Let the caption contest begin.
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
Before I forget:
Exclusive.
Was the Jew killer a conservative or liberal. In the Seattle Times we have the following quote:
Haq’s friend said he couldn’t believe the timid, “geeky” man he knew from the tutoring center was capable of such violence.
“Are you sure we’re talking about the same person?” he said Sunday………….
He said Haq was not a devout Muslim and often complained that the Tri-Cities were too politically conservative.
“I’m beginning to think I was his only friend in the Tri-Cities. I don’t recall him hanging out with anybody else.”
Now for the other side we turn to Goldy’s story from last week:
Psssssssssstttttttt…….
Ah it looks like the story was all a bunch of hot air. Well there you have it. Enjoy all you Nazi Libs.
I’m so thankful that ambulance chaser isn’t up there as VP…
“Oh, for Christ’s sake, Dick, hurry up! I can’t hold this friggin’ smile much longer. . . “
That’s a lot of flags for a coward like Dick to stand in front of…
12 year old @ 1 (probably DOOFUS)
stroke..
Feel better now?
Caption:
“Damn! I’d better win. I’m getting tired of holding in my gas!”
With a war mongering, minimum wage increase rejecting, transvestite like Cantwell, do you really need me to fundraise for you Mike?
“I know I can run this rube’s office from my secret bunker and make him vote the party line 100% of the time. Otherwise, I’d be up here with my shotgun.”
Dick Cheney: ….which is why we will be installing NSA video cameras in every bedroom in america. The homofascists will not interfere with our businessmen looti…earning as much as they can!
McGavick(Thinking to himself): Hehheh…heh..hehehe…his name is “dick”…hehe…he..heheh.
“Now what is that douchebag’s name w/ the blog?”
“I know I sold my soul to the devil but I never knew hell could be this bad!”
caption:
“Sure I’m here Mr. Vice President just because I have to be, but if the truth be known I think you are a real asshole.”
12 year old @ 1 (probably DOOFUS)
stroke..
Feel better now?
Commentby For the Clueless— 8/12/06@ 8:17 pm
Um… Ah yeah. Versus a 1 year old diebold spewing lefty.
“This guy’s ass is almost as cute as that Stevens guy’s…”
“…and after this, Mike! and I are going to go backstage and drink the blood of some Iraqi babies.”
IS IT TIME TO VOTE FOR RICHARD PUKE … I MEAN POPE?
The reason I didn’t post in the thread about Richard Lamar Trollfuck Pope’s candidacy for district court judge a couple weeks ago is because I was hitching a ride on the Ladies Garden Club tour bus at the time.
Richard, who possibly may be the losingest candidate in Washington history, is so desperate to get elected — to something, anything — that he has finally wise up.
First of all, this time he’s running for a job that pays $122,000 a year, instead of one paying $6,000 a year. Economically, that’s a smart move, and proves Richard has at least as much upstairs as, say, a 40-watt light bulb.
Secondly, Richard demonstrates his cleverness further by adopting the LOW TAX LOOPER strategy, i.e., run against a candidate so bad that even a write-in can get 96% of the vote.
I consider it unnecessary to rehash here the allegations against incumbent judge Mary Ann Ottinger. Let’s just say the cops dragging me before Judge Ottinger on a charge of vagrancy (“no, officer, I don’t have $10 on me”) would scare the shit out of me. Never mind that SCOTUS declared vagrancy ordinances unconstitutional decades ago; Ottinger would find me guilty (without even giving me a chance to enter a plea) and sentence me to 99 years.
In his July 29 thread on this topic, Goldy took some comfort in the fact there is a third candidate in the race, Frank V. La Salata. But that comfort is misplaced; La Salata is little, if any, better than Ottinger.
Once again, I won’t rehash what has already been posted (either here, or on other local liberal blogs); I figure everyone already knows about La Salata’s sentencing of a meth lab operator being overturned by the Court of Appeals for judge bias. (If this is the first you’re hearing about it and want to know more, go here: http://tinyurl.com/jdxdm)
But I also found this on candidate La Salata:
“Frank Lasalata is a judge in the San Juan Islands … (t)he first time I saw Judge Lasalata was at a Small Claims hearing on 9/11/2003, where he started the court calendar by saying to everyone there:
“‘ … Once I’ve made my decision … (w)e’re not gonna talk about it any more. If you want to get personal, I’m going to ask the courtroom deputy to come in and place people under arrest. This is a place where we need to maintain courtroom decorum; if you don’t, you’re gonna pay the consequences for it. I’m not gonna tolerate any personal attacks by anyone. The issues before this court are financial and financial only. If you make it personal, I will make it personal, you will go to jail. …’
“For those considering trying out Small Claims court, most judges do not start out the session by chewing out everyone in the room before they’ve even had a chance to piss off the judge in their own right.”
http://tinyurl.com/kelrh
Geez … threatening people with jail in SMALL CLAIMS COURT?!
In the July 29 HA thread, Richard posted the following comment:
“The most egregious unlawful misconduct by Judge Ottinger (at least from what has been publicized to date) were her actions against Sara Totten. On June 12, 1999, when Ms. Totten was 17, she was caught drinking by a King County Deputy Sheriff … which is a criminal offense for persons under 21 years of age. … Ms. Totten had no prior criminal record of any sort when she was charged with this offense – not even a traffic infraction …. To show some of my own judicial thinking, I think Ms. Totten should have been charged – if she was ever going to be charged at all – with this offense in Juvenile Court before she turned 18 on October 8, 1999. However, Washington law allows prosecutors to charge juveniles in adult court, if the prosecutor waits until the juvenile turns 18 before filing charges, and the statute of limitations has not expired at the time of filing. In such event, the person receives adult sentences (and adult convictions) for offenses committed as a juvenile.”
Yes, I know you all read it (well, those of you who can read, anyway), but let’s analyze Richard’s comment. First of all, he knows what the term “egregious” means, in the context of judicial conduct, which is a good thing in a judicial candidate. Secondly, his mention of defendant Totten’s previously clean record demonstrates an understanding of mitigating circumstances, which is a good concept for a judge to know something about before sentencing a juvenile to 375 days in an adult jail for a non-driving drinking offense. Richard also knows what a “statute of limiations” is, which is another one of those legal thingys that keeps officials with Stalinist procilities from throwing American citizens into municipal gulags. Finally, I even detect a hint of compassion and outrage in Richard’s posts — also good things in a judge.
As for the argument that Richard can’t possibly be a good judge because he’s a rabid partisan shill, all I’ll say about that is that I’m also a rabid partisan shill, but I was a pretty damned good judge if you don’t mind my saying so. The trick is that you can’t be a judge and a rabid partisan shill at the same time. I waited until I wasn’t a judge anymore to become a rabit partisan shill; if Richard is willing to give up being a rabid partisan shill upon becoming a judge, then I don’t see any reason why he can’t be a judge.
What non-lawyers don’t understand about us lawyers is that we’re trained to play different roles at the drop of a hat. One day we may be a defense attorney, the next day a prosecutor, the day after that a judge; yet we can do all of those things well, because of our devotion to the PROCESS. Lawyers are, above all, about PROCESS. While winning cases is one of our objectives, being good lawyers is a higher objective, and if we’re fortunate enough to be entrusted with the office of judge — the greatest honor that can be bestowed on a lawyer — then being a fair and impartial judge is the highest objective of all. Yes, we lawyers have the ability to set aside even our most passionate personal opinions and dispassionately decide cases according to the facts and law. We do it every day. You guys who aren’t lawyers just have to trust me on this, I don’t think Richard’s passionate advocacy of his political viewpoints on this board is going to be a problem on the bench.
What IS a problem on the bench is incompetence, disregard of defendants’ constitutional rights, arrogance, and rudeness to the public judges are supposed to serve. Sadly, both of Richard’s opponents are afflicted with one or more of these vices to a distressing degree — and, worse, they both appear to be serial recidivists. So where does that leave voters trying to decide how to fill N.E. District Court Position No. 2 this fall? With Richard, and only Richard.
Richard says he graduated from U.W. Law School with “highest honors,” and I have no reason to disbelieve him. Having graduated from the same law school, I know how much work and dedication it takes to graduate at the top of your class there. You gotta be some kind of antisocial nut who locks himself in a room with books for three years and does nothing but read, eat, read, shit, read, and read, that’s what. You’re pretty fucked up after going three straight years without sleep. It took me years to recover, and I still sleep 12 hours a day. But ya gotta respect what Richard did, in the same way ya gotta respect people who join the priesthood so they’ll never have to perform in bed again, or sign up for Army Ranger school. It’s about the same thing.
So, bottom line, end of the day, Richard gets Roger Rabbit’s Lesser Evil Endorsement. I’m gonna vote for Richard — and hope for the best. If I’m ever dragged by my bunny ears in front of a judge on a small claim (by some disgruntled trollfuck who thinks I libeled him, which is not possible to do, because anything you say about a trollfuck is automatically true), given a choice between
[ ] 1. Judge Ottinger,
[ ] 2. Judge La Salata, or
[ ] 3. Richard Lamar Pope,
I’d rather take my chances with the trollfuck than the two Stalinists.
“I once told Mike! to go fuck himself, and now here I am campaigning for him.”
“First of all, let me state categorically that the glare on my forehead isn’t actually glare. John Ashcroft told me that trepanation would make my hair grow back, but it turned out that my brainpan is a transdimentional doorway to white-hot firey hell. And with that in mind, ladies and gentlemen… MIKE MCGAVICK!”
erratum
“proclivities” not “procilities”
It ain’t that easy to type on a notebook-size keyboard when you have furry paws instead of fingers
“Gooble Gobble, Gooble Gobble,
on of us, one of us!”
Felix at 11:
How ’bout : “I knew I had to sell my soul, but I didn’t think I would actually get to meet the devil!”
Another thing I’ll say for Richard is, he ain’t shy. He had the gonads to show up at the 32nd district Democrats endorsement meeting in Shoreline tonight. Although I’m not a member of the 32nd district Democrats, I hopped up there from Green Lake Park to see for myself how things are going for Maria Cantwell’s campaign.
Hey Richard, how come you weren’t smiling when I introduced myself to you as “Roger Rabbit?” Yeah, I saw you go to the men’s room to wash your hands after I shook your paw. Lighten up, dude, don’t be such a fucking sourpuss. After all, I’ve endorsed you, and I’m even gonna vote for you. But only because your two opponents are so fucking bad … it’s not an enthusiastic endorsement, and it’s definitely a hold-my-nose vote … I just want you to know that, so it doesn’t go to your head. For your part, don’t worry about whether I actually LIKE you; if you get elected, just take the $122,000 a year and run to the bank!
And don’t forget, Richard — candidates are supposed to SMILE!!! Like this: :D You get more votes that way.
Dan Limbaugh at 1:
Still trying to spin this. It seems strange that you keep forgetting the one thing that changed. He seems to be a fine upstanding person until he was baptised by some conservative Christian church.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/.....t30ww.html
Oh, no wonder you have to spin this. Obviously it cuts close to home. Were you once rational, but sold your soul to some right wing nut?
It would explain a lot.
Things didn’t go well for Maria at the 32nd Democrats tonight. They endorsed her primary opponent, and there was an awful lot of outright anger and hostility against Maria in that room.
Three reasons were mentioned: Her votes on …
1) Iraq
2) Patriot Act
3) Justice Alito confirmation
Even her spokesperson, ex-candidate Mark Wilson, was forced to admit he disagrees with Maria on a lot of things; and the best argument he could muster to vote for his current employer was “to defeat McGavick.” It didn’t sell to that crowd.
Yes, I think many of those angry Democrats will vote for Maria in November, although I fear a crucial number of them may stay home or leave that space on the ballot blank. I detect little danger of any of them voting for McGavick, a multimillionaire CEO cheap-labor conservative rubberstamp for the Hard Right agenda. They understand that a vote for McGavick is a vote for Eternal War and dispossessing the middle class. But if Maria squeaks back into office in 2006, I think it’ll be her last term as a U.S. Senator. If our troops are out of Iraq by 2012 (and it’s hard for me to believe they won’t be) and the congress and/or White House have returned to Democratic control in 2007 and going forward (as I believe will happen), these pissed-off Democrats will settle their score with Maria in the next election cycle, when they can better afford to stop holding their noses and voting for her.
23
“Last winter, Haq began attending a weekly men’s group meeting led by a member of the Word of Faith Church in Kennewick.”
Now why am I not surprised that the Jewish Federation shooter went out and did that after some rightwing fundie church got their claws into him?
No reason to be surprised, RR, As Dan Limbaugh at 1 keeps posting that he was a nice liberal guy until that happened. Dan Limbaugh makes it clear that what made him a jew hating freak was not being a muslim or being a liberal, but getting involved with a right wing church.
It is nice of him to post it every day so we do not forget this leason. I’m just wondering why Dan hates Christianity so much?
Cheney: “Where the hell is your American Flag lapel pin Mike? Didn’t you get the f***ing memo?”
26
“I’m just wondering why Dan hates Christianity so much?” Commentby JDB— 8/12/06@ 10:08 pm
Ask Redneck, maybe Redneck knows. Redneck probably will say Dan is a “towelhead” or a “terrorist” or something like that. Redneck knows the solution, too: “Kill ’em all, and let God sort ’em out!”
“Last winter, Haq began attending a weekly men’s group meeting led by a member of the Word of Faith Church in Kennewick.”
Now why am I not surprised that the Jewish Federation shooter went out and did that after some rightwing fundie church got their claws into him?
