherhood, Dawg immediately googles the internet to find some contrary opinion.

    No matter how questionable the source, the contrary opinion to FOX News is considered truth. It’s predictable as the sun rising.

    I actually kind of yearn for a day when some of these radical jihadists go through Dawg with a scimitar. Like grease through a goose, they’ll beat him senseless before sawing his his head off with the rusty blade, before they realize they just beheaded an incredibly useful idiot.

    And if I were betting, before Yeller loses consciousness, his last words will be, “that Talk Radio rots the brain. And the polls say Obama is coming….” rip…

  • 184. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 3, 2011 at 2:47 pm

    “The Muslim Brotherhood is the Taliban by another name.”

    I’m not quite sure I would go that far. The Taliban would destroy Egyptian antiquities and monuments, like they did in Afghanistan.

    And it is probably debatable if they are a terrorist organization, at this point in time.

    But they are certainly a group we don’t want expanding its influence in Egypt, or anywhere else.

  • 185. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 2:49 pm

    Rutherford, I’m having a good time reading your responses at Fat Grannies – Old Lesbians on Wheels!

    That one wasn’t me. I promise. :lol:

    You do realize every bit of garbage your reading over there concerning medical science is wholesale bullshit? Tell that shrew Alice she’s the one that is lying thru her teeth – and that Fiona whore too. Some dumbass named Fiona64 stated the unborn can’t feel pain because at three months, the nerves aren’t myelinated… blah blah blah

    Tell that dumb bitch she couldn’t be more stupid, or more wrong for me. Most peripheral nerves (pain sensing) are not mylenated, even in adults.

    Fricking lying propagandists….straight from Planned Parenthood. That’s who you keep company with politically old pal – people who traffic in child sex and make a ton of cash of the remains of dead fetuses. They’ve been caught again and again obtaining abortions for 13-14 year olds.

    You need to think about that.

  • 186. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    Sorry Huck….we disagree again. I’ve been listening to those really in the know – those who have lived it.

    I’m not quite sure I would go that far. The Taliban would destroy Egyptian antiquities and monuments, like they did in Afghanistan.

    Don’t put that past them – it took the Taliban a little time to get around to blowing up the Buddhist statues.

    And it is probably debatable if they are a terrorist organization, at this point in time.

    I believe it is debatable at all. The Muslim Brotherhood is simply out of power at this minute. Their religion is sharia law, and somewhere down the line, it becomes a more sophisticated Taliban. Women in burkas, whipped and uneducated, death to Israel (that’s already documented above), a hatred of America and Europe, and strict adherence to Islamic Law – backwards that it is but a requirement of global submission to allah. Sounds like the Taliban to me.

  • 187. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 2:54 pm

    I don’t believe… gad. Back to shoveling snow. I hate snow.

  • 188. poolman  |  February 3, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    Worried about Sharia Law? Let’s get Jesus on the ballot here…

  • 189. poolman  |  February 3, 2011 at 5:02 pm

    Tex constantly accuses me of being a Jew hater, which is not anywhere near reality. Anti-Zionist, yes. Jew hater, no. Anti-semite, not even close. Obviously he has no idea who the Jews are or from where they attribute their ancestry. He continually proves he doesn’t know his ass from a hole in the ground. Most so called Jews today are not the same semites that many believe them to be…

    For all that anthropologists know, Hitler’s ancestry might go back to one of the ten Lost Tribes of Israel; while Weizmann may be a descendant of the Khazars, the converts to Judaism who were in no anthropological respect related to Palestine. The home to which Weizmann, Silver and so many other Ashkenazim Zionists have yearned to return has most likely never been theirs. “Here’s a paradox, a paradox, a most ingenious paradox”: in anthropological fact, many Christians may have much more Hebrew-Israelite blood in their veins than most of their Jewish neighbors.

  • 190. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 7:14 pm

    Al-Poolman,

    You are profoundly stupid like Yeller Dawg. Even debating with an idiot like you is an exercise in futility. You’re not smart enough to understand anything but simplicity. Eat, sleep, take a dump, get on internet and Google, repeat…I honestly don’t think you have an original thought in your head. You’re like a “dawg” on a leash.

    Contrary to everything you pretend to be, you are the epitome of Jew hater and cut out of the same basic cloth as the Muslim Brotherhood. The only Jews you tolerate are secular, liberal Jews. They are useful to your dependency on nanny state.

    Where your clearly wrongheaded in your understanding – a twisted religious perversion of worst kind – is understanding the basic tenets of faith. You have a form of religion, but no power thereof.

