Friday, April 29, 2011

Damn the Facts - FULL SPEED AHEAD!


Well! Heavens to Betsy and thank goodness! It's all over! The proof is right there! Finally we can put this whole nasty question of the geography of Barack Obama's birth behind us and get on with the business at hand, right? Right???

Oh, ye of
such abundant faith.

We have had the evidence in the palms of our hands since the day Barack Obama announced his candidacy four years ago: There was the standard, state-issued birth certificate - which should have settled the issue right then and there. Then there was the August 9, 1961 edition of the Honolulu Advertiser, clearly announcing the birth - in Honolulu (which as we all know is part of the United States) - of the future president of the United States. Finally the other day the president threw up his hands and released the "certificate.of live birth" (as opposed to the perfectly legitimate "long form" version). This was the document that was signed by the doctor and certified by the state of Hawaii within minutes of baby Barack's birth. You would think that this would be enough to convince these nitwits, wouldn't you? As a matter of pathetic fact, you would think that this would be more than enough - that the matter could now be mercifully put to rest once and for all.

Think again.

In the 2008 presidential campaign, of the candidates from the two major political parties, only one of them was born in the United States of America - Barack Oba
ma. John McCain was born in Panama. Do you find it as curious as I do that it is the black guy who has had his citizenship called into question? I'm sure that that's just a coincidence though. I'm sure that the man's race has not a thing to do with it.

AUTHOR'S NOTE:
I just made a twenty dollar bet with myself that I could write that last sentence and keep a straight face. I lost.

There was Orly Taitz, the so-called "Queen of the birthers", on MSNBC's The Last word with Laurence O'Donnell, desperately trying to keep the lie alive. O'Donnell gave this idiotic woman a chance to show some real class by admitting that, yes, the certificate is official; Barack Obama was born in the USA. And yet she just couldn't bring herself to do it. Oily Orly has made quite a bitchin' bundle of cash in the last two years from her persecution of the tru
th. As someone once noted, it's easy for people not to understand the obvious when their paychecks depend upon them not understanding it.

Not that it makes a damned bit of difference, but Orly Taitz (the supposed "expert" on what it takes to be a honest-to-goodness, true-blue American) was born in Russia and raised in Israel - not that that makes any difference.

A cottage industry has risen from the depths of our otherwise screwed economy. This is an industry that caters to the "birther" movement. On her MSNBC program the other night (I like MSNBC - can you tell?) Rachel Maddow took amusing note of the right wing website, "World Net Daily". One of their links is called the "World Net Daily Super Store" which offers for purchase scads of really neat stuff - books, videos, bumper stickers, cocktail napkins, tea cozies - that cater to the proposition that our president is actually a foreign born A-Rab Kenyan. They definitely have a vested interest in keeping the lie's flame burning brightly. Let it shine.

What I wonder is how the release of the certificate of live birth is going to effect the opinio
ns of regular people who are registered to vote as Republicans. At last count, a depressingly huge number of them - nearly two thirds - either don't believe that President Obama was born here or they're just not sure. In my neck of the woods even Republicans (a bare majority of them anyway) are smart and reasonable people. I imagine this latest news will settle the matter for most of them. I'm not quite as optimistic as far as other regions of the country are concerned. I suspect that it will continue to be business-as-usual in states like Texas, South Carolina and Mississippi. Those places are beyond hope. That is as it should be. We need the laughs. We really do.

Of every Republican politician I've seen interviewed thus far, although none of them have come out and said "I am not convinced", not one of these bastards has had the basic decency to say "I am". They're not going to let go. The implication that the president of the United States is not a citizen of those United States - as far as they're concerned - shall remain. They don't give a shit about what's good for America. They never have.

This should be interesting.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

AFTERTHOUGHT:

While I've been writing this, the Morning Joe program has been covering the wedding of William and Kate. I've never been a "Royal Watcher"; I've always been indifferent to them. But I'm forced to admit that this is hard to ignore. They seem like nice kids. Ooooooh! They just kissed on the balcony of Buckingham Palace! I'M POSITIVELY GIDDY!!! Back to the real world....

SUGGE
STED READING:

The River of Doubt
by Candice Millard

In the late winter of 1914 former President Theodore Roosevelt signed on to take part in an expedition, the purpose of which was to map an uncharted river that snaked its way through the Amazon jungle. He almost never made it back alive. When he emerged from the jungle's interior four months later, he had lost a quarter of his body weight and was suffering from malaria. It is believed that the experience took years off his life. He died less than five years later on January 6, 1919 at age sixty. This is an absolutely riveting book that I could not put down. If your local Library has it on its shelves, grab it.

BREAKING NEWS, 5/2/11: Osama bin Laden has been killed.

President Barack Obama ordered the military action to proceed that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden yesterday. It will be interesting to see how the uber right wing will attempt to deflect any credit this president deserves for getting the job done. This should also bring Obama's approval rating up a notch or two. The conservatives media machine will be working overtime in the weeks to come bringing it back down again.