Commentby Roger Rabbit— 8/12/06@ 10:05 pm
He probably couldn’t make up his mind on if he was going to shoot a Christian or a Jew. We know why he left the Tri Cities.
The Nazis scapegoated the Christians to. All you lefties need now is a fuer. Could that be Hilary?
Oh, no wonder you have to spin this. Obviously it cuts close to home. Were you once rational, but sold your soul to some right wing nut?
It would explain a lot.
Commentby JDB— 8/12/06@ 9:56 pm
Leave it to a lefty to call what the perp actually said spin. Hahahahahaha LMFAO. hehehe
“The Nazis scapegoated the Christians to.”
To what? Finish your sentence for Chrissakes.
“All you lefties need now is a fuer.”
What’s a “fuer”? In German, that would be understood as “für”, which means “for”.
C’mon Dan, are you really that illiterate?
Goebbels, Nazi Minister of Propaganda, noted:
“The Fuhrer is deeply religous, though completely anti-Christian. He views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race… Both [Judaism and Christianity] have no point of contact to the animal element, and thus, in the end, they will be destroyed.”
It is all starting to add up. You lefties are Nazis.
What’s a “fuer”? In German, that would be understood as “für”, which means “for”.
C’mon Dan, are you really that illiterate?
Commentby Dr. E— 8/12/06@ 10:34 pm
Wow. Your knowledge of history is incredible. No wonder our public schools are so fucked up.
29
“The Nazis scapegoated the Christians to.” Commentby Dan Rather-Whats the frequen— 8/12/06@ 10:28 pm
Really? How many concentration camps and gas chambers did they set up for Christians? Oh, I know they killed Christians — they killed anybody who got in their way. They also went into battle wearing belt buckles that said, “Gott mitt uns.” But they mainly killed Jews, Gypsies, communists, and disabled people (especially the mentally ill). Christians weren’t very high on their persecution list — unless, as I said, they got in their way.
Cheney: “I only made HOW MUCH from Halliburton this month?”
McGavick: ” I wonder if Bush rubs Cheney’s head too? After all, he’s bald enough.”
Okay, Dan, I’d gladly take you mano a mano in historical matters. But that’s not the point: you can’t even spell monosyllabic words correctly! Here, let me help:
The word you’re looking for at the end of this sentence is “too”, not “to”.
The word you’re looking for here is “Führer”. This is a German word that means (among other things) “leader”. It comes from the verb “führen”, which means (among other things) “to lead”. It also can mean “to steer”, which is one of the reasons why a German drivers license is known as a “Führerschein”.
Instead of posting the same half-baked shit over and over, try getting yourself a basic education.
By the way, Dan, please note that “Führer”, being a noun, is capitalized in German. Ever heard the expression “GröFaZ”? Know what it stands for? Go ahead and lecture us on history Dan. You’ve already betrayed your ignorance, but we might at least get a bit of entertainment out of you.
31
“C’mon Dan, are you really that illiterate?” Commentby Dr. E— 8/12/06@ 10:34 pm
Yes, he is.
32
“It is all starting to add up. You lefties are Nazis.” Commentby Dan Rather-Whats the frequen— 8/12/06@ 10:42 pm
Sorry, Dan, but that epithet is already taken … you guys are the Nazis.
36
Dan, like many other wingnuts, can’t spell big words like “too.” No wonder these guys are against public schools — they never attended one.
“Dick, would you hurry please? The buckshot you put in my ass is really starting to hurt now.”
Roger,
It was nice to meet you in person. Hope the hop back to Green Lake from N 185th was pleasant.
Actually, the July 29 thread about me was by Darryl as a guest host. And it does seem to have gotten wide circulation. I heard it from several people in the 32nd that they were prepared to endorse me, until they found Darryl’s thread in an internet search.
There was zero enthusiasm in the 32nd for endorsing either of my two opponents. I was nominated from the floor for endorsement, and got a substantial number of votes anyway. I think it was 40% or so in favor, 60% or so against — with 60% in favor required for an endorsement. Before the vote, I was asked questions such as: What are all the offices you have run for? (I think I listed them all in my answer) Where have your big contributions come from? (I said I wish I had received some!) and How much has the Builders Association given you? (My answer was zero) No one even brought up the issue of whether Ottinger or LaSalata should be endorsed.
It was a very interesting meeting. I found out that I have been to one more 32nd district Democrats meeting in my lifetime (one) than Maria Cantwell has been to in her lifetime (zero). That is what one of the longtime PCO’s said. If that is correct, Cantwell ran for Congress (1992 & 1994) in the 1st CD — which included most of the 32nd district during the 1990’s. It would really be amazing if Cantwell had never visited the 32nd LD Dems during her campaigns for and service in Congress.
Hong Tran received the 32nd LD Dems endorsement by an overwhelming margin, as did Chris Eggen, who is challenging three term 32nd LD Dem State Senator Darlene Fairley. And Senator Fairley said she would not personally endorse St Rep Maralyn Chase (D-32, Pos 1) — which is interesting, given the Chase has no primary opposition, and is opposed only by a Republican in November.
Anyway, one of the PCO’s remembered me from ten years ago, in a non-partisan setting, when I was speaking at a human rights rally in Kitsap County on behalf of the wrongfully accused Wenatchee defendants. He was a very enthusiastic backer for my endorsement, and said it didn’t matter how many times I had run for office, or what I thought about party politics if I was a human rights supporter and my opponent was a human rights violator.
I learned a lot from the experience this evening — both humbling and educating — which will help me reach out better to the voters and serve the public better (hopefully) starting in January.
By the way, “losingest candidate in Washington history” would be correct in a certain sense. I have never won an election previously, but have always received respectable percentages of the vote. If you add up all the votes (including both primary and general) that I have received in unsuccessful elections, my combined vote total is higher than anyone else has received in unsuccessful election.
“Most successful loser” would be a more accurate term.
“If he turns around, I have to remember to duck”!
JCH et al….. From the L.A. Times. Now is Congressman Miller a producer or a taker? I am confused. Perhaps you can read this and explain it to me. Right now, I am thinking he is a lying bastard. Wait, he is Republican. Same thing.
When U.S. Rep. Gary Miller (R-Diamond Bar) sold 165 acres to the city of Monrovia in 2002, he made a profit of more than $10 million, according to a financial disclosure form he filed in Congress. Ordinarily, he would have had to pay state and federal taxes of up to 31% on that profit.
Instead, Miller told the Internal Revenue Service and the state that Monrovia had forced him to sell the property under threat of eminent domain. That allowed him to shelter the profits from capital gains taxes for more than two years before he had to reinvest the money.
ADVERTISEMENTBut there is a problem with Miller’s claim: Monrovia officials say that Miller sold the land willingly and that they didn’t threaten to force him to sell.
Miller, whose 42nd Congressional District includes chunks of Los Angeles, Orange and San Bernardino counties, claimed the same exemption in two subsequent Fontana property transactions, allowing him to continue sheltering his profits from the Monrovia sale. And in each of those cases, the purchasers say eminent domain, which allows a government agency to force a sale if it’s in the public interest, was neither used nor threatened.
Internal Revenue Code Section 1033 was designed to protect people whose land is condemned by government agencies or destroyed in natural disasters. Other investors wishing to postpone capital gains taxes would have to follow complicated rules that include reinvesting the entire amount in other property within 180 days. For Miller, a millionaire land developer in the Inland Empire and a senior member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, repeated use of the forced-sale exemption has enabled deferment of capital gains taxes through at least 2009.
Miller declined to comment on the sales after officials in Monrovia disputed his eminent domain contention. Officials with the IRS and the state Franchise Tax Board said it’s not their policy to comment on individual cases.
In an earlier interview, Miller described being threatened by Monrovia during the bargaining process and said the city gave him no choice but to sell. He said that he prided himself on transparency and noted that he fully disclosed all of his property transactions.
“The base of the deal was either you sell to us or we’ll have to condemn it,” Miller said.
But records and interviews in Monrovia show that the sale of Miller’s land was voluntary.
Glen Owens, a member of Monrovia’s Planning Commission, said the city could not have used eminent domain to purchase Miller’s property, because it was acquiring the undeveloped hillside land for a wilderness preserve using state funding that specifically prohibited forced sales.
“The state doesn’t go along with eminent domain,” he said. “You have to have a willing seller.”
A letter from then-City Manager Don Hopper at the time of the sale confirms that use of state funds blocked the city from considering eminent domain.
“Under the guidelines of the Challenge Grant Program, all property owners must be willing sellers,” Hopper wrote in May 2002.
A videotape of a February 2000 City Council meeting, packed with people pushing the city to protect the hillside, shows Miller pleading with city officials four times to buy his land.
“Why don’t you buy my property? I’ve asked you repeatedly,” Miller said.
Miller’s press secretary, Kevin McKee, wrote in an e-mail to The Times, “Mr. Miller and the city of Monrovia agreed upon the purchase price and a friendly condemnation.”
Although early drafts of Monrovia’s sales contract with Miller included the phrase “friendly condemnation,” it was stricken when the final deal was made. Miller and his wife signed an amendment to the escrow instructions on Aug. 1, 2002, saying, “condemnation deleted.”
Scott Ochoa, the assistant city manager at the time and now the city manager, said the city always discusses the possibility of so-called “friendly condemnation” when it is negotiating a purchase in case a seller wants to claim the forced-sale exemption. In this case, though, the state funds took that option off the table, he said.
Miller said that two years after the Monrovia sale, he raced to beat his extended deadline of Dec. 31, 2004, for reinvesting the profits. On Dec. 28, he reinvested some of the profits by purchasing 10 lots for about $5 million near the expanded 210 Freeway in Fontana, a building in Fontana for $1.3 million and five acres in Rancho Cucamonga worth about $2 million. He bought the properties from Lewis Operating Corp., a major Inland Empire developer and one of Miller’s largest campaign contributors.
Miller took an exemption again when he sold the 10 lots to the city of Fontana in 2005 and again when he sold the building to Fontana this year, claiming both were compulsory sales. Those moves gave him at least another two years after each sale to reinvest the funds without paying capital gains taxes.
The rest of the text is located in the Sunday online edition of the Los Angeles Times. DeLay, Cunningham and now Miller. Who is next?
All the best,
Carl Grossman
Democrat, Proud and on your ass!
Dissidents, who accuse Castro of subjecting Cuba’s 11 million people to collectivised poverty in a police state, said the state had activated its network of informants to detect any hint of protest and deter people from talking openly about the political situation.
Mike and Dick don’t support Castro. Moonbats do though!
12 year old @ 1 (probably DOOFUS) stroke.. Feel better now? Commentby For the Clueless— 8/12/06@ 8:17 pm
Why are you asking #1 to perform your favorite act?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14320452/
What a surprise. It’s looking more and more like the Bush regime just made this shit up about the recent airline terror plot. When is America going to wise up to these crooks?
Mike? has to be concerned. He hasn’t offered the people of Washington a reason to vote for him, he hasn’t broken 41% in any poll yet, and now we learn that his supporters can’t even spell his name properly (#46 and 47).
DOOFUS @ 13
Psssssttttt. You’re repeating yourself so much you must have wingnut Alzheimers.
Don’t worry though, by election day you’ll be crawling back under the wingnut rock of 24/7 Limbaugh and Faux Snooze Channel. Remember I-912?
Wingnut Obsession Sucks @ 46,47
ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz…..
from the link @ 48
The source did say, however, that police believe one U.K.-based suspect was ready to conduct a “dry run.” British authorities had wanted to let him go forward with part of the plan, but the Americans balked”
I wouldn’t want to be a passenger on the “Dry Run” would you???
I wouldn’t want to be a passenger on the “Dry Run” would you???
Why not? Perhaps your definition of “dry run” differs from mine, but there’s no reason to believe those passengers would have been in any danger.
@52
Um, I don’t think you quite understand what a “Dry Run” is then.
My Caption:
McGavick: “What a great guy. I could learn a lot about projecting my own failures on others while rolling in a pile of money from him.”
Oh, and the caption contest:
“Mrs. Mike! Cheney. Ms. Mike! Cheney. Mrs. Mike! McGavick-Cheney. Mrs. Mike! Cheney-McGavick…”
“Mike and Dick don’t support Castro. Moonbats do though!”
Bullshit. Prove it. It’s the GOPers who need Castro around still. They can’t survive politically without a few weakling tinpot dictators to push around. That’s how they pretend to look “powerful”: take on a third-world nation with a weak, decrepit army and threaten to obliterate it if it misbehaves. That’s been one of their chief strategies since Reagan. Remember those scary commies down there in Grenada? Problem is, Iraq didn’t work out so well, though, did it?
By the way, Mike!™’s last name is “McGavick”, not “Gavick”. Another illiterate winger…[sigh]
Oh, and before I forget, some Beat poetry:
Exclusive.
Friend the a knew conservative or. In he have Seattle the Tri-Cities:
Was you said the talking, tutoring man have killer he was of such violence.
“Are Jew quote sure conservative we’re about couldn’t Haq’s same we person?” he complained Muslim………….
He said Haq was not a devout Nazi and we believe the timid, “geeky”, “geeky”, “geeky” that were too politically said looks like.
“I’m the often following other side Times beginning to. Enjoy all think I friend in the liberal Tri-Cities. I don’t turn the; Ah for the hot air from recall capable.”
Now anybody Libs was his only hanging story from last Times week him out with:
Psssssssssstttttttt……. else you Sunday, to Goldy’s.
Well it it the looks like the story was all a bunch of center.
(Makes more sense than any of the shit Dan posts here.)
@ 53 & 54
I understand what Dry Run is, and frankly I don’t want to be on the same airplane with someone who is willing to blow himself up (suicide) for the chance of a few virgins in the afterlife.
The mentality of these terrorists can’t be considered rational, and do we truly know if it was “Dry Run”.
58 – Pretty funny. “Dan” aka DOOFUS will love it.
Psssssttttt. DOOFUS! DOOFUS!
you’re a moron..
you’re a moron.. -Commentby For the Clueless— 8/13/06@ 9:29 am
It’s really quite amazing how the species always recognizes one of its own, eh aptlynamedclueless?
Pssstttt.. ASS – face reality – you’re both a moron and a loser..
spew some right-wing propaganda if it will distract you from that reality.
58 – it’s funny that the terrorists are “rational” enough to plot all the elaborate conspiracies that right-wingers are always carping about but at the same time they’re completely foaming-at-the-mouth crazy.
According to the wingnuts, Saddam Hussein was “reconstituting” nuclear weapons, building mobile germ-warfare labs and drone aircraft able to fly from Baghdad to MacLean, Virginia. To the wingnuts, Saddam was this mustachioed colossus who provoked their greatest loathing and fear. He had to be knocked off his pedestal lest the wingnuts’ heads would explode.
Richard Hofstadter noticed this a long time ago:
The enemy is clearly delineated: he is a perfect model of malice, a kind of amoral superman—sinister, ubiquitous, powerful, cruel, sensual, luxury-loving. Unlike the rest of us, the enemy is not caught in the toils of the vast mechanism of history, himself a victim of his past, his desires, his limitations. He wills, indeed he manufactures, the mechanism of history, or tries to deflect the normal course of history in an evil way. He makes crises, starts runs on banks, causes depressions, manufactures disasters, and then enjoys and profits from the misery he has produced. The paranoid’s interpretation of history is distinctly personal: decisive events are not taken as part of the stream of history, but as the consequences of someone’s will. Very often the enemy is held to possess some especially effective source of power: he controls the press; he has unlimited funds; he has a new secret for influencing the mind (brainwashing); he has a special technique for seduction (the Catholic confessional).
Hofstader’s final words on the subject are particularly applicable to the looney-bin wingers who frequent HA.org:
We are all sufferers from history, but the paranoid is a double sufferer, since he is afflicted not only by the real world, with the rest of us, but by his fantasies as well.
JCH, here is one more for you. I know you like to laugh at Democrats who break the rules, so perhaps you will find this just as funny. From todays New York Daily News. It appears this story is not going away either.
Vito’s Double Trouble
Fossella sez Elmo pix are really legit
BY GREG B. SMITH
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
U.S. Rep. Vito Fossella has a new explanation for why his photos with constituents – and Elmo from “Sesame Street” – were improperly used in congressional mailings and campaign literature.
Although the photos used in both instances appear to be exactly the same, the Staten Island Republican now says they are actually different snapshots.
To the casual eye, though, it would take the skills of a CIA analyst to detect the supposed differences.
Last month, when the Daily News broke the story of Fossella’s questionable dual use of the same photos, including one featuring Fossella with “Sesame Street” characters Elmo and Rosita, the congressman immediately removed most of them from a campaign Web site and announced that “any duplication was inadvertent.”
In his response to a formal investigation by a congressional commission, Fossella now insists that it just seems as if the photos are the same because they were taken seconds apart with the same digital camera.
Fossella even submitted an elaborate sworn statement from Ronald Sartini of Brooklyn, identified as an expert on digital photography, who said it was “perfectly reasonable to assume” that “each of the images taken in a posed sequence can look the same.”
Fossella declined to say if Sartini was paid anything for his expertise, or if any funds used to pay for his services had come from the Fossella congressional office account or from his campaign coffers. Sartini did not respond to calls and e-mails.
Fossella made his unusual claim in response to an investigation being conducted by the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, which is looking into possible violation of rules that prohibit a member of Congress from using his office to benefit his reelection campaign.
The rules bar members of Congress from using taxpayer-funded resources – including staff – to perform campaign work, such as campaign photography. The rules also prohibit the use of campaign material in taxpayer-funded official mailings sent to constituents.
Following The News stories, Fossella’s Democratic rival, Stephen Harrison, filed a complaint with the commission; the commission then demanded a written explanation from Fossella.
Now, in his official response to the commission, Fossella has admitted for the first time that one of his full-time congressional staffers took the photos that wound up being used by his campaign.
Fossella contended that while the photos appear “to the naked eye” to be the same, they are, in fact, different.
For example, in explaining the use of photos – plural – of Fossella with several firefighters in his congressional mailings and in a campaign pamphlet handed out to potential voters, Fossella aide Craig Donner insisted in a sworn affidavit that the two shots were different snaps shot in sequence.
Donner said he used his personal Sony DSC-P100 and had Fossella and the firefighters “pose in front of a fire truck.” He said that “in using said pose,” he took “several” photos “in less than a minute.”
Fossella claimed in his filing with the commission, “The photos may look indistinguishable to the naked eye and look the same, yet they are separate and distinct photographs.”
In admitting that he had taken the photos that appeared in both Fossella’s congressional mailings and his campaign literature, Donner may have opened himself – and Fossella – to more scrutiny.
Fossella said that although Donner, his press secretary, had taken the firefighter photos, “no official funds were used to shoot the photos or to cause their reproduction.”
But Donner did not respond to written questions about how he was able to take campaign and congressional photos within seconds of each other without violating the rule barring staffers from doing campaign work.
In his response to the commission, Fossella also addressed the allegation that some of the photos used in his congressional mailings also had appeared for months on his campaign Web site.
One depicted Fossella with Elmo and Rosita. A second depicted Fossella with Mayor Bloomberg, for whom he served as campaign chairman in 2005. A third depicted Fossella with a senior citizen in a red hat.
Fossella claimed the photos used on the campaign Web site were merely “similar” to the photos used in the taxpayer-funded mailings.
He also explained to the commission that the photos were pulled from the Web site “as a precaution to avoid any confusion between and among official and nonofficial photographs.”
Actually, Fossella’s campaign removed the photos hours after The News began questioning him about the photos.
Fossella also did not respond to a question regarding how long the photos had appeared on the Web site.
Again, is this guy a producer or a user? We know he is a tongue twisted liar with a flair for revisionist history. Oops, wait a minute, what am I thinking. He is a lying bastard Republican. Geez, I really should have my coffee before I get started here.
Carl Grossman
Democrat, Proud and reporting it as it happens.
JCH, here is one more for you. I know you like to laugh at Democrats who break the rules, so perhaps you will find this just as funny. From todays New York Daily News. It appears this story is not going away either.
Vito’s Double Trouble
Fossella sez Elmo pix are really legit
BY GREG B. SMITH
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
U.S. Rep. Vito Fossella has a new explanation for why his photos with constituents – and Elmo from “Sesame Street” – were improperly used in congressional mailings and campaign literature.
Although the photos used in both instances appear to be exactly the same, the Staten Island Republican now says they are actually different snapshots.
To the casual eye, though, it would take the skills of a CIA analyst to detect the supposed differences.
Last month, when the Daily News broke the story of Fossella’s questionable dual use of the same photos, including one featuring Fossella with “Sesame Street” characters Elmo and Rosita, the congressman immediately removed most of them from a campaign Web site and announced that “any duplication was inadvertent.”
In his response to a formal investigation by a congressional commission, Fossella now insists that it just seems as if the photos are the same because they were taken seconds apart with the same digital camera.
Fossella even submitted an elaborate sworn statement from Ronald Sartini of Brooklyn, identified as an expert on digital photography, who said it was “perfectly reasonable to assume” that “each of the images taken in a posed sequence can look the same.”
Fossella declined to say if Sartini was paid anything for his expertise, or if any funds used to pay for his services had come from the Fossella congressional office account or from his campaign coffers. Sartini did not respond to calls and e-mails.
Fossella made his unusual claim in response to an investigation being conducted by the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, which is looking into possible violation of rules that prohibit a member of Congress from using his office to benefit his reelection campaign.
The rules bar members of Congress from using taxpayer-funded resources – including staff – to perform campaign work, such as campaign photography. The rules also prohibit the use of campaign material in taxpayer-funded official mailings sent to constituents.
Following The News stories, Fossella’s Democratic rival, Stephen Harrison, filed a complaint with the commission; the commission then demanded a written explanation from Fossella.
Now, in his official response to the commission, Fossella has admitted for the first time that one of his full-time congressional staffers took the photos that wound up being used by his campaign.
Fossella contended that while the photos appear “to the naked eye” to be the same, they are, in fact, different.
For example, in explaining the use of photos – plural – of Fossella with several firefighters in his congressional mailings and in a campaign pamphlet handed out to potential voters, Fossella aide Craig Donner insisted in a sworn affidavit that the two shots were different snaps shot in sequence.
Donner said he used his personal Sony DSC-P100 and had Fossella and the firefighters “pose in front of a fire truck.” He said that “in using said pose,” he took “several” photos “in less than a minute.”
Fossella claimed in his filing with the commission, “The photos may look indistinguishable to the naked eye and look the same, yet they are separate and distinct photographs.”
In admitting that he had taken the photos that appeared in both Fossella’s congressional mailings and his campaign literature, Donner may have opened himself – and Fossella – to more scrutiny.
Fossella said that although Donner, his press secretary, had taken the firefighter photos, “no official funds were used to shoot the photos or to cause their reproduction.”
But Donner did not respond to written questions about how he was able to take campaign and congressional photos within seconds of each other without violating the rule barring staffers from doing campaign work.
In his response to the commission, Fossella also addressed the allegation that some of the photos used in his congressional mailings also had appeared for months on his campaign Web site.
One depicted Fossella with Elmo and Rosita. A second depicted Fossella with Mayor Bloomberg, for whom he served as campaign chairman in 2005. A third depicted Fossella with a senior citizen in a red hat.
Fossella claimed the photos used on the campaign Web site were merely “similar” to the photos used in the taxpayer-funded mailings.
He also explained to the commission that the photos were pulled from the Web site “as a precaution to avoid any confusion between and among official and nonofficial photographs.”
Actually, Fossella’s campaign removed the photos hours after The News began questioning him about the photos.
Fossella also did not respond to a question regarding how long the photos had appeared on the Web site.
Again, is this guy a producer or a user? We know he is a tongue twisted liar with a flair for revisionist history. Oops, wait a minute, what am I thinking. He is a lying bastard Republican. Geez, I really should have my coffee before I get started here.
Carl Grossman
Democrat, Proud and reporting it as it happens.
Don’t you have a plane to catch aptlynamedclueless? …hurry.
Oh yeah, read the whole essay and bookmark it.
It’s one of those essays that rational people should read once or twice a year to keep things in perspective when the lunacy of the wingnuts is getting you down.
“doodoo doodoo doodoo doodoo” as aptlynamedclueless sings his mantra from The Twilight Zone, while in the back of his ‘mind’ (that inert gray glob missing more than just a few firing neurons between his ears) he’s hearing:
“And they’re coming to take me away ha-haaa
They’re coming to take me away ho ho hee hee ha haaa
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I’ll be happy to see those nice young men
In their clean white coats
And they’re coming to take me away ha haaa
And they’re coming to take me away
To the happy home with trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket weavers who sit and smile and twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they’re coming to take me away ha haaa!”
68 – ASS, you’re a Dr. Demento fan! Well you sure are demented for sure – by right-wing kool-aid.
Chill out with some Faux Snooze Channel or a little “Best of” Limbaugh.
The faces of todays nutroot-liberals
Dickhead meets Sleasehead
Sugar pants… I don’t have clue who “Dr. Demento” might be… your shrink? HINT: You are NOT getting your money’s worth… oh wait…. your a hand out liberal… you aren’t getting MY moneys worth.
Hey ASS. There’s got to be some old Joe McCarthy speeches out there on the net to inspire you. Ann Coulter just thinks he’s the tops.
Once you’re done with those, you can work back to Father Coughlin.
oooooohhh ohhhhhh, you wound me, sugarpants! … pass the bandaids.
You don’t know Dr. Demento?!?
What are you ASS – a “private school” product?
Culturally illiterate. tsk tsk…
42
Hey Richard, you may (or may not) have noticed I left the meeting after the vote on U.S. senate endorsements — it’s a long hop back to Green Lake. (Although not has long as the hop back from Billings, MT, that time I grabbed the Ben-Gay instead of the Preparation H by mistake. You can still see the smoke trail from my flaming ass along I-90.)
But you can’t have failed to notice how unpopular Cantwell is in her own party. And her problems, as your post suggests, go far deeper than her votes on Iraq and a couple of other issues. What people were saying last night is, “She doesn’t listen to us.” Well, it doesn’t help if the candidate doesn’t show up, either … especially if the candidate has a listening problem to begin with. Slade the Indian Hater should’ve been an easier guy to beat than he was in 2000; McGavick should be a walk-over; Cantwell is not a novice at this political game, and one is left scratching his long pink ears trying to figure out why she is so inept and out of touch. Well, I’ll vote for her anyway, because there’s only one respectable political party left in this country and McGavick doesn’t belong to it.
As for state Sen. Fairley, I don’t know her, but she seems to be popular with the voters in her district despite a touch of personal abrasiveness, and I don’t think the 32nd district Democratic primary voters will dump her in favor of an unknown.
I understand what Dry Run is, and frankly I don’t want to be on the same airplane with someone who is willing to blow himself up (suicide) for the chance of a few virgins in the afterlife.
The mentality of these terrorists can’t be considered rational, and do we truly know if it was “Dry Run”.
Killing and/or dying for a cause is inherently irrational? Our troops are willing to die for their country. Are they also incapable of rational thought?
Uh huh… and you consider ‘dr demento’ is high example of ‘cultural literacy’ … good grief.
42 (continued)
It doesn’t surprise me anymore who reads HorsesAss. At first it did, but when I saw the white van with “DHS” markings parked across the street from my burrow and helicopters hovering overhead, I got the idea.
Same to you, George! http://tinyurl.com/jbdwo
Hey, the guy doesn’t read newspapers, but at least he reads HA … so he must know he has a popularity problem, too!
Well, maybe my tepid and grudging endorsement well help you a little, Richard. In case anybody missed my post above — THE OTHER TWO CANDIDATES ARE SO BAD THAT RICHARD IS THE BEST CHOICE for N.E. District Court Pos. No. 2 judge.
By the way, have you ever actually practiced any law? I mean, where you got paid for it?
42 (continued)
In any case, no matter how this race turns out, you can take some small comfort in knowing that you kicked Low Tax Looper’s ass last night! 40% ain’t all that bad. Not compared to Looper’s 4% against a write-in candidate.
But then, you didn’t murder your opponent, either. Looper thought he could skate into the Tennessee state senate once his opponent, a popular long-time Democratic state senator, was pushing up daisies. Instead, he skated into Brushy Mountain Penitentiary for 900 years. He’ll be eligible for parole sometime around the Second Coming. You gotta wonder about the 4% who voted for Looper instead of the write-in candidate. Yes, they were all Republicans — need you ask?
ROGER RABBIT POLL
Which will occur soonest?
[ ] 1. The Second Coming
[ ] 2. Low Tax Looper’s parole eligibility
[ ] 3. Global warming melts the polar ice caps
[ ] 4. The dinosaurs return
[ ] 5. Richard Pope gets elected to something
45
“Mike and Dick don’t support Castro.” Commentby Mike Gavick Rules-Goldie NUT— 8/13/06@ 7:02 am
Really? They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If that’s so, then George and Dick are big admirers of Castro, especially his police state.
Speaking of collectivized poverty, cheap-labor conservatives are big admirers of Castro too, judging from their efforts to impose collective poverty on the American working and middle classes.
Of course, no one should be surprised that neo-CONS are Castro admirers. After all, they all were commies because they became fascists, and they became fascists only because fascism pays better. Neo-CONS, at heart, are mercenaries. It’s about the MONEY, stupid. They don’t give a fuck about abortion, patriotism, national security, or any of the other stuff they shill for. They’re only in it for the bucks.
46
You can lick my cute cottontail any time! For a good time, call 1-800-SUCK-ROG.
Rabbit – Your ignorance of global economics is pathetic as evidenced by your “cheap labor” rant. Have you read the book “The World is Flat” by NYT columnist Thomas Friedman? Seriously, you should read it so you don’t sound so fucking stoopid here.
Friedman is a librul, but even he understands what is going on and why.
Chris at 51:
Do you think they would hav let him actually carry out his plans? He would have made the “dry run” under severe observation and probably been detained . . . and now they would have even more evidence. This skittish adm. doesn’t have the patience to do anything right.
Chris and skagit – Would YOU want to be a passenger on a flight where terrorists are practicing? Let’s say you knew… would you get on the plane?
56, 57
At least you know what the words are, because they’re spelled correctly.
Chris @58
How about this for a compromise. I don’t want to be on the same plane as you. Especially if I have to sit in the same row.
58 (continued)
Actually, this is unlikely to be a problem, because when Chris flies he usually travels in the wheel well.
58 (continued)
You know how those wingnuts are … they’re all FREELOADERS who won’t pay for anything, so of course they travel in the “free class” seating.
64
“Fossella made his unusual claim in response to an investigation being conducted by the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, which is looking into possible violation of rules that prohibit a member of Congress from using his office to benefit his reelection campaign.”
I assume this is being investigated because Doc Hastings is not in charge of that commission? Otherwise, there would be no investigation — even if Fossella was plastering his Vito and Elmo pics on billboards across his district with taxpayer funds.
Faux Redneck, are you unable to read? I said “under severe observation” they would have “detained him” and gotten more evidence.
Man you grad-u-at-ed from one of those mountain rural schools didn’t you? Or are you just a coward . . . or both?
Do-nothing congressman Doc Hastings, by doing nothing in his role has chair of the House Ethics Committee, is a key enabler of the Republican Culture of Corruption in D.C.
4th C.D. voters have a viable candidate in Richard Wright. It’s time to send Hastings into retirement. Yes, it’s a Republican district, but even Republicans (the honest ones, anyway) are getting fed up with the rampant stealing of taxpayer money by crooked GOP politicians in the other Washington.
George W. Bush kept one campaign promise, anyway. He promised to “change the culture” in D.C. Well, he sure as hell did.
86 ROGER RABBIT POLL
Who is stupider?
[ ] 1. An 11-lb. rabbit who thinks people who work full time should be able to live on their wages, or
[ ] 2. A guy with 4 engineering degrees who rants about “producers” but can’t pay his child support or gambling debts?
88
I was thinking more along the lines of you being on the “wet run.”
“Do you think they would hav let him actually carry out his plans? He would have made the “dry run” under severe observation and probably been detained . . . and now they would have even more evidence. This skittish adm. doesn’t have the patience to do anything right”
Gidget,
You have lost it, Girl!
Skittish? Skittish of risking the lives of flying passengers?
Your remarks just prove the point that no matter what President Bush and government officials do, they’re fucked. Nothing they do will please a Democrat in today’s hypersensitive partisian political quagmire.
I am happy that they had the common sense to not let anyone go for a test drive endangering hundreds of lives.
Would YOU want to be a passenger on a flight where terrorists are practicing?
Another example of the stoopidity of wingers. Have they ever heard of sky marshalls?
They want to throw journalists in jail when their Dear Leader is caught spying on American citizens and yet it’s ok to blow the whistle on a major operation to help out Shrub’s favorite Dem in CT.
This is why you guys are UNFIT to lead the nation in time of war.
I am happy that they had the common sense to not let anyone go for a test drive endangering hundreds of lives.
What danger would those people be in?
No danger… just getting blown out of the fucking sky that’s all. No big deal really…
You’re not very bright, are you?
Let’s say they did let them on to collect evidence to close the deal. Let’s say it wasn’t just a dry run, or let’s say the situation got out of control of airmarshalls. Let’s say a few hundred people got killed. Let’s say GWB came out and said “yeah, we knew we were there but we wanted to learn more about them.”
Would you delerious moonbats say “Well that was a good decision. One mustn’t be hasty after all. The risk was worth it. Thank you for your dynamic and insightful leadership.”
You are all out of your fucking minds… no wonder you vote the way you do.
Let’s say the situation was completely different…
“What danger would those people be in?”
I am obviously a lot brighter than you. I know better than to play around with explosives. I also know that terrorists are NOT bomb experts and accidents do happen.
Who knows what the fuck would happen with explosives on a airplane full of people at high altitudes. Any fucking thing could happen and it would be careless, irresponsible and ruthless for our government to play chicken with people’s lives.
Following your fucking philosophy we should have let them blow up the fucking planes to gather evidence!
86
“Rabbit – Your ignorance of global economics is pathetic” Commentby Mark The Redneck— 8/13/06@ 10:54 am
I don’t have 4 engineering degrees, but I know when I’m being fucked.
Rabbit – Thank you for your display of “aggressive stoopidty”. When given the opportunity to expand your horizons and learn, you scorn it.
Par for the course for moonbats…
Mac – Nobody is really as stupid as being displayed here. I think they’re pulling our legs. Gotta be… nobody is that stupid.
Are they?
MarkandtheRetardedRednecks@anywhere Don’t you all find it crowded around the computer? What a clusterf*ck! I’m having trouble remembering which one of you stunted intellects is a budget analyst.
By the way, I’m still in favor of a physician draft so Mark can go serve in his little Yellow Elephant War and deal with some seriously traumatic wounds, including the head injuries that he is too cheap to prevent with a donation to Operation Helmet.
Redneck,
They are NOT stupid. However; they are having difficulties with their ethical boundaries. Apparantely the boundaries move like wet spaghetti noodles according to WHO is do is doing what. It’s okay for a Democratic government to fuck over people, but not okay for a Republican government to fuck over people. Had it been President Kerry, they would be praising him to the Sun and back.
According to these brilliant wingers, a “dry run” is blowing up ONE plane. Uh.. How many planes were used in 9/11 again?
IIRC, “dry runs” were done for 9/11. Did those “dry runs” include a shot at the Columbia Tower?
These wingnuts could only hope.
As the whole literate world now knows, the Bush administration pressured British authorities to prematurely arrest the suspects in the alleged airline bombing plot, over the objections of British investigators who wanted to keep the suspects under surveillance.
Today, BuzzFlash.com published an editorial that gives stunning clarity to the political motives behind the Bush administration’s cynical manipulation of terror threats — and our national security.
Is it too much to call the Bushies traitors? Buzzflash doesn’t think so.
“A BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL
“August 13, 2006
“As BuzzFlash has repeatedly editorialized, the Bush Administration is a detriment to America’s national security. Our lives are increasingly at risk every day that they are in office.
“They will never seriously battle the sources of terrorism in an effective, strategic fashion. That is because politically they need the terrorists as much as the terrorists need them. And the goals of the Bush Administration are the consolidation of power and the acquisition of natural resources and economic dominance, not the eradication of terror.
“Only the naive and the Rush Limbaugh Stepford-Red Staters can possibly draw any other conclusion.
“NBC just confirmed — as BuzzFlash editorialized earlier this week about the politics of terrorism — that the White House forced the UK to move up the timing of the alleged terror cell arrests, against the recommendations of the British intelligence agencies. By so doing, the Bush Administration compromised the investigation and kept it from obtaining further evidence and contact names. In short, for purposes of political timing — in order to make partisan points from the election of Ned Lamont — the Bush Administration compromised our national security.
“Furthermore, NBC confirms that UK sources indicate that the alleged terrorist plan was not near operational. Indeed, the hijackers — who are British citizens — did not even have passports! (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14320452/)
“This is an extraordinary betrayal of America’s national security, purely done so that Cheney, Snow and Bush could attack the Democrats as weak on national security, knowing that the arrest announcement was going to be made on Wednesday, because they picked the day of the arrest.
“These use of Rovian-timed terrorist announcements — often extremely, extremely exaggerated (as in the case of the Liberty City Insane Clown Posse and the alleged Manhattan Tunnel explosions that would have defied the laws of gravity if they were planned to ‘flood’ lower Manhattan) — are basically treason.
“They are meant to frighten Americans into voting Republican. The only viable winning platform of the Busheviks now (and remember that they cannot afford either House of Congress to become Democratic, because it would likely lead to investigations and the impeachment and prosecution of the senior Bush Administration staff) is something like: ‘You see what the terrorists will do if the Republicans are not here to protect you. The Democrats will just mollycoddle them. Fear for your lives and vote Republican.’
“After six years of cynical rule and five years of an alleged ‘war on terrorism’ that has killed tens of thousands more people than the terrorists have, all the White House has to do is invoke premeditated fear into Americans.
“And it has worked up to now.
“Look at the media this week. The alleged British terror plot dominates the leads in television, radio and newpapers around the nation. Fear is a powerful tool. It goes right from the media into the brain. It appeals to our Reptilian sense of self-protection.
“That is why it is the tool of demagogues.
“Yes, there are terrorists out there who wish to do citizens of the United States harm. But yes, we also unleashed them in Iraq to do us and each other harm. Bush is breeding new ones every day in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“Bush hasn’t reduced terrorism; he has increased its threat.
“And that is fine with Rove, because Rove has been out front and openly stated through three election cycles that the GOP will win by painting the Democrats as soft on terrorism.
“The Bush White House and GOP campaign apparatus will lie, cheat, steal, manipulate our emotions — and even carry out policies that breed terrorists, because they need terrorism in order to win elections. They would lose in a landslide if people were to vote on public policy issues.
“So they need fear. It is the only fuel that will help them achieve a one-party dictatorial state for a century, as Grover Norquist and Karl Rove have promised.
“Who is creating a new generation of terrorists? Not the Democrats (except for Joe Lieberman, but he has clearly cut a deal with the White House a long time ago to be one of them – and remain a Democrat on foreign policy in name only.)
“Now, more than 60% of Americans oppose the war in Iraq. Ned Lamont — a descendant of the robber Baron J.P. Morgan, a fourth-generation Harvard graduate, and a self-made millionaire — is no radical.
“It is the Bush Administration that is radical, extremist, and basically treasonous.
“At the same time it was politically manipulating the arrests of the alleged British terrorists, it was trying to decrease a Congressional allotment of millions of dollars to increase our ability to detect explosives that could be carried on planes. It has already allowed box cutters, nail clippers, scissors and razors back on airplanes. It has done almost nothing to ensure the security of cargo that is shipped on planes, which is how the Pan Am plane was blown up over Scotland. (You don’t even need a suicide terrorist to blow up a plane in mid-air.)
“Bush blew off the warnings of an impending 9/11 and told the CIA briefer who came to him with them to get out and then used an expletive deleted. Bush then did nothing. He didn’t want his vacation disturbed — and then 9/11 happened. And when it did happen, after Bush failing to take steps to protect us, he read ‘The Pet Goat’ for several minutes before his handlers could write ‘comments’ for him. And then he inexplicably got on Air Force One and flew AWAY from Washington, D.C.
“As Americans, all of us have our lives at stake while these cynical, power hungry, demagogues are ruling the nation.
“Yes, there are terrorists in the world who wish us harm.
“Many of them, have indeed, been drawn to terrorism as a result of Bush Administration action.
“The goals of the White House are not to stop terrorism; the goal of the White House is to allow terrorism to fester in order to — as is the basic game plan for dictators goes — use fear to consolidate tyrannical power and do away with our Constitutional checks and balances of government and guarantee of individual liberties.
“If you can’t see that they are traitors in the White House, then you are risking your own lives and the lives of your families.
“If you value those lives – and your own – we cannot, as a nation, any longer afford a White House and a Republican party that only knows the politics of using terrorism as a political tool, while running only an ineffective ‘show war’ to reduce the threat of terrorists.”
http://tinyurl.com/fxc53
This is why you guys are UNFIT to lead the nation in time of war.
Nope it’s why the neo-crazies have never been serious about effectively fighting and preventing terrorism but TOTALLY serious about using fear of terrorism to cling to power even it means bankrupting the country and creating more terrorists.
For the neo-con nutcases and their worshippers the “War on Terror” was just their kind of growth industry.
THE SMOKING GUN
In tandem with its coverage of the Bush administration pressuring the British the arrest the suspects the day after last Tuesday’s elections, NBC News reports that Bush simultaneously cut funds for airline security. After reading this story, can anyone still doubt the accuracy of BuzzFlash’s perception of what is really going on?
“Amid U.K. terror plot, administration targeted anti-terror technology funds
“WASHINGTON – As the British terror plot was unfolding, the Bush administration quietly tried to take away $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new explosives detection technology.
“Congressional leaders rejected the diversion of funds, the latest in a series of Homeland Security Department steps that have left lawmakers and some of the department’s own experts questioning the commitment to create better antiterror technologies. …
“Representative Martin Sabo, Democrat of Minnesota, who joined Republicans to block the administration’s recent diversion of explosives detection money, said research and development are crucial to thwarting future attacks, and there is bipartisan agreement that Homeland Security has fallen short. ‘They clearly have been given lots of resources that they haven’t been using,’ Sabo said. …
“The department failed to spend $200 million in research and development money from past years, forcing lawmakers to rescind the money this summer.
“The administration also was slow to start testing a new liquid explosives detector that the Japanese government provided to the United States earlier this year. … Japan has been using the liquid explosive detectors in its Narita International Airport in Tokyo and demonstrated the technology to US officials at a conference in January, the Japanese Embassy in Washington said.
“Homeland Security is spending $732 million this year on various explosives deterrents. It has tested several commercial liquid explosive detectors over the past few years but has not deployed them.
“For more than four years, officials inside Homeland Security also have debated whether to deploy smaller trace explosive detectors — already in most American airports — to foreign airports to help stop any bomb chemicals or devices from making it onto US-destined flights. A 2002 Homeland Security report recommended ‘immediate deployment’ of the trace units to key European airports, highlighting their low cost, $40,000 per unit, and their detection capabilities. … A 2005 report to Congress similarly urged that the trace detectors be used more aggressively and strongly warned that the continuing failure to distribute such detectors to foreign airports ‘may be an invitation to terrorists ….’
“Tony Fainberg, who formerly oversaw Homeland Security’s explosive and radiation detection research with the national labs, said he strongly urged deployment of the detectors overseas but was rebuffed. ‘It is not that expensive,’ said Fainberg, who recently retired. ‘There was no resistance from any country that I was aware of, and yet we didn’t deploy it.'”
This story is excerpted under the Fair Use doctrine; for complete story and/or copyright info, see http://tinyurl.com/fneql
Mark the Redneck, Sergeant Mac, and the other righty shills are working overtime this afternoon on damage control.
Reply to 100
“This is why you guys are UNFIT to lead the nation in time of war.” Commentby Mark The Redneck— 8/13/06@ 11:45 am
See #113 & 115, traitor.
110
“I’m having trouble remembering which one of you stunted intellects is a budget analyst.” Commentby killatroll/saveablog— 8/13/06@ 12:44 pm
That was Mark Retardo, who said tax cuts always increase government revenues … to wit:
2000 – $1,372,376,000,000 (baseline year)
2001 – $1,297,063,000,000
2002 – $1,152,413,000,000
2003 – $1,069,364,000,000
Source of data: http://tinyurl.com/ahdfm
111
So now we have Sergeant Shill lecturing liberals on “ethics.” Shows how desperate they are …
116&117 I would only add two small corrections: that would be MarkandtheRednecks. And”See @113 & @115, traitors.
This seems as good a time as any to reacquaint HA readers with the GOP’s voting record on homeland security.
Nov. 14, 2001: Senate Democrats propose $15 billion for homeland security; the White House warns against “permanent spending on other projects that have nothing to do with stimulus and that will only expand the size of government.”
Dec. 4, 2001: Senate Appropriations Committee votes 29-0 in favor of $13.1 billion for homeland security; the next day, Bush threatens to veto it.
Dec. 6, 2001: Senate Republicans reduce homeland security funding by $4.6 billion.
Dec. 19, 2001: Under pressure from White House, House-Senate conferees eliminate another $200 million of funding for airport security, port security, nuclear facility security, and postal security.
June 7, 2002: Senate votes 71-22 for $8.3 billion of homeland security funding; the next day, Bush’s advisors recommend a veto.
July 19, 2002: Under White House pressure, homeland security funding is further reduced by cutting money for food security, cyber security, nuclear security, airport security, port security, drinking water security, coordination of police and fire radios, and lab testing to detect chem-bio weapons.
Aug. 13, 2002: Bush decides not to spend $2.5 billion appropriated for homeland security on the grounds of “fiscal responsibility.”
Jan. 16, 2003: White House reacts to Democratic efforts to increase homeland security funding by stating, “The Administration strongly opposes amendments to add new extraneous spending.” Later that day, Senate Republicans vote against funds for smallpox vaccine.
Jan. 23, 2003: Senate Republicans cut security funding for the FBI, FEMA, INS, TSA, Coast Guard, and National Nuclear Security Administration.
Feb. 3, 2003: Bush submits a 2004 budget cutting homeland security funding by nearly 2 percent.
Feb. 14, 2003: Senate Democrats request money for smallpox vaccine, police and fire radios, and public transportation security; no Republicans support it.
March 21-25, 2003: Republicans defeat 7 amendments to bolster homeland security.
April 2, 2003: Senate Republicans reject Democratic amendment to provide $1 billion for port security.
April 3, 2003: Republicans reject protection of commercial airliners from shoulder-fired missiles and four other pro-homeland security amendments.
June 2003: House Republicans reject Democratic proposal to raise $1 billion for homeland security by reducing tax cuts for 200,000 millionaires by an average of $5,000 each (from $88,000 to $83,000).
Source: James Carville, “Had Enough?” (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003), pp. 41-43.
“Although Bush took credit for creating the new Department of Homeland Security, he vigorously opposed the idea when Democrats first proposed it. He insisted that a presidential adviser with no accountability to the American people would be more effective than a new Cabinet member. White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said President Bush thought that a Department of Homeland Security was ‘just not necessary.’ Tom Ridge — then homeland security adviser — said that he would recommend that Bush veto legislation to create a Cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security.”
Source: Democratic National Committee Newsletter, Jan. 29, 2003.
“While the Department of Homeland Security has issued new warnings of terrorist hijackings on commercial airlines this summer, Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee voted just last week against a Democratic amendment to add $50 million in funding to prevent the Transportation Security Administration from cutting the number of air marshals. The vote came during the Committee’s mark-up of the 2003 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill, which funds the TSA’s air marshal program.”
Source: Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee press release, July 31, 2003.
“Senate Republicans once again blocked a vote on homeland security legislation solely because it preserved collective beginning rights and civil service protections for the 170,000 federal workers who would make up the new department.Sixty votes are needed to end debate and bring the measure to a floor vote, the move failed by a 52-45 count, with almost solid GOP opposition. President Bush has threatened to veto any measure that does not give him unlimited power over the workers and Senate Republicans also rejected a bipartisan bill that gave Bush most of what he sought.”
Source: International Association of Machinists, Oct. 8, 2002.
Roger Rabbit comment: Nothing new about what’s being reported by NBC, Buzzflash, and others today. The Bush administration has subordinated the safety of the American people to their political goals from Day One. And brainwashed apologists for treason like Sergeant Mac call into question OUR ethics? Take a good look in the mirror, Mac, and ask yourself if you want your grandkids to remember you as a Benedict Arnold supporter of the GOP’s treason.
“What danger would those people be in?”
I am obviously a lot brighter than you. I know better than to play around with explosives. I also know that terrorists are NOT bomb experts and accidents do happen.
Who knows what the fuck would happen with explosives on a airplane full of people at high altitudes. Any fucking thing could happen and it would be careless, irresponsible and ruthless for our government to play chicken with people’s lives.
Following your fucking philosophy we should have let them blow up the fucking planes to gather evidence!
Why are right wingers such potty-mouths?
As for your contention that a dry run would endanger anyone, define “dry run.”
GOP = party of treason
Mark the Redneck = deadbeat dad and bet welsher
I am happy that they had the common sense to not let anyone go for a test drive endangering hundreds of lives.
Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 11:24 am
Too bad the British don’t agree. Of course, they are just silly inexperienced people who somehow prefer to do things the legal way, accumulate the evidence they need to prosecute, and actually have the balls to do the right thing . . .
Hmmm, again I think you must’ve been clerking for the general.
BTW, Smeg, wasn’t it the British who were bombed during WW2 . . .
Roger Rabbit – The only destitute lawyer on the face of the fucking planet. Claims he gave up real money to serve humanity.
Fact is he couldn’t run with the big dogs, so he settled for the low expectations of gummint job and sucking off the Producers.
What the fuck are Democrat voting Michigan Hizbollah supporters rallying in Washington for, 3 days after 10+ airplanes and 3000+ innocent people (including women, children, babies) nearly got blown out of the sky?
Even more to the point, why is it that these people can parade around unworried that true Americans will beat them to a pulp? Can you imagine a pro-Nazi demonstration in Washington in, say, 1944?
“Let’s say they did let them on to collect evidence to close the deal. Let’s say it wasn’t just a dry run, or let’s say the situation got out of control of airmarshalls. Let’s say a few hundred people got killed. Let’s say GWB came out and said “yeah, we knew we were there but we wanted to learn more about them.”
Would you delerious moonbats say “Well that was a good decision. One mustn’t be hasty after all. The risk was worth it. Thank you for your dynamic and insightful leadership.”
You are all out of your fucking minds… no wonder you vote the way you do.
Commentby Mark The Redneck— 8/13/06@ 12:02 pm
Well, you and Smeg are finally showing the stuff you are made of . . . No wonder you stand behind a tin-hat soldier in YOUR C in C. No wonder he hides out at the ranch most of the time.
I guess we libs can finally declare victory on this blog. . . ’cause we’ve got it, proof positive, you all cowards without the balls to get the terrorists. . . and you sound good on paper but you lack the courage to do it.
That’s okay, when the big one does come, we liberals will protect you. . .
“Cantwell or you, either way I get an uncritical lapdog on the Patriot Act.”
sgmmac has a serious personality deficit. She regularly confuses criminal proceedings with civil proceedings. She also displays a strong authoritarian streak: Of course they’re guilty, otherwise why would they be charged. . .If you’re not doing anything wrong, why object to wiretapping. . .etc.
I have known numerous ‘lifers’ who do not display this authoritarianism, so I must conclude she was seriously damaged before she went into the service, and merely found a happy home for her deficits.
“define dry run………”
That’s the inherent problem, isn’t it? The British do have much stronger anti-terror laws than we do, but it’s problematic for anyone to make that ‘estimated guess’ on exactly what a ‘dry run’ means. According to the news reports I read, they had a “green light” to go from the terrorist in Pakistan. Does it mean a dry run with phony liquid for bombs or the real stuff? It isn’t a risk worth taking, so dump your shampoo and hair conditioner before boarding that plane.
I do talk like a truck driver – bad habit I picked up in the military, frequently being the only female around a bunch of wild male soldiers. I can be good, but why should I when the majority of the posters on this site say much worse????????
Gidget,
The only person on this board I would trust to protect me is Roger……….. The rest of you seem very fluffy! He’s not, even though he plays like he is.
MarkandtheRetardedRednecks Is it getting a little claustrophobic up in the Arlington area?
The ultimate conceit is that these wingers think they’re smarter than MI5 who have been much closer to terrorism (IRA and Islamist) than the chickenhawks in DC could ever dream!
127
I’d rather be a guvmint hack attorney than a traitor and bet welsher.
The British have a hell of a lot more experience at this stuff than we do. Perhaps a wise approach would be to listen to them.
Does it mean a dry run with phony liquid for bombs or the real stuff?
You were sure in your other post; now you admit you have no idea what they had planned. Given that the British had infiltrated the network, knew of the “dry run” plan, and wanted to allow it, I suspect there was no danger.
I’m flying to London in a month, and I’m amused by the number of people wetting themselves over this. But, in truth, I’m of two minds on this. On the one hand, these guys were caught using all the techniques the Democrats have been advocating from day one, so there’s hope that a smarter strategy will win out. On the other hand, I should be worried because the current administration has demonstrated that it is willing to put politics above the safety of Americans and, even when they don’t, they really, really suck at their jobs.
Uh-oh, looks like the pukes are down to their bench; they’re putting Doktor JCH on the playing field …
Smeg: “but it’s problematic for anyone to make that ‘estimated guess’ on exactly what a ‘dry run’ means.”
So, why are you trying? The British foiled the plot. The British have had decades more experience with terrorism that we have. But now you think you can second guess the experts?
You represent the “all-protective” hands of the military? OMG!
Don’t worry, I’m sure Roger will be there for you. He’s a good liberal.
For all you terrorist loving people here on HA…..Catch the first plane out….I won’t call you left leaning, because that would insult those democrats who have morals and values. If I hated the current administration as much as you people do, I would move to Canada.
Horsesass.org has turned into a Hate Filled LITTLE Blog where only a few are allowed to have an adult conversation. It is pathetic that HA has grown to this……
I am sure you will be glad to see me gone. I am not the first, nor the last to try and engage in adult conversation at HA.
This country is truly divided, and it’s amoung own citizens, what a shame…..
Goldy, I wish you luck, but I would hope that this isn’t what you expected for the legacy of your Blog. In the world of Today, you represent what you portray, are guilty by association, and this blog is an embarrasment to the “real” people of the USA, regardless of your political association(even a democrat).
BTW Roger, I am a Woman….
I have a lot of respect for both MI-5 and MI-6. . .and that is not based on James Bond claptrap. They much prefer to operate in the shadows and don’t like high profile kasha like the current terrorist bust.
One of the difficulties is getting operational Agents-in-Place within the Muslim Community. You burn these resources up when you choose to trumpet your successes and operations in the media for political gain. The alliance between the intelligence community in Europe and the political operatives in the White House is tenuous at best post Valerie Plame.
Tree Frog,
I am most definitely an “A” personality, but then most SGM’s are. It is something you learn after years of telling people what, when, how, why and where to do something. Unless you are a wussy, you shouldn’t be threatened by a strong willful woman.
You can lead, you can follow, or stay the fuck out of my way, because if you don’t lead, I will.
I know the difference between criminal and civil proceedings. I also know that you can’t expect to win a civil suit unless you can prove that the other guy wronged you in some way.
Have a great day and don’t eat too many of those legs!
@140 Uh, Chris, the split is apparently approaching a 70-40 split. Don’t let the door hit ya. . . .
ATJ,
Be safe on your flight, they have some great chocolates from Belgium in the London airport, my daughter and grandson are flying next month, and I am still glad there arn’t any dry runs.
Sggmac You habitually refer to McDermott’s legal situation as criminal.
Fortunately you are not in a position to lead anyone. If you wish, I will happily keep administering whacks with a clue bat.
Now, sggmac, repeat after me, slowly now:Jim McDermott is involved in Civil Lawsuit, not a Criminal Matter.
Tree Frog,
You have me mixed up with someone else. I don’t know or care who Jim McDermott is. I vaguely know what he did, something about eavesdropping/taping phone calls????
I live in Lacey and he doesn’t represent me. Furthermore, I came here in 2000 from Germany and retired here (Fort Lewis) in 2003.
Be safe on your flight, they have some great chocolates from Belgium in the London airport, my daughter and grandson are flying next month, and I am still glad there arn’t any dry runs.
Thank you, and I respect when people would rather be safe than sorry, but risk has be assessed more rationally than it is currently.
And please don’t pretend that my willingness to listen to people with one hell of a better track record than the Bush administration is some ethical failing. I consider it to be the only sensible course, and I suspect you agree with me, deep down.
Aw, come on, sggmac, I thought this could be your Come to Jesus Moment. We will be happy to admit you into the Reality Based Community. All it takes is saying, slowly now: Jim McDermott is involved in a Civil Lawsuit. Not a Criminal Matter
ATJ,
I trust the British intelligence a lot more than I do American intelligence. But that has nothing to do with President Bush. Our intelligence agencies have been failing for years and years – decades. It has to do with their group mentality, not anything that Bush has or hasn’t done.
We have some serious problems in this country and he didn’t do it all. He is one man. He appoints the head guy in all of those government agencies. Every damn one of them are entrenched with the same blowhard employees that have been there for 40 years. Getting them to change their ways is harder then giving a 400 lb panther a bubble bath!
Tree Frog Farmer,
Maybe you have confused with Janet………..
sgmmac,
I’ve never limited my criticisms to simply Bush himself. He merely leads the group that has managed to cock things up more in 5+ years than I thought possible.
Hot off the presses: the latest Seymour Hersh.
The lowdown: Lebanon was planned for a year with close Pentagon cooperation.
Reason? A “dry run” for a bombing of Iran.
The money quote:
Cheney’s point, the former senior intelligence official said, was “What if the Israelis execute their part of this first, and it’s really successful? It’d be great. We can learn what to do in Iran by watching what the Israelis do in Lebanon.”
ATJ,
Unfortunately, I don’t think you’ve (we’ve) seen anything yet.
I read an article about the latest Governor’s conference. It said the majority of them were frustrated at Washington D.C.. That’s both Republican and Democratic Governors, because nothing is being done for the people or the States. Our politics have degenerated into partisian bickering and a big hate filled quagmire.
Both sides are to blame.
Chris, this blog is not for the weak. Can’t be thin-skinned here. Besides, your point was taken and refuted. If you want to be among friends and hum with the choir, you are right to find another site.
Sometimes this site turns into an arena for mud wrestling; other times is gets interesting.
“The lowdown: Lebanon was planned for a year with close Pentagon cooperation.”
Damn Cheney’s good! Imagine, he had to convince Hezbollah to invade Israel and kidnapp soldiers. I wonder how he did that!
Tree Frog,
I am most definitely an “A” personality, but then most SGM’s are. It is something you learn after years of telling people what, when, how, why and where to do something. Unless you are a wussy, you shouldn’t be threatened by a strong willful woman.
You can lead, you can follow, or stay the fuck out of my way, because if you don’t lead, I will.
I know the difference between criminal and civil proceedings. I also know that you can’t expect to win a civil suit unless you can prove that the other guy wronged you in some way.
Have a great day and don’t eat too many of those legs!
Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 2:06 pm
Smeg, you give all women in charge a bad name because you sound more like a bully here than a wise leader. Get over yourself!
sgmac,
the only one that continually reeks of ignorance here is mark the welsher.
For those who have obviously not been paying attention Hisbollah has had a long standing habit of kidnapping Israeli soldiers to use as bargaining chips for the release of detained Palestinians in Israeli prisons.
What changed was the abandonment of Measured, or Proportionate Response by the Israelis. One can only assume this invasion of Lebanon was with the complicit knowledge and approval of the White House.
I may need a bigger clue bat.
Gidget,
I don’t bully anybody, but I will stand up and fight anybody.
I won’t be bullied, I won’t run and I will go down fighting before I give up.
Chris @ 140
There’s nice little “choir” at (un)SP. You’ll like it there.
Smeg: not anything that Bush has or hasn’t done.
Oh, I thought he was the decider . . . I was wrong? You people need to make up your minds! He didn’t replace Tenet with Goss? He did underfund Homeland Security? He didn’t have anything to do with Iraq?
What in the hell has he been doing?
Smeg, ” the same blowhard employees that have been there for 40 years.”
Remember, girl, you’re talking about yourself here . . . (LOL)
Smeg: “Our politics have degenerated into partisian bickering and a big hate filled quagmire.
Both sides are to blame.
Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 2:43 pm
Gawd, you’re self serving! The dems haven’t been in a position to say anything since 2002 . . . At least be honest!
“Gidget,
I don’t bully anybody, but I will stand up and fight anybody.
I won’t be bullied, I won’t run and I will go down fighting before I give up.
Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 3:18 pm
Then quit talking like a bully.
140
“If I hated the current administration as much as you people do, I would move to Canada.”
I certainly hope you’ll hate the next administration as much as we hate this one — and that you’ll move to North Korea or some other nice fascist state where you’ll feel more at home. Don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out.
“Horsesass.org has turned into a Hate Filled LITTLE Blog where only a few are allowed to have an adult conversation. It is pathetic that HA has grown to this……”
And rightwing blogs are filled with love and “adult conversation?” Hey, if you want “adult conversation,” try an “adult web site,” that should be right up your alley. Since I’ve never once seen your posts here take to task any of the rightwingers who advocate killing liberals (e.g., Ann Coulter), I’m forced to conclude you’re a hypocrite.
“I am sure you will be glad to see me gone.”
See ya, bub. Au revoir. Sayonnara. Buh-bye. I repeat, don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out.
“This country is truly divided, and it’s amoung own citizens, what a shame…..”
Yeah, it is a shame. You rightwing assholes divided it. Fucking traitors. I hope you all swing.
“Goldy, I wish you luck, but I would hope that this isn’t what you expected for the legacy of your Blog. In the world of Today, you represent what you portray, are guilty by association, and this blog is an embarrasment to the ‘real’ people of the USA, regardless of your political association(even a democrat).”
Chris, people of your mindset no longer know the difference between “real” and “surreal,” but you folks are mostly surreal … “guilty by association,” an interesting phrase that describes a smear tactic that wingers have been using for decades. Let’s try it out and see how it works in reverse.
Have you ever flown on a plane, Chris? You have? Well, terrorists fly on planes, too. That makes you a terrorist. You know — guilty by association. How do you like being a terrorist? What went wrong? Didn’t you get any parenting as a child? Was your mother a whore? Just wondering.
“BTW Roger, I am a Woman….”
OK, OK, you’re not a fascist bastard. I stand corrected. You’re a fascist bitch. Adios, cupcakes.
Another winger cuts and runs.
We get a lot of that here on HA. For example, there was a guy named John MacDonald who posted here for a short time, then stormed off this blog in a huff. Chickenshit.
Rightwingers grew so accustomed to trashing liberals they never dreamed we might spoon-feed them with their own medicine. How’s that Castor oil feel sliding down the old drainpipe, Chris-gal? Nice and slimy, like slug puke? Good! Now you know what it feels like.
So that no one is misled as to our intentions, here is the unofficial protocol for posting on HA:
1. This is a liberal blog
2. Anyone can post here
3. There is no censorship
4. As liberals, our job is the verbally kick the living shit out of the unpatriotic, America-hating, fascist traitors who post here
5. No mercy for wingnuts
6. Our terms are unconditional surrender
7. Klake is a nazi
Any questions?
Gidget,
I know how those employees are because I have been in “Units.” Yes, there is a mentality that is hard to break and it’s frustrating if you are trying to get something accomplished. I had soldiers who refused to use computers (or learn how to). Those same die hard employees exist here in our State government, our city government, and in companies and organizations around the world. Because the Chief changes doesn’t mean the organization changes, many times the little employees will ‘buck’ the orders and do things like back door leaks………. Office politics can be real tough.
The head of the VA is an example, when the first laptop was stolen, his employees didn’t bother to tell him for days….
Has the new Chief of DSHS here in Washington State fixed anything yet? No, because the employees have been working there for years and they are going to keep doing things the way they always have.
The Democrats get their words in through cloture votes in the Senate. They are not powerless.
Wise does not a good leader make. Self-Defense isn’t bullying. I’m nobody’s door mat, I have been through way too much sexual harrassment crap to put up with more of the same.
147
“I vaguely know what he did, something about eavesdropping/taping phone calls????”
Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 2:17 pm
No, you DON’T know, even vaguely, what he did. Congressman McDermott neither eavesdropped nor taped a phone call. He simply gave a tape recording made by someone else of public officials discussing public business to a newspaper. To wit: The tape recording contained evidence of unethical conduct by then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
McDermott was never charged with any criminal offense for leaking the tape recording to the media. There is currently no civil judgment against him, either, as a federal appeals court vacated that judgment in June 2006 and ordered a retrial. McDermott claims his actions in leaking the tape recording to the media are constitutionally protected.
Unfortunately, “free speech” is a concept Republicans don’t understand. Republicans often claim soldiers gave us our freedoms. While that is partly true, it’s not the whole story. I could show you plenty of GIs who know little or nothing about the Constitution. While defending the nation against foreign enemies is important, we owe just as much for our political freedoms (including free speech) to brave citizens who challenge unjust laws passed by knee-jerk congresses and organizations like the ACLU that value this freedoms enough to fight for them in the courts and political arena. Democrats are not the people in this country who want to take away our First Amendment freedoms; conservative Republicans are.
Our freedom is in greater danger from rightwing Republicans than from Al Qaida.
Memo to Chris-gal: And we’re supposed to be polite to you assholes?
GOP = party of liars, thieves, and traitors
150
“I trust the British intelligence a lot more than I do American intelligence. But that has nothing to do with President Bush. Our intelligence agencies have been failing for years and years – decades. It has to do with their group mentality, not anything that Bush has or hasn’t done.” Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 2:28 pm
Spin, spin, spin — it’s all bullshit. The CIA did its job. Bush didn’t do HIS job. There’s no more to be said.
154
“Our politics have degenerated into partisian bickering and a big hate filled quagmire. Both sides are to blame.” Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 2:43 pm
Bullshit! Rightwingers questioned our patriotism. Rightwingers refused to negotiate or compromise with Democrats. Rightwingers were obstructionists against Democratic legislation and judicial nominees. Rightwingers campaigned with smear tactics. Rightwingers started the incivility and name-calling. All we ever did was react to it by dishing some of it back in kind, after your side did it first.
155
One thing I’ll give Mac credit for is, she isn’t a thin-skinned, lily-livered, cut-and-run chickenshit like MacDonald, Chris, or some of the other trolls that have fled from HA.
169
“Wise does not a good leader make.” Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 4:09 pm
You prefer stupid leaders? (It seems so.)
Rabbit – We don’t “question” your patriotism. There’s nothing to question. You have stated clearly whose side you’re on. Having trouble with us callin’ a spade a spade?
We don’t want to negotiate or compromise with your side because your side is wrong. See, the country doesn’t move ahead when leaders from both sides sit down and negotiate. We move ahead when libruls and their kooky ideas are defeated and sent to the trash bin.
Obstuctionist on judges? Bork. End of discussion.
Smear? Bill Clinton. Delay, deny, denigrate. End of discussion.
Dumass….
Smeg: Those same die hard employees exist here in our State government, our city government, and in companies and organizations around the world. Because the Chief changes doesn’t mean the organization changes, many times the little employees will ‘buck’ the orders and do things like back door leaks………. Office politics can be real tough.
They’re all alike, aren’t they. Not a good one in the bunch . . .cept’n you of course. You sound like every bigot I’ve ever heard.
he head of the VA is an example, when the first laptop was stolen, his employees didn’t bother to tell him for days….
Sounds like all those generals who didn’t want to rock the Iraq boat cause the ones that did got demoted or replaced like Abizaid. The ethics at the top “trickles down” as they say . . .
The Democrats get their words in through cloture votes in the Senate. They are not powerless.
Oh, that group of lawmakers that couldn’t even get a room in which to meet or keep the lights on . . . LMAO!
Wise does not a good leader make. Self-Defense isn’t bullying. I’m nobody’s door mat, I have been through way too much sexual harrassment crap to put up with more of the same.
Grannie, you may be nice to your grandkids and probably put up with a lot crap like most of us do, but wise is what we should all be lookin’ for. Anybody that doesn’t think wisdom makes for a tood leader has been shufflin’ paper for too many years . . .
Also, what is this love affair you have with the shrub? To think that a president isn’t in charge of his administration is pure bullshit. And you sound like a silly girl with a crush . . .
Hey Rabbit – If it was good for both sides to sit down and be reasonable, then why did dems attack Lieberman so viciously for agreeing with GWB on one issue.
Hi Roger,
Being wise doesn’t make you a good leader. Translating knowledge and book smarts (wise) into leadership isn’t automatic. I’ve known very intelligent leaders both senior non-coms and senior officers who, while being nice were absolutely worthless as Commanders/Supervisors. There’s a time to be nice and there’s a time to kick ass. Many also have this sterotype of female leaders that goes something like when a male is a strong aggressive leader – they’re Hooah! When a female is a strong aggressive leader – she’s a Bitch or a Bully!
181 – pay your gambling debt.
Gidget,
Bush certainly wasn’t my first choice……….
Being wise doesn’t make you a good leader. Translating knowledge and book smarts (wise) into leadership isn’t automatic.
Honey, nothing’s automatic but to think being wise (which isn’t the same as “book smart” and you should know the difference at your age) isn’t part and parcel of being a good leader is disingenuous to say the least.
Everything you say seems to end with a bullying technique of some sort. I think you should reassess your views on leadership.
Also, you seem to have a grandiose idea of your own opinions . . .
All good leaders need wisdom and decisiveness. Name an American leader – past or present – that you admire.
Gregoire will be our first female president!
Hope this is okay but had to post this great letter from Washblog: http://www.washblog.com/story/2006/8/12/33059/2117
An open letter to Mike McGavick
By switzerblog
Sat Aug 12, 2006 at 12:30:59 AM PST Section: Washington State Topic: Repubs
[Cross-posted at Kos. Please feel free to stop by and reco]
Mr. McGavick,
You have made a “civility pledge” in your campaign for the U.S. Senate. This is admirable, if viewed with some skepticism by many, including myself. Joel Connelly has recently come to your defense in his column in the P-I, concerned that Democrats are treating you poorly and calling you a stand-up guy. You may be. You may also be using surrogates to cynically launch attacks on your behalf – to paraphrase you when you ran Slade Gorton’s campaign, I have no evidence you’re not. I have noticed, however, a very specific lack of civility from your Party, and I think this affords you an opportunity to take the high road and live up to your pledge, and this is why I’m writing.
(I do think it is worth noting that your name appears nowhere except linked news articles on Senator Cantwell’s website, yet she has taken no civility pledge.)
Civility seems no longer possible in today’s political climate. A daily flood of attacks flows from one side to the other…and back again. There seem to be no good guys today. The best defense has become a good offense, and campaigns that don’t fight dirty seem destined to fight alone and lose. You have taken a pledge to be that good guy, but it would seem you still accept relationships with people who have no interest in what is best for America or Washington state – and those relationships are very revealing. Civil politics requires a ceaseless demand for higher ethics, better standards, and frankly, expecting more of the people around you.
I call on you, in the interest of civility, to do the following:
Immediately demand that Diane Tebelius halt her ceaseless attacks on Senator Cantwell and other Democratic candidates. Her attacks have been shrill, relentless, without merit, and serve only to poison the political debate in Washington state. You have the pull within your Party to do this, and a responsibility to the voters you hope to represent. This type of discourse has no place in civil politics.
Insist that Michael Young and Lori Sotelo abandon their plan to challenge thousands of voter registrations in King County at the last minute. Last year, after filing 2,000 sloppily researched challenges and having to withdraw many of them, Michael Young was overheard suggesting there were 20,000 more they hoped to file in 2006. This is an assault on democracy itself. Such a cynical attempt to further a political agenda at the expense of the public’s trust in our democracy is inappropriate at best, illegal at worst. This type of action has no place in civil politics.
Demand the the RNC immediately remove the “Meet the Defeat-ocrats” video from the GOP website and apologize for adding a “Hitler moustache” to Howard Dean’s image in the screenshot of that video. This type of slanderous, juvenile and frankly stupid name-calling has no place in civil politics, and applying a “Hitler moustache” to a man whose wife and children are Jewish is offensive in the extreme. (Since being uncovered, the image has been altered to remove the image:
8/10 screenshot:
8/11 screenshot: have to go to the site to see the screen
Demand that the GOP immediately remove the “John Murtha’s Cut-and-Run Tour” image from their website and apologize for slandering the name of an American hero and patriot in this way. I will remind you, sir, that John Murtha did not come to the decision to propose a phased withdrawal in a vacuum, but rather after speaking with actual soldiers and officers both on the ground in Iraq and those recently returned stateside. Slandering John Murtha’s plan is slandering those brave men and women who have fought valiantly in our name. This type of discourse has no place in civil politics.
Demand that the GOP apologize immediately for their cynical fundraising email sent out hours after a major terror attack was foiled by the British intelligence services. Not only was this in bad taste, it was yet another example of your Party using terror as a political tool for their benefit. I urge you to focus, rather than constant political gain, on what is actually best for America’s security. Sending “$500, $250, $100, $50, $35 or $25 to the Republican National Committee” is not what’s best for America – it’s pandering to fear. This type of discourse has no place in civil politics.
If you will not, or cannot, secure these changes and apologies from the RNC, you should immediately return all funds given by them to your campaign and refuse any further contact with them. The RNC has spent the last 15 years corrupting the American political system, and it is likely too late to alter their course. You have the opportunity to choose a better path without their corruption of our state’s politics.
Apologize for, or seek an apology from, Vice President Dick Cheney, who suggested in a conference call with reporters (after he had already been made aware of the unfolding terror plot in Britain) that a Ned Lamont victory might embolden “Al Qaeda types”. Not only is this a shockingly simplistic view of worldwide political realities and simple human nature, it shows that this administration was already laying plans to capitalize on what may be an Al Qaeda plot, not to make the American people safer, but to rescue their own political fortunes. To suggest that voters in the democratic process choosing one candidate over another can be equated to breaking “the will of the American people” is absurd and shocking. It was petty, ill-advised, rude and cynical. This type of discourse has no place in civil politics.
Apologize for, or seek an apology from, President Bush for his claim that we are “at war with Islamic fascists”. This is a phrase becoming more frequently used by members of your Party, and is not only misleading but is insulting to our friends and allies in the Muslim community both here at home and abroad. We ought not further alienate people whose friendship we so desperately need in our struggle against extremists who represent Islam in name only, not in their deeds. I will remind you that the recent terror plot was not uncovered by the CIA or NSA, but by a Muslim reporting suspicious activities of a neighbor to British intelligence. I will further remind you and others who have used these arrests to tie our struggle against terrorist extremists with our war in Iraq that no terror plots have been uncovered in Iraq – major attacks have occurred in Saudi Arabia, Spain and London, all perpetrated by extremists local to those places, and the recent suspects are in fact English natives, not Iraqis. It is misleading and irresponsible to continue this charade for political reasons, and for the security of this nation, we must make a plan to defeat the problem, not the most convenient symptom. This type of discourse has no place in civil politics.
Rescind your endorsement of Senator Joe Lieberman, who despite claims to civility much like yours, has in fact been on a steady attack against Ned Lamont for nearly two months, and continued his attack today. Suggesting that because Ned Lamont disagrees with the Senator regarding our policy in Iraq that he doesn’t understand the threat facing America shows a shocking disregard for the reality of the situation. His continued claims that his website was “hacked” and implication of the Lamont campaign in his internet consultant’s failure to provide quality stability of service demeans a three-term Senator. Frankly, his behavior should be beneath you as well. This type of discourse has no place in civil politics.
Apologize for your attack press release dated August 3, 2006, in which you falsely claim Maria Cantwell “side(s) with her party’s leaders over the interest of our state”. Maria Cantwell has proven throughout her career that she makes up her own mind and is more than willing to work in a bipartisan fashion, when it does in fact serve the interests of our state. As you know, the tax bill Senator Cantwell opposed would have reduced the pay of 120,000 tipped employees in Washington state by $5.50 per hour, nearly $11,000 per year for a full-time employee. That is an enormous pay cut for people already making the least in our economy. Your contention that a letter from a partisan appointee within the Labor Department showed wages would not be cut for tipped employees was in fact undercut by a similar letter sent by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, but even more so by a simple reading of the bill itself. As a former tipped employee, I am more than familiar with this game, and deeply resent the incredibly cynical nature of this legislation, which was never intended by your party’s leadership to pass (See Representative Wamp’s gloating comment from the House floor, “…you’ve seen us really outfox you on this one.”), but was only introduced to provide, in the words of a GOP Congressional Staffer, “like 12 30-second ads sitting around in this bill”. The people of Washington state deserve better than this kind of cynical governance – using the august chambers of our Congress to promote something like this for no more than campaign advertisements cheapens the incredible power in our democracy. This type of thing has no place in civil politics.
Mr. McGavick, I have made no “civility pledge”. I feel no qualms when the Democratic Party uses the tactics pioneered by the GOP to make political points. I make no pretension to be a friend to Republicans or their stance on issues. You, however, have made such a pledge. As a voter and an American, I deeply resent cynicism, unfairness, and false pretenses and in particular the corruption of our government by the ceaseless necessity to score political points. This is a creation of your Party, not mine.
I am always honest about my goals, my biases, and what my words and actions mean. I offer you this opportunity to truly embrace a civil campaign, and in exchange offer my own “civility pledge” – If you can act on the issues I have laid out in this letter, or explain satisfactorily why you cannot, I will “call off the dogs” in my own case, and will expend no further effort towards your defeat. It is not too much to ask – I think people should say what they mean and mean what they say, and I am offering you the opportunity to live up to your own words.
I await your reply.
Humbly,
Switzerblog
Gee, I thought this was a caption contest.
So much for GOP right-wing creativity & NOT shown here.
Welcome to the darkside, McGimmick!
Mike is thinking: “Win this one for us, Dick, and you’ll get Washington State as your own private fuckhole”
JCH, Time for someone to say it…..GO FUCK YOURSELF! You lie about being a doctor, having money and on and on. Unless and until you come forward with your real name, education and qualifications we will assume you to be what, in all reality you are, a pimply-faced, 19 year-old with a computer a hard-on and no idea what to do with either.
Have a nice day!
Carl Grossman
Democrat, Liberal and not giving in until the last drop of blood is gone from my body. Dissent is patriotic. Walking with the masses is just foolish!
Oh! Nice pic: Holden Caulfield at the computer trying to figure out what to do with his hard-on . . . LMAO! Thanks Carl!
Gidget,
There are all kinds of leaders and various leadership styles. What works in the corporate world probably won’t work in the military. What works in one military unit won’t necessarily work in a different type of unit.
Unless you have been in the military, you won’t know what I am talking about. Shuffling papers isn’t what the military does. It might fit your stereotype of what a female in the military does, but unfortunately it’s pretty far from the truth.
Before you get too gung ho about Gov Gregoire becoming the first female President, you better check her leadership style. It’s a definite A Plus – tough, hard, and very demanding. I, personally, don’t have a real problem with her style, but the Democratic party paid for focus groups on her to explore ways to make her more likeable to the public………….
And Hillary and Cantwell have also suffered the same sexual stereotypes!
Smeg: Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 7:26 pm
Gidget,
There are all kinds of leaders and various leadership styles. What works in the corporate world probably won’t work in the military. What works in one military unit won’t necessarily work in a different type of unit.
Exactly. But they all have two things in common: wisdom and decisiveness. Which would you want to eliminate? The military eliminated creativity which is exhibited by your need to have things your way or out. That’s the bullying I’m talking about. Soldiers have to be able to follow orders, esp. in battle. We all know that. That’s what makes Abu Graib so sad. . .
Unless you have been in the military, you won’t know what I am talking about. Shuffling papers isn’t what the military does. It might fit your stereotype of what a female in the military does, but unfortunately it’s pretty far from the truth.
Lots of people get through the military simply shuffling papers. Your over-blowing of everything military is what makes you and your opinions so suspect. That no one could know what you are talking about is a gross overgeneralization.
Before you get too gung ho about Gov Gregoire becoming the first female President, you better check her leadership style. It’s a definite A Plus – tough, hard, and very demanding. I, personally, don’t have a real problem with her style, but the Democratic party paid for focus groups on her to explore ways to make her more likeable to the public………….
Bingo again. She is wise and decisive and I love that about her. I’m a teacher and I have to be decisive yet tempered with wisdom and compassion. But both the wisdom and the decisiveness are absolutely imperative. Not everyone has those qualities – neither in the military or in teaching. But those qualities are what make excellent leaders . . And focus groups were only used by the democrats? I think focus groups have become de rigeur in politics!
And Hilary and Cantwell have also suffered the same sexual stereotypes!
Hilary is not authentic and will not be president . . . Cantwell? Time will tell. I hear she is kind of authoritarian which is different than being decisive. Don’t lump people together . . .
I don’t necessarily have to have things “my way.” I have done things my soldiers’ way many times. I like things done the fastest and the most efficient way possible. I also want it done correctly the first time. When I find something that doesn’t work, I change it. I also tried to learn new things every day.
Having said that, when one of my soldiers fails, my mission won’t fail, because I take over and get the job done.
As for the paper shuffling, very few soldiers spend 30 years in the Army shuffling papers. I didn’t shuffle papers when I was a Drill Sergeant, I didn’t shuffle papers when I was an Instructor, or when I was a Platoon Sergeant, or First Sergeant, or Operations SGT, or when I was a SGM. The “papers” in the military that I dealt with are all actions. Every paper was something that had to be done. I certainly never shuffled papers in the two combat zones I served in either, paperwork wasn’t really important there.
Decision making is an inherent component of leadership. If you can’t make a decision and stand by that decision, you can’t be a good leader.
Smeg: cision making is an inherent component of leadership. If you can’t make a decision and stand by that decision, you can’t be a good leader.
So you will take decisiveness without wisdom? Well, you have it. The Decider does just that. Congratulations.
We libs prefer both and we attempt (not always successfully) to recruit leaders with both characteristics because both are necessary.
“. . . stand by that decision. . . “
When facts change, shouldn’t the decision be reconsidered? I’m not trying to give you a hard time for nothing. I think you need to examine your absolute sureness about everything. That’s the problem I see with conservatives. Too far to the other side, yeah that’s indecisive and dubious . . . don’t want anybody like that either.
Sometimes that’s why libs sound less absolute than conservatives. We see things a little more nuanced . . . a little more globally as we say in teaching.
Stand by that decision means having the guts to stand up and say I made a mistake. If you can change an ongoing action, hell yeah, it should be changed.
If you are talking about Iraq. The military has been making changes since they arrived in that country. Abu Ghraib wasn’t soldiers following orders by the chain of command. The female General in charge of that unit was punished, quite severely for a General Officer too.
Wisdom usually comes with expierence, but yes, you can be a good effective leader without wisdom. It also depends upon what kind of wisdom you are speaking of. General wisdom, book smarts, common sense, knowing every nitpicky detail of a subject. It also depends on the level of the leader and the scope of their responsibility as to what type of wisdom they need.
A President doesn’t need to know everything to be effective, but he/she better have some highly trained advisors/subordinates around them.
JFK got elected with a slogan, among others “Why not the Best and the Brightest?”. Which of course infuriated many conservatives.
But Really how far from this can you get, with a President who doesn’t read newspapers and a Vice-President who gets so drunk he shoots a hunting companion in the face?
Smeg, we are back where we started. . . chasing out tails I guess.
Abu Ghraib wasn’t soldiers following orders by the chain of command. The female General in charge of that unit was punished, quite severely for a General Officer too.
The atmosphere for this behaviour started with Rumsfeld. Karpinski was a scapegoat and so were the a lot of the other underlings. Shame on you.
Wisdom usually comes with expierence, but yes, you can be a good effective leader without wisdom.
That’s just horsepuckey and I don’t think much of you as a leader if you believe it.
It also depends upon what kind of wisdom you are speaking of. General wisdom, book smarts, common sense, knowing every nitpicky detail of a subject. It also depends on the level of the leader and the scope of their responsibility as to what type of wisdom they need.
It is clear you don’t know what you are talking about here. Anybody with a liberal education knows that wisdom can be acquired very young or never acquired at all. Yes, experience has a lot to do with wisdom. Book smarts? Naw. Too many people equate books smarts with wisdom. That shows ignorance. And it doesn’t change from job to job. What you are doing right now is anal-izing.
A President doesn’t need to know everything to be effective, but he/she better have some highly trained advisors/subordinates around them.
Any chief is responsible for those which serve him and for choosing those who serve him/her. Cronies will give you one thing; accredited people with experience will givve something else. The chief is responsible for selecting wisely. Keeps getting back to the beginning doesn’t it?
You don’t need a lot of Wisdom to lead if your responsibility is to supervise two workers mowing lawns…..
The charge that “The atmosphere started with Rumsfield” is incorrect. The units who operated the Abu Ghraib facility before Karpinski’s unit and after her unit, did it very well. Those soldiers were unsupervised by the senior leaders and therefore they got stupid and did a lot of stupid things. The people who were also directly responsible were civilian contractors for military intelligence. Those fools were doing the directing and now the soldiers are doing the time!
Your definition of Wisdom isn’t the only one out there. Wikipedia has quite a few more definitions……..
JFK was a great President!
Smeg: You don’t need a lot of Wisdom to lead if your responsibility is to supervise two workers mowing lawns…..
You need wisdom if you intend to motivate any subordinates to do a job well. You should know that, also.
Your definition of Wisdom isn’t the only one out there. Wikipedia has quite a few more definitions……..
I leave Wikipedia to you. I’ve access to many others . . . If you wish, tell me which definition of wisdom you prefer? Doesn’t mean I will agree with it. Definitions are taken from common usage and are not always correct in the formal sense. Also, Wikipedia is not always right. It is easy, however.
“Hmmmm…., I wonder if my ass will look that good when I destroy my country?”
Brownie, you’re doin’ a heckuva job!
The motivation is different depending on the person involved. Some leaders use negative motivation, some use positive and some don’t use motivation at all.
Some people don’t need motivation to do a job well, they take personal pride in the job that they do, some people won’t respond to any amount of motivation that you use. Everyone is different. And I’m sure you already know that too!
Leadership doesn’t change because employees change. . . leadership is a package that you either have or you don’t. Poor employees out poor leaders. Good employees make poor leaders look good. That should be obvious on its face.
He’s thinking he same thing Ann Coulter would be thinking if she was in his shoes, staring at Buckshot’s backside.
Leadership absolutely changes with the people being led. If you interface with everyone exactly the same way and never change your style of leadership or your approach to leadership, you will not be a successful leader in the long run.
Everyone has different motivations, everyone also learns and acts differently, so treating all the same to the same leadership style wouldn’t be very effective.
Leadership skills are developed and learned, they don’t arrive at birth or some or other magical time. Poor leaders can be molded into good effective leaders.
Former Haliburton CEO Welcomes Insurance Lobbiest To Corporate Greed Club
Commentby sgmmac— 8/14/06@ 6:09 am
Leadership absolutely changes with the people being led. If you interface with everyone exactly the same way and never change your style of leadership or your approach to leadership, you will not be a successful leader in the long run.
Trying to change yourself to meet the expectations of subordinates gives subordinates the greater power . . . and leads to the accusation of unfairness. Good leadership starts with authenticity and consistent expectations for all subordinates. Start changing for different subordinates and you’re going to have a problem! The best thing that can be said about leadership is that it is fair, consistent and that the leader wouldn’t ask anything of the subordinate the leader wouldn’t or couldn’t do as well.
The ability to lead gets honed via the learning process and experience. Obviously, the more a leader leads, the greater the experience quotient. That isn’t just true of leadership. That’s called life, Smeg! This is nothing peculiar to “leadership.”
Everyone has different motivations, everyone also learns and acts differently, so treating all the same to the same leadership style wouldn’t be very effective.
See above . . . authenticity, fairness are crucial to good leadership. Changing to meet the needs of subordinates is called “playing the boss” or “manipulating the leader.” No good, Smeg!
Leadership skills are developed and learned, they don’t arrive at birth or some or other magical time. Poor leaders can be molded into good effective leaders.
This is obvious on its face. So what’s the point? Some people are natural leaders and others need to learn it. Some people are succesesful at learning to lead and others never learn it. Some “poor leaders can be molded into good effective leaders.” You talk as if you think “leadership” is just being able to tell people what to do. You have a very poor opinion of people as illustrated by your various posts. You denigrate them more than honor them. I think that is typical of poor leadership. If you don’t think someone is up to the job, you’ll let them know in your body language and spoken language. That is death to good leadership.
JFK was a great President!
Commentby sgmmac— 8/13/06@ 9:36 pm
JFK was a two-year president. Yes, I liked him . . . but I’m not prepared to set him up on a pedastal. Surely, you can name others . . . you don’t have to like everything they did but surely you can name some who were good leaders . . .
BTW, did you vote for the shrub twice?
Gidget,
Nowhere in my statement did I say that you change your leadership style to meet your subordinates expectations. You said that. You change because people are different and the situations are different.
Have a nice day in the classroom!
Smeg, school’s not in session. It is still summer . . .
You also didn’t say if you voted for the shrub twice. I think you’ve had one experience with leadership and you think you know all. . . I think you don’t.
So. we’ll agree to disagree.
What you or I think of each other is hardly important.
I know what kind of leader I am, my soldiers and my officers knew what of leader I am/was also.
I never claimed to know everything about leadership, no-one does. I don’t think I know everything, I learn new things every day. As for having one leadership expierence, keep dreaming.
I think you like to put a lot of your beliefs onto others and I am wondering if the pot isn’t calling the kettle black with all of this know it all stuff.
No, I didn’t vote for President Bush twice.
So you voted for him once . . . did you vote for Kerry? Did you believe the Swifties?
You sound a little defensive here. . . I’m wondering why.
Gidget,
I didn’t get to vote in 2000. I was in Thailand on a only a couple of days notice, no time for an absentee ballot, so I couldn’t vote. The ARMY does come first.
OMG! You voted for Bush in 2004 . . . after you’d seen four years of the guy?
I”m done with you!
The only other option was Kerry……..
Yeah, can’t have a certified war hero in the race, huh? Especially for you great leaders who know what good leadership is . . . don’t we just have the best!
You lack much wisdom, Smeg.
If I stand back here then he can’t shoot me in the face.
Gidget, we have a Difference of opinion.
I had the wisdom to vote for the best leader. There is no way that I would vote for someone who testified before the US Congress calling all servicemen in Vietnam murderers, rapists, and Ghengis Khan criminals. Most especially when he led some of those soldiers.
And then there was that little Paris trip of his meeting with the North Vietnamese…….
The swifties didn’t have anything to do with it either. Kerry and Fonda rank just about the same in the minds of Vietnam era soldiers and they have been there way before the swifties started doing commercials.
flU7iOOQbnZPK 08XhijgvvrES WhuWnUGmcQAe
222 – Well that’s an interesting comment. I think you have a “circle the wagons” kind of mentality there Sarge. An attack against some of you is an attack against all.
Kerry’s words before the Senate were a quotation of others from the Winter Soldiers conference. It goes without saying that abuses happen in every war so if you go to war, it better be for a damned good reason. Kerry may have gone out on a limb by coming out so strongly against the war but he wasn’t alone by a long shot.
And as a recent LA Times article just discussed, abuses were carried out by just about every Army unit stationed in Vietnam.
Savior of the Clueless,
I don’t know about every unit, but yes I know about the abuses in Vietnam. I even saw some direct evidence of it and heard stories that most sane people would not believe in their lifetime. War is very ugly.
The only objection that I have about Kerry doing what he did, was his audience and his timing. There is a way to change things and a way to make things worse. He made them worse. That’s my opinion and he isn’t pro defense enough for me to vote for. I do have a few issues with the way that he engaged the enemy also, but it was a different war and a different time and the choice has to be the soldier who is there making that split second decision, so I wouldn’t hold that against him.
If I had a choice of Clinton or Bush, I would have voted for Clinton. But Clinton wasn’t an option, and I don’t think I think his wife would get my vote either. We shall see who gets selected for both parties in 08. I will vote for who I think is the best for our country and for the US Military forces.
X0OjBXrYUdvq KhlVM7J4Ez 72Ln526dYAbrJ
iMvgY4Gshj i0Tj5gMfiqzJxy lqPxlcjrugWDDc
YOmjjYTBQo Xbxfm0FIJU 8QwWTBUFVSnj7j
lawsuit lawyer vioxx woodlands
lawyer vioxx wisconsin
merck vioxx recall
vioxx recall attorney
vioxx recall lawsuit
vioxx recall claim
en language recall vioxx
vioxx drug recall
texas vioxx recall
vioxx recall attorney pennsylvania
currant!Frenchmen recasts adjures busses?dragnet laundered generousness shelves!
crafting restroom parry!Catalan,peeper hardware wealthiest!…
multilayer matrimonial Brahms brained depreciation browbeats drifter