    Judaism is not a race anymore than Christianity is a race. It’s not a color or a blood line. It’s a faith, those who make the same covenant with the same God that Abram made long ago. It doesn’t matter what one’s lineage – if that were the case, only Jews could be Christian.

    Clearly, Israel, more specifically Jerusalem, is ordained by God Almighty Himself to be under the auspices of Jewish sovereignty. That you deny this demonstrates your understand woefully limited.

    I don’t care what kind of Jew hating propaganda you find on the net, I don’t care what you think of me, I don’t care how well read you might think yourself grounded in something Holy. You’re not.

    When you show support for something as demonstratively evil as the Muslim Brotherhood, you are not with God; you are against God.

    But because your also a reprobate and pharisee, I’m going to continue to throw rocks at your head.

    So you better get used to it dummy; :smile:

  • 191. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 7:32 pm

    Those dumbasses at Fat Grannies!! :twisted:

    Those imbeciles have pegged Rutherford as the enemy. They’re so stupid, they don’t realize the smartest Lib on WordPress, perhaps the only LIb that could carry forth their wishes in a rational, intelligent manner, is being pummeled.

    I’m with Tigre, Rutherford. Perhaps getting a taste of those you’re partnered with politically will be an eye opener. Nonetheless, I haven’t witnessed such awful judgment about one’s character since Barack Obama was elected President in 2008.

    What an injustice! :lol:

  • 192. fakename2  |  February 3, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    The Muslim Brotherhood is not some harmless, blameless, fine group of guys. It was the ideas of that organization which started Osama bin Laden on the road to radicalization. Since we’re so big on links around here, I get that from reading Steve Coll’s book “The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century”. Here’s a link to a book review of it: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/books/01kaku.html
    The MB and others might say, well we never told him to go out and do those things, which sort of reminds me of some White Supremacist groups in this country. Which brings us back to the power of words. When you use violent words or images, some people will take you up on it. Saying, “That’s not my fault” is not good enough for me. I’m not sure what the legal definition of “inciting to riot” is; perhaps you have to outright suggest that someone take up arms. But in a practical, commonsense meaning, well…

  • 193. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 8:50 pm

    Correct Fakename. The Muslim Brotherhood is sharia compliant and an accessory to jihadism, praying on false promises and poverty.

    While I don’t think this Egyptian uprising is based on the Muslim Brotherhood, I think there’s a real danger once Mubarak gone, the Muslim Brotherhood fills the void – and that would be terrible.

    Mubarak served a purpose. While not a tyrant like Saddam, he was obviously just as incompetent governing his people, as the Egyptians are full of misery and despair.- Mubarak kept the peace, but hurt the populace.

    It is unfair to blame any of this on Obama. The criticism he is receiving from my circles is undeserved. Obama is between a rock and a hard place, where there are no good choices.

    On a prayer, I hope the younger generation seeking a better life could start a rudimentary democracy, while keeping the peace. But I don’t see it ending that way.

  • 194. poolman  |  February 3, 2011 at 8:53 pm

    So, let me get this straight, Tex. On one thread you tell me Jews, as a people, have a right to a establish a nation of Israel in Palestine because God gave the land to them in OT days.

    Now you claim anyone who converts to Judaism, whether they practice their faith or not, has that same right to that land. You do know that Zionism to the religious Jews is similar to what Mormonism is to practicing Christians, don’t you?

    There are in fact many Jewish movements, groups and organizations whose ideology regarding Zionism and the so-called “State of Israel” is that of the unadulterated Torah position that any form of Zionism is heresy and that the existence of the so-called “State of Israel” is illegitimate.

    “I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars–I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.” Rev 3:9

  • 195. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 11:02 pm

    So let me get this straight. The Jews of Israel are Satan? But God intervenes anyway in the last days for the sake of Satan. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. :roll:

    Mormonism to Christian, hey? Baloney – you don’t have a clue. Ever heard of Aliyah? You going to tell me almost half the Jews in existence are equivalent to a fringe group like Mormonism?

    Either your rotten at math and percentages, or don’t have a clue to what real Judaism is – which wouldn’t surprise me, because you obviously have no understanding or appreciation of the Old Testament – after Genesis 12 and possibly Job, completely Jewish.

    Synagogue of Satan? Well what would you call a majority of Jews in America that call themselves Jewish and are “atheist” or completely secular? Are they the good Jews Al-Poolman? Many who are Jewish in Name Only?

    I personally think, much like your life, you’ve got it ass backwards Poolman. It is you that understands nothing of Jews. I would wager a large sum of money you don’t have one Jewish friend in the Aryan fortress you live.