Here's something you can take to the bank:

Within less than a week, a whole new cottage industry will arise from our otherwise screwed economy that will deny that Osama bin Laden has been killed; that the president manufactured this whole thing to bring his approval ratings up; that Osama was actually killed by the Bush administration four - five - whatever - years ago. I can just hear them now:

"SHOW ME THE DEATH CERTIFICATE!"

"THEY THREW HIS BODY INTO THE SEA? HOW CONVENIENT!!!"

Fasten your seat belts, boys and girls! Here come the Deathers!

117 Comments:

At 6:32 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Ah c'mon, Tom, you know the Right never lets the facts get in the way of their underlying racism.

 
At 7:25 AM, Blogger Gypsy Bob said...

Was Hawaii a State in 1961? There appears to be some doubt. If you factor in the time zone difference over the years Obama was really born on August 4, 1955! This is prior to Hawaii's statehood. THE CASE IS NOT CLOSED! The Birth Certificate contains another Fatal Flaw; nowhere in the document is Earth listed as Obama's home planet! WE WONT GET FOOLED AGAIN!

 
At 7:29 AM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Hawaii became a state in 1959. You bring up an interesting point, Gypsy Bob: What if Obama had been born prior to 1959. Can you imagine the fuss these assholes would be making?

Cheers!

 
At 8:18 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

They produced the only possible qualification Obama may have to be POTUS. Now we all can focus on his abject incompetence.

 
At 8:32 AM, Blogger tnlib said...

Not so fast, botox. Here is a list of 9 - that's nine - sites that prove Obama is a citizen and they've been around since Day One.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/apr/27/links-documents-involving-president-obama/

Why don't you start a blog where you can spew your ignorant hatred instead of always making such a monumental ass of yourself here?

 
At 9:17 AM, Blogger Dearest Friend said...

Haven't you heard? Stanley Ann was a pharaoh's sister who found the baby Barack floating near the coast in a tiny wicker basket amongst some bulrushes...wait, I think I saw that movie...there again, a case of is he or isn't he? Moses, Egyptian or...?

Maybe there's a tiny baby footprint to go with the official birth certificate, if it matches the President's footprint - they'll shut up? I doubt it though!

 
At 9:33 AM, Blogger Donna Cusano said...

Well done Tom. I dind't know John MacCain was born in panama. Is there proof?

 
At 9:49 AM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Yeah, Donna. They said that the fact that he was born in a military hospital means he was born on American soil. Fine. I've no argument with that. However, I doubt they would have cut Obama the same slack had that been the case for him.

Loved your new piece, by the way! Everyone, check out Donna's new blog:

http://www.donnacusano.blogspot.com

It's fantastic!

 
At 9:55 AM, Blogger Harley A. said...

“Finally , the other day the president threw up his hands and released the "long form" certificate. This was the original document that was signed by the doctor and certified by the state of Hawaii within minutes of baby Barack's birth.”

Shouldn’t he have done that day one? I’m not saying he isn’t a US citizen, but why be so coy about it? Why did it take years for him to produce it? I see two basic choices. Either there are questions about his citizenship – or he was just being a jerk about the whole thing.

 
At 10:01 AM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Well, Harley, the way I see it, he didn't have to prove himself. The birth certificate has been available for years. No other president in history had ever had the geography of his birth called into question. Why should he be the first?

Also there is the case of the August 9, 1961 announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser. It's there for all to see. That could not possibly have been forged.

All the best,

Tom Degan

 
At 10:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JG, underlying racism? Since when is the question about a person birth certificate racism, underlying or overlying?

 
At 10:41 AM, Blogger tnlib said...

Slight correction. Meant to say:

Because Obama is the ONLY president who's citizenship has ever been questioned and there are other presidents - all white - who either weren't born in this country or whose parents weren't born here. Now, let's see, ummm, why would this be called racism?

 
At 11:18 AM, Blogger charles moore said...

Tom, thanks for taking on this subject. To the doubters who always manage to twist everything, I have to say that while I read every Rant, I have stopped reading the comments as I just can no longer stomach the asinine stupidity of some of them. BUT, having said that, I will read the comments for this one to see to what lengths the unconvinced will go to try and disprove the official birth certificate.

Orly Taitz on O'Donnell? Great TV. One of the funniest things I have seen in years.

And thanks for plugging The River of Doubt. Definitely one of the best adventure stories I have ever read.

 
At 11:44 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, you asked...

"JG, underlying racism? Since when is the question about a person [sic] birth certificate racism, underlying or overlying?"

When the question shouldn't have been an issue at all, and when lies upon lies by the Right concerning this non-issue consumed the American airwaves for months. Underlying racism cloaks itself in the justification for non-equal treatment, either overtly or subtlety (as in this case), when the treatment wouldn't normally be an issue. Even now, with the proof as tangible and factual as possible, many on the Right still want to "look into it".

But, it goes with the territory. Racism and ignorance go hand-in-hand, and conservatives continually prove to have more than their share of both.

 
At 12:15 PM, Blogger Gypsy Bob said...

Now that we all know Obama is a citizen we must deal with the other outstanding rumor: The President is alleged to be a Negro.

Even the Reverend Fartin Lutheran King would roll over in his grave at the thought of the average American voting for a colored for the highest office in the land.

If Obama was a negroid he would be married to a white woman...case closed.

 
At 1:03 PM, Blogger De_Bill said...

Actually, there are two separate components in the birther movement: the ones who desperately want to believe that no black person could possibly be qualified to be President, and the cynical ones who could care less, but are more than happy to profit from their stupidity.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."
---John Stuart Mill

 
At 1:06 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

tnlib
I recognize that Obama is a citizen. Birth certificate is enough. His citizenship is his only qualification. He has not demonstrated the ability to handle the responsibilities of the office.

Obama lies and people die.
Obama blood for oil.
Unemployment and perpetual recession.
etc.
etc.

 
At 1:11 PM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

I concede your point with respect to this president, boltok, but tell me, when Bush was in the White House (either of them) were you reciting that little chant then?

All the best,

Tom Degan

 
At 1:34 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

I endorsed fully Afghanistan, not Iraq. I thought strategically the best thing was to let Iraq and Iran fight with each other in perpetuity and threaten Saddam to keep him in his place. I have no problem retaliating for 9/11. I supported assisting Kuwait.

I really do think that dems have more blood on there hands than repubs. Bush, for whatever his convictions, believed that these war were the right thing to do, agree or not. Democrats voted along and perpetuate these wars out of political expediency. Every name brand dem except a couple voted for Iraq. Voting for war for political cover is a higher war crime than any that can be ascribed to bush.

It seems like Trump is becoming the anti war candidate.

 
At 2:11 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

The racism thing is DOA. Is there racism? Of course. But, there was as much or more racism in the ranks of his supporters, explicitly championing him as a black man – and that’s their right. More importantly, it is not the substance of the issue – it is political, not racial. Political people find potential weaknesses and pick at them, regardless of merit – that’s what they do. He is not immune because he is black. You think Trump is racist – or do you think he just found out about the issue a month ago? No, he has political interest (God help us) and now is joining the fun. I think you are seeing something that’s not there.

 
At 3:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great Rant, Tom. How sad that we are still discussing this 4 yrs later. Sigh....

Like Charles Moore, I never miss a rant but have only lightly scanned the comments lately. Thank you JG and others who make intelligent rebuttals to the un-informed. I have no such patience for them and I appreciate your thorough knowledge of history and facts.

 
At 3:47 PM, Blogger Darlene said...

I, too , have stopped reading the comments by the ignorant and uninformed. Why bother to answer them because they don't, or won't, understand logic or facts. I have better use of my time. Jefferson's Guardian always answers the dolts with well thought out logic, correct grammar and spelling and I admire his tenacity. I prefer ignoring them and not giving them a platform to feed their insatiable egos. I wish they would just go away.

 
At 3:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So let me get this straight, it's racism to ask for Obamas b.c. because he is the only president to have ever been asked that question?

Since it was the Clinton's, who are not right wing, who first questioned the need for a b.c. does that mean they and those who supported them are racists? Are they and their followers ignorant?

What proof can you offer to support your belief that Obama is the only President whose citizenship was questioned?

About the white racism, if race mattered in this election, then why did more whites for for Obama than against him?
If it's all about racism, how come more blacks voted for Obama than they did white McCain? That sounds pretty racist to me.
Racism is no longer the liberal trump (no pun intended) card as it was in the past. If it were not so, then a Obama would not be the 1st black President.
While I think the whole B.C. issue was stupid and a waste of time, those who had the question should not be painted with the Clinton's dirty paint brush of racism.

 
At 4:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another example of bitter clinger's getting what's coming to them.
Power to the people!
Blame Bush.
Tax the rich into poverty!


Lahore (AsiaNews/Agencies) — Anti-Christian violence continues in Pakistan, after Easter was celebrated in memory of Shahbaz Bhatti, the country’s Minority Affairs minister assassinated in March. Yesterday, an extremist group ambushed a Protestant clergyman travelling with his family, seriously wounding his 24-year-old son. A few days ago, a young Christian woman was abducted and raped over several days by a man claiming to be a police officer. After she was let go, he fled without leaving a trace.

Two members of Tehreek-e-Ghazi Bin Shaheed (TGBS), an extremist Muslim group, attacked a Protestant clergyman and his family. The incident occurred near the town of Hamza, near Lahore (Punjab). The pastor’s 24-year-old son sustained serious injuries. The clergyman himself had received threats and demands for money a few weeks earlier.

Rev Ashraf Paul, 55, and his family were driving down Ferozepur Road. At one point, two men on motorbikes intercepted the vehicle, firing at the clergyman’s car, which was hit at least five times. His 24-year-old son, Sarfaz, was critically wounded.

The two suspects, aged 19 to 21, fled the scene right after the attack. Their identity is unknown, but in addition to police, activists from the Center for Legal Aid Assistance and Settlement (CLAAS) are on the case.

 
At 4:31 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

Darlene,
You have yet to substantiate anything you say. You are a typical liberal that applies labels to anyone with whom you disagree. Avoiding a debate is probably the correct strategy for you. You, more than anyone, criticize other's intelligence. What do you hold a phd in???

 
At 5:06 PM, Anonymous Anne said...

Tom, you stated that... "Also there is the case of the August 9, 1961 announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser. It's there for all to see. That could not possibly have been forged."

I am sure that the Honolulu Advertiser must have anticipated that there would be this controversy over the validity of a U.S. President 45 years ago. I am also just as sure that the editors must have fabricated it all back then for this very purpose. All part of the conspiracy theory.

 
At 2:04 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Boltok its better to be a typical liberal than the Cheerleader in Chief for the Billionaires Liberation Front. To rise to such an esteemed position it must be difficult as i can't imagine the dribble you come out with in every posting must be difficult to wipe off your chin. Keep up the good work, life just wouldn't be the same without the crap you subscribe to as political conversation.

Den fron Oz

 
At 7:23 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

Den
I simply said that I am glad we have established Obama's citizenship so we can now focus on his distinguished record.

Unlike you and your peers, I try not to use the ape logic: Losers good, successful bad, fleece anyone with anything mentality.

 
At 8:55 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Boltok, you addressed to Den from Oz...

"Unlike you and your peers, I try not to use the ape logic: Losers good, successful bad, fleece anyone with anything mentality."

"Ape logic"? That's a new one on me. Please, try to explain that term more fully for us...if you can. (Be careful, though, and don't step in it.)

That's what I love about the Right: you and your kind always act so sanctimonious and only see the world in black and white, rich and poor, good and evil, and ultimately worthy and not worthy. You have no sense of justice and what's good for society-at-large -- absolutely none. You think a "free market" is the panacea for each and every societal problem, and refuse to acknowledge that "capitalism" -- the kind that dominates the world at-large -- doesn't work except for a select minority (and even for that minority the clock is ticking).

Listen, Boltok, nobody's calling for the fleecing of "anybody with anything", as you put it (and I can only believe you're referring to the elite rich -- the top two-percent, in addition to the multinational behemoths that are stealing us blind), but we are expecting them to pay their fair share. If that "fair share" means much higher tax rates, yes, by all means! The uber-rich in this country, and most multinational corporations, were only able to get that way through the generosity of the middle- and working-class tax-payer funded military-industrial-congressional complex. Without it, and this empire's adventurous militarism around world, they could never have attained the wealth (and scope of power) that they take advantage of right now. That's a fact.

Read John Perkins's Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. He was a former, and very respected, member of the international banking community. He was "one of yours", Boltok, and in this revealing book he spills the beans. He tells exactly how empire (our government) and multinational banking and corporate interests worked hand-in-hand to cheat poor countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could possibly repay, and then taking over their economies. He explains, precisely, how "free markets" and "capitalism" work today.

It's no wonder our government is hated by so many around the world, and it's not because of our "freedom" (as dumbass Bush made a point of saying on more that one occasion), that's for sure.

 
At 11:20 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

JG
Not feeling like a full rebuttal. Look at Darlene and Dens labeling, is that an example of the open minded intellectual debate propensity of the left that you allude to.

Also, please list for me the countries, other than the USA, that give a shit about whether other countries like them and base their policies on international affection. The nonsense you sometimes speak. Notice the sometimes qualifier.

 
At 12:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JG,
You have a lot of nerve! Recommending a book to read, when you refuse to read a book suggested to you.
Typical, so typical, closed minded, American liberal.
Hypocrite!

 
At 12:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey lefties, Sharia Law, it can never happen here? Wanna bet! Remember, Sharia Law is the same law that allows the burning alive of homosexuals!

ENJOY your folly.

U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri Richard Callahan visited the Islamic Foundation of Greater St. Louis last night to address the fears and frustrations of Muslim Americans who worry they are being racially profiled and wiretapped — and to assure them that the Missouri Legislature’s attempts to ban Sharia law from being considered in state courts here could face Constitutional challenges.

Seated in front of a large Muslim audience during a town hall-style meeting at the Ballwin mosque, Callahan anchored a panel that included fellow federal attorneys (one of whom was Muslim American), as well as three members of the FBI.

“There is a worse kind of Muslim hatred recently,” said Adil Imdad, one of the event’s organizers. “Especially in the last two years, Islamophobia and fear-mongering have been spreading like wildfire, and it’s causing a lot of stress for our youth.”

The problem is now hitting a little closer to home, said Imdad, pointing to three bills currently circulating through the state legislature that seek to limit Sharia law (Islamic law) in Missouri courts. Sharia law could come into play in rulings considering child custody or prisoner rights for Muslims. As we’ve reported, the bills have become a source of controversy.

Callahan responded by hinting that, should anti-Sharia legislation get passed by the Missouri Legislature, it could be overturned by the federal courts. “The Department of Justice has a good history of challenging laws passed by state legislatures,” he said. “If some laws are passed, I think you will see challenges by the federal government on the constitutionality of them.”

 
At 1:04 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

“That's what I love about the Right: you and your kind always act so sanctimonious and only see the world in black and white”

That statement is not only black and white, it is sanctimonious.

Oops.

 
At 2:10 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Good one, Harley, but why not finish my sentence as it was intended to read?

The truth is tough to deal with, isn't it? You know I'm right.

 
At 2:35 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Boltok, you addressed to me...

"Not feeling like a full rebuttal."

Not "feeling like", or not able to justifiably give one?

You continued with more nonsense...

"Also, please list for me the countries, other than the USA, that give a shit about whether other countries like them and base their policies on international affection."

I'm not aware that the United States has ever based foreign policy upon "affection". You should know, being an "economist", that foreign policy has for several decades been framed and dictated based upon the desires of the international banking and multinational corporate communities. That's exactly why we're having to endure "Bush III" as the "head" of government today. Should he lose his coveted position in 2012, you can rest assured his Republican opponent will be none other than "Bush IV".

 
At 2:52 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

"Anonymous", you brazenly claimed...

"You have a lot of nerve! Recommending a book to read, when you refuse to read a book suggested to you."

Browns44, is that you, hiding under an "anonymous" moniker since you last made it quite clear to all of Tom's readership that you're a bigot and a racist?

I'd hide, too, if I made the sort of claims you did.

By the way, are you still upset that I won't read that book by Thomas Sowell? ;-)

 
At 5:13 PM, Anonymous Donald Trump said...

After stating that our nation has more important issues than questioning the legitimacy of his birth certificate, our young smooth talking president then left town for Chitown to film an episode with Oprah. Yes that was very important! Who is the real carnival barker? Did Obama bring his teleprompter for the interview?

I just want to ask all the liberal posters here, Where is the Hope and Change?

 
At 5:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff Guard,
Another book you wont read, this one by Thomas Sowell? That's two you have closed your liberal mind to.
I bet the only reason you wont read Sowell's book is because he is black!
Liberal racism at it's best.

 
At 6:15 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, you mistakenly said...

"I bet the only reason you wont [sic] read Sowell's book is because he is black!"

No, Anonymous, you're wrong (as usual). The reason I will not waste my time reading Sowell's work is because he's an advocate of laissez-faire economics, and his political outlook is generally classified as libertarian -- neither of which I believe to be in the best interests of our country, or the world, right now.

While in school, I was force-fed enough of Milton Friedman's laissez-faire and monetarism theory to choke a horse. Mr. Sowell is in the same boat, so I have no need to waste my time on obsolete economic thought. Besides, he's spent (as has his colleague, Mr. Friedman) too much time at the Hoover Institute, which has been influential in the American conservative and libertarian movements. So, why on earth would I want to spend my limited time reading his dribble?

I've heard it all before, already, and we've seen its repercussions over the last thirty years. It doesn't work...well, it doesn't work unless you count yourself within the top two-percent.

 
At 8:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

'The reason I will not waste my time reading Sowell's work is because he's an advocate of laissez-faire economics, and his political outlook is generally classified as libertarian -- neither of which I believe to be in the best interests of our country, or the world, right now." Jeff Guard
How do you know unless you read his book? Racist!

 
At 10:20 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, you stupidly said...

"How do you know unless you read his book? Racist!"

I think I made it abundantly clear exactly why I will not waste my time reading Sowell's work, but since you're obviously incapable of understanding sentences that are written beyond that of a simple structure, please allow me to reply, once again, in simple sentences (for your very simple mind):

(1) Sowell believes in laissez-faire economics. I don't.

(2) Sowell believes in libertarianism. I don't.

Hai capito?

 
At 7:43 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

JG
Read you own nonsense. You implied that the USA should be overly concerned with how other nations "feel" about us. You are the one preoccupied with what other nation's think of us. Sometimes I think you may be smart; sometimes not so much.

Sowell is the type a person of African American the left wants to quarantine. The left needs to keep that group dependent on their policies. Can’t afford to lose that voting bloc. The irony, of course, is that left loves building planned parenthood clinics in the inner city. I still haven’t figured that one out.

Why should anyone read anything that they may not agree with?

Of course you don’t believe in libertarianism. Libertarianism is the antithesis of liberalism. Lefties hate individual rights. They thing their clan is more intelligent that the rest and that they have license to trounce on individual liberties and property rights. They detest the US Constitution. Those damn negative rights.

 
At 9:16 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Boltok, you amazingly said...

"You implied that the USA should be overly concerned with how other nations "feel" about us."

I never implied anything of the sort. If you'll refer back to my statement, I said, and I quote: "It's no wonder our government is hated by so many around the world [because we "cheat poor countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars...", directly from the previous paragraph], and it's not because of our 'freedom'."

Really, Boltok, I thought you'd be able to make that not-so-subtle connection, but apparently I was overly confident in your ability to read and comprehend. I guess I'll take the blame for that. (Gee, am I going to have to keep my sentence structure extra-simple, as I've started doing for Anonymous, for you also?)

Incredibly, you also offered this...

"Of course you don’t believe in libertarianism. Libertarianism is the antithesis of liberalism."

No, I disbelieve libertarianism because it's the antithesis of sustainability.

And then you offered this jackpot of an absurd statement...

"Lefties hate individual rights."

That's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it? The Left, as a matter of fact, has always been the champion of human rights, justice and privacy. It's the Right that has always felt the need to trample on these (and the list is endless). Now, granted, I'll concede this issue to your side: you've always championed the rights of multinational corporations over those of individuals and workers. That's a given.

 
At 9:20 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

PART II

...and you continued with this whopper...

They thing [sic] their clan is more intelligent that [sic] the rest and that they have license to trounce on individual liberties and property rights.

Well, yes, that's because we are more intelligent -- if you count intelligence as being more open-minded and broad-minded; having the ability to resort to the skilled use of reason, or to think abstractly, or to see or read complex or complicated information, decipher and interpret that information, and finally come to a logical and rational conclusion. Yes, if that's what you mean by intelligence, I agree -- liberals do tend to be much more intelligent than conservatives.

And finally, probably the singular most unintelligent proclamation of all...

"They detest the US Constitution."

Once again, similar to the idiom I referred to above, I'll use another that may have more meaning for you: "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" Sound familiar?

 
At 10:03 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

JG
How are you more open minded when all the commenters on this page implore people with different opinions to leave and arrogantly apply demeaning labels without support. You're so open minded you won't read Sowell's book.

WTF is sustainability in your mind? Is it a bunch of liberal jackasses invading all aspects of other's lives to accommodate an arrogant need for power.

I forgot. Life is not sustainable with evil corporations.

 
At 10:52 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Boltok, you accusingly asked...

"How are you more open minded when all the commenters on this page implore people with different opinions to leave and arrogantly apply demeaning labels without support."

Well, you're half right. I admit there hasn't been anyone from your side asking or hoping someone would leave. But as far as pure arrogance, where the arrogance is based upon lies and deception instead of truth and facts, you and your side take the cake. Again, I refer back to my previous idiom about the pot and the kettle. Remember that one?

Then you continued your stupid line of questioning, when I've already responded -- twice!

"You're so open minded you won't read Sowell's book."

Again, please refer back to my previous comments. I believe I've answered your question truthfully and thoroughly. Please stop being redundant.

 
At 10:55 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

PART II

Then you angrily asked the following...

"WTF is sustainability in your mind? Is it a bunch of liberal jackasses invading all aspects of other's lives to accommodate an arrogant need for power.[sic]"

Taken directly from Wikipedia under, of all things, "Sustainability" [bold print my own -- for emphasis]: Sustainability is the capacity to endure. In ecology, the word describes how biological systems remain diverse and productive over time. Long-lived and healthy wetlands and forests are examples of sustainable biological systems. For humans, sustainability is the potential for long-term maintenance of well being, which has environmental, economic, and social dimensions. Sustainability interfaces with economics through the social and ecological consequences of economic activity.

And you followed with the statement I hoped you would...

"I forgot. Life is not sustainable with evil corporations."

Exactly! Now you're talkin'!

 
At 11:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff Guard,
Have you read the books of Clarence Thomas or Herman Cain, or J.C. Watts?
Bet not, because they were written by Black Men and you are a racist and will not read them.
Hypocrite!

 
At 11:40 AM, Blogger Gale Starr said...

The problem with all the questions about Obama's birth certificate is that there was never any legitimate, fact-based reason to doubt where he was born. Birthers used half-truths and at times resorted to just simply making stuff up, but all the facts always pointed to Obama being a natural-born citizen. So the motivation behind the birthers was not to 'find the truth', because the truth was already known. No, their motivation was and always has been to subvert the Democratic process and 'undo' the election because they didn't like the result.

 
At 12:02 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, once again you've astounded me with your brilliance [sarcasm, just in case you didn't pick that up] by writing...

"Have you read the books of Clarence Thomas or Herman Cain, or J.C. Watts? Bet not, because they were written by Black Men and you are a racist and will not read them."

Nope...for the same reason I'd never read anything by Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito or John Roberts; Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin or Pat Buchanan; or Steve Largent, Jim Bunning or Jack Kemp. It has nothing to do with their race, but everything to do with their pro-corporatist politics.

Anonymous, go crawl back under your rock -- before I step on you.

 
At 12:04 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Gale Starr, you're totally correct. Plus, it's because they're closet-racists, and probably can't even admit it to themselves.

 
At 1:10 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

JG
I was looking at some liberally managed city/state sustainability achievements. Examples include: non coastal New England, Cali, Baltimore, Gary, Detroit, Chicago, DC, etc., etc. What ever you liberal geniuses devise under the auspice of sustainability, I am sure that in most cases I desire the opposite approach.

 
At 1:30 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Boltok, you said...

"...I am sure that in most cases I desire the opposite approach."

And what might that be? Please...enlighten me.

 
At 1:31 PM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Words that should be etched in stone, Gail Star! Now what the heck did I do with my chisel?

Keep em' comin'!

All the best,

Tom Degan

 
At 2:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff Guard,
So as in typical liberal fashion, you have made your mind up about what authors have said before you even read their works.
Afraid of having your beliefs challenged? Or is it because you re a liberal hypocrite racist?
Have you ever read these writer's works?
Walter Williams
Kevin Jackson
John N McWhorter
Larry Elder
Ward Connerly
Anglia McGowen
Thomas Nelson
Star Parker.

Of course not,
don't dare to do you?
So for all you liberal patter about being opened minded and about the little man vs. the rich how come you cant read books by Black American,must be their race that offends you.

 
At 3:15 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Actually, Anonymous, I've read the works of many black authors over the years, and have been heavily influenced and inspired by not only what they wrote, but also their actions and convictions. As far as those you mention, I admit I haven't read anything by them -- much less heard of them (well, most of them). But, I'd probably not be remiss in stating that you haven't either.

Copy-and-paste is an easy, yet transparent, way for illiterates, like yourself, to attempt to convince others that you're well-read and versed in educational pursuits beyond playing video-games and watching reality TV. But you haven't fooled me.

No, I'm not offended by race, not at all. But, I am offended by you.

Like I previously said, crawl back under your rock and stay there. You might get hurt sparring with adults.

 
At 3:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff Guard,
I offend you? How do you know I'm not black?

 
At 4:12 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

JG
You're sounding more like MO every day.

 
At 4:15 PM, Blogger Gale Starr said...

I'm rather surprised you didn't bring up Alan Keyes or Michael Savage sycophant Ellis Washington, Anonymous. Most of your choices do seem to have come from World Nut Daily--hardly the most reputable of sources.

 
At 4:17 PM, Blogger Gale Starr said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 4:28 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, you said...

"Jeff Guard, I offend you? How do you know I'm not black?"

It doesn't matter whether you're black, white, yellow, green, or polka-dot. It's not your race that offends me, it's your stupidity.

 
At 4:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff Guard,
Mychal Massie, is someone you should check out. You can best reach him at his website:
mychal-massie.com
If you are as opened minded as you claim conservatives are not, you will figure out a way to go there without a hyper link.
If you don't go it has to be because you are a racist and will not take seriously a black persons views as, you admit "I haven't read anything by them -- much less heard of them (well, most of them). Then you try to deflect your own short comings by stating that you would "be remiss in stating that you haven't either."
Nice try but again, a "FAIL" on the grandest scale. You simply can not deflect from the fact that while you claim to have "read the works of many black authors over the years." You don't site one.
Further, you too closed minded to beleive that all Black Americans do not beleive the same as you. You treat Blacks like the DNC does every election, just call the other side racist to get their attenton, promise them something for their vote. Then you refuse to examine the results that your liberal policy's have had on the American black, when given a list of writers who could do so.

That is institutionalized liberal racism at is very best!

 
At 4:32 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Boltok, you said to me...

"You're sounding more like MO every day."

Thank you! I consider that a compliment. You should strive to attain such intelligence and understanding.

 
At 4:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why JG, you seem to be running from your own post, the 1st post on this string, which I will cut and paste for you to read.

"Ah c'mon, Tom, you know the Right never lets the facts get in the way of their underlying racism."

Could the same be said about you, J.G., since you refuse to examine the life's experience facts of American Blacks. Isn't their view point important to you or do you know what Blacks know and believe cause your read some books? Why not broaden your experience and wisdom and read just a few more?
Is it because you are a racist who thinks all Blacks are the same? Easier to keep them in their place that way, isn't it J.G.?

 
At 4:42 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Gale, you mentioned the World Nut Daily.

How appropriate. ;-) You're new here, and already you're catching on to their...let's say..."special challenges".

Welcome aboard!

 
At 4:55 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, once again you speak like a fool (which, is no surprise).

You conclude with...

"Is it because you are a racist who thinks all Blacks are the same?"

No, it's because I'm a realist who knows right-wing nuts are all the same. My prejudices are equal-opportunity -- it doesn't matter your nationality, color, religion or creed, if you talk and act like a lunatic, then you are one.

 
At 5:01 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JG & Gale

Take a look at these two books that might open your minds to the failures of liberalism for the American Black.

"Up from Slavery"
Booker T Washington

"Negrophilia"
Erick Rush.

Unless of course you are both too much of a closed minded liberal racist.

 
At 5:11 PM, Blogger Gale Starr said...

Anon,

I've read Booker T Washington. And as for Erik Rush, after reading one of his columns in which he basically advocated treason charges and the death penalty for anyone with political views that differed from his own, I decided that he was definitely not all there in a mental sense. Which is probably why he writes for WND. So I'll pass on his little gem, thanks.

 
At 5:25 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, have you read either book?

I've read some of Washington's works -- long ago. Why do you say his book points out "the failures of liberalism for the American Black"?

I wasn't real familiar with Rush (except for Rush Limbaugh...hmmm.), but after reading Gale's glowing review, I too think I'll abstain.

 
At 8:43 PM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "Since it was the Clinton's, who are not right wing, who first questioned the need for a b.c. does that mean they and those who supported them are racists? Are they and their followers ignorant?"
Racist? Maybe. Blindly Tribal? Yes.
Also, it was not "the Clintons". It was, instead:
...first concocted by renegade members of the original Obama haters, Party Unity My Ass, known more commonly by their acronym, the PUMAs. They were a splinter group of hard-core Hillary Clinton supporters who did not want to give up the ghost after the bitter 50-state Bataan Death March to the 2008 Democratic nomination. (via thedailybeast)

"About the white racism, if race mattered in this election, then why did more whites for for Obama than against him?"
43% of the white vote is a majority now? Have the laws of mathematics been repealed?

Anonymous "Take a look at these two books that might open your minds to the failures of liberalism for the American Black.'Up from Slavery' Booker T Washington'"...
Available for $2 from Amazon.com.
(Spoiler alert: Mr Washington was criticized for being too accomodating with the segregationalists. In other words, their failure to him was, from their point of view, his willingness to compromise to those who, pretty much by definition, wouldn't. See: 'Du Bois')

"'Negrophilia' Erick Rush"
First, "Erik Rush".
Second, O_O
Third, Hypothesis; America is too in love with African-Americans, and are too scared to criticize them (even Obama, who they see as "incapable of corruption"). Did you know, for example, that there are too many black people in roles as competent people on television?
Also, since we're on a WND tear, *Ahem*.

 
At 11:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

WHAT do you know Modusoperandi. you don't even live in the US?
What was the % of blacks that votEd for OBAMA? 99.9%. Ever wonder why such a high per cent?

 
At 12:29 AM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "WHAT do you know Modusoperandi. you don't even live in the US?"
Clearly facts change once one crossed the borders. National Relativism. Kudos. You've torn asunder the very fabric of the universe.

"What was the % of blacks that votEd for OBAMA? 99.9%."
96% or so, actually.

"Ever wonder why such a high per cent?"
Because African Americans tend not to vote for the Party of "nigger baiting"?

 
At 8:22 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

I am aghast! How could Obama order the death of the Bin Laden. He was not given his day in a New York City court room. The information that led to his capture likely came from waterboarding and the like at Guantanamo. Obama is trampling on the constitution. Is there no end to the lies and butchery of this president. You should all be outraged.

Where in the hell is the ACLU on this. Where is Eric Holder to demand due process for this man. I am mad as hell.

 
At 11:45 AM, Anonymous bamstersslave said...

"Within less than a week, a whole new cottage industry will arise from our otherwise screwed economy that will deny that Osama bin Laden has been killed; that the president manufactured this whole thing to bring his approval ratings up; that Osama was actually killed by the Bush administration four - five - whatever - years ago. I can just hear them now"

You're right Tom, isn't that's how the game is played, throw enough stuff against the wall to see what sticks? Maybe we can beat you at your own game. I am shocked to see patriotic liberals who also speak so lovingly of our brave members of the military and CIA. Ten years ago any chants of "USA,USA" and other expressions of patriotism were characterized by liberals as jingoistic. Guess it depends on who is in the White House. Right?

 
At 12:04 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

boltok "I am aghast!"
U.S. officials said that Bin Laden himself fired his weapon during the fight, and that he was asked to surrender but did not.

bamstersslave "You're right Tom, isn't that's how the game is played, throw enough stuff against the wall to see what sticks? Maybe we can beat you at your own game."
Yeah, Tom Degan! Shame! This goes too far! You're way off! It took less than a day!

 
At 12:27 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

MO
The fact that you didn't see the dripping sarcasm in my post shows just how demented you are. I believe he is dead, and yesterday was an endorsement for Guantanamo, the CIA and the waterboard.

Go Seals!!!

I wondered if Obama polled to determine public reaction to taking out OBL.

 
At 12:44 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

boltok "MO The fact that you didn't see the dripping sarcasm in my post shows just how demented you are."
I saw the sarcasm in your faux-liberal post. And I countered it with facts. I'm cool like that.

"...and yesterday was an endorsement for Guantanamo, the CIA and the waterboard."
Odd. The initial intel was gained post-Dubya, and Obama banned such tactics.

 
At 12:52 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

MO
Who is your cia contact. I read they have been investigating couriers for years. I guarantee you that OBL was not of primary concern to our marxist in chief.

 
At 12:57 PM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Bamstersslave said:

"Ten years ago any chants of "USA,USA" and other expressions of patriotism were characterized by liberals as jingoistic. Guess it depends on who is in the White House. Right?"

Who said that? It certainly wasn't me. Who said it? Give me an example.

 
At 1:05 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

Are you kidding? Ten years ago any chants of "USA,USA" and other expressions of patriotism were characterized by liberals as jingoistic. Guess it depends on who is in the White House. Right? Only according to the corporepublicons...I fucking LOVE MY COUNTRY! I have a United States Flag warm, fuzzy blanket! I used to get drunk and sing "Proud to be an American" Karaoke while on deployment in places like Slovenia, Greece, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Dubai...There is nothing wrong with loving the US, as long as you welcome all of the people that belong to the US...or become a bully...

BTW, I would have put the bullet in between Osama's eyes myself. Sorry, I don't normally believe in In playing judge and jury, but something tells me that he would be up to way much trouble sitting in GITMO. I still blame him for the Cole, and that is way too tangible to me.

 
At 1:11 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

boltok "MO Who is your cia contact