  • 196. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 11:05 pm

    Here Al-Poolman. Educate yourself, unless Isaiah was a fraud too…

    Isaiah 60:14

    The sons of your oppressors will come bowing before you; all who despise you will bow down at your feet and will call you the City of the LORD, Zion of the Holy One of Israel.

    If I were you Al-Poolman, I’d be buying a good pair of knee pads.

  • 197. Tex Taylor  |  February 3, 2011 at 11:42 pm

    I think I found one of Al-Poolman’s hand made home videos… :smile:

  • 198. poolman  |  February 3, 2011 at 11:51 pm

    I have plenty of Jewish friends, Tex. I can count 10 on my FB page that I have known since HS.

    Already got the knee pads, Tex. Actually have 2 pair. :wink: I was actually reading that in Isaiah earlier this evening. No Isaiah is/was no fraud. That is the New Jerusalem come to earth, and it will replace what is there now. Read and compare Revelation chapter 21. Same place. Hope you make it.

  • 199. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2011 at 12:07 am

    You are so confused Al-Poolman. Kind of like your take on the Muslim Brotherhood, which said volumes about character and intent.

    I don’t know whether your that evil, or just that confused – but you are on the wrong side brother of about everything important.

    I don’t need to read Revelation 21 Poolman. It is irrelevant to the subject at hand. Making a new heaven and new earth is not what we are discussing. We are discussing who and what present day Israel represents – not what will be after a thousand years…

  • [...] we have no idea what follows should Hosni Mubarak abandon his office. So as I’ve said in a prior post, we are indeed between a rock and a hard place in how we react to this [...]

  • 201. Rutherford  |  February 4, 2011 at 2:15 am

    Tex, there was a comment made at M&H that has me confused. I hate to be gross, but the comment implied that anal sex could get a woman pregnant.

    Maybe I don’t understand human anatomy as well as I thought. How does anal sex get a woman pregnant? Is this the cousin to the old “I got pregnant off the toilet seat” BS?

  • 202. Rutherford  |  February 4, 2011 at 2:17 am

    By the way, Lori from M&H thinks she has blown my cover by reading my comments in this thread.

    Howdy Lori, you lurker you! :-D

  • 203. Tex Taylor  |  February 4, 2011 at 10:08 am

    Pay no heed to Lori. She’s just another one of the horse-faced, spurned dregs at Fat Grannies with a room temperature IQ.

    However, Lori may be the one that did get pregnant through anal sex – it’s the best part of her and most redeeming feature. That’s the story the mill told her to tell after about her fourth trip to terminate.

    Can you imagine somewhere out there in the world is some man desperate enough to actually bone one of those nasty things in the first place? Have you seen a few of their pictures – the ones dumb enough to post them? Gawd – think of your worst nightmare in grade school. It’s enough to make a man shiver.

    Hasta la Vista Auntie Jean, you wrinkled, old gargoyle you. Keep the bugs away for us. :wink:

  • 205. bvilleyellowdog  |  February 10, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

    Mubarack falls – live.

  • 206. Hucking Fypocrites  |  February 10, 2011 at 1:34 pm

    Yeah, looks like he’s gonna split today.

    It’ll be interesting days and weeks ahead for Egypt.

    Especially since I am catching that the protesters are not happy with the fact that he is giving the house to the military.

  • 207. Shyam  |  August 1, 2011 at 12:20 am

    true… but ultimately, like the how a wise man once said: I have absolutely no idea what my generation did to enrich our democracy. We dropped the ball. We entered a period of complacency and closed our eyes to the public corruption of our democracy.

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


January 2011
M T W T F S S
« Dec   Feb »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
Bookmark and Share

Categories

Recent Comments

poolman on Damn! Another Thug!
Tex Taylor on Damn! Another Thug!
dead rabbit on Damn! Another Thug!
El Tigre on Damn! Another Thug!
El Tigre on Damn! Another Thug!

Rutherford on Twitter

  • Eh @MajorCBS why did u let Peter King off the hook? Congress did NOT authorize action in Syria. They let Obama twist in the wind 1 day ago
  • LOL @cptime Clarence, I noticed your Twitter handle on "Up" yesterday and did a double take. U gave me my laugh 4 the day. Thank u 2 days ago
  • Note to NYC police: maybe it's time to stop roughing up the disabled and obese? You've killed two unarmed fat guys recently. Enough? 3 days ago
  • Would you please stop the friggin music during Mika's newscast? What's wrong with u people? @Morning_Joe 4 days ago
  • Eh @JoeNBC Saddam and Osama don't belong in same sentence. Saddam was despot not terrorist 5 days ago

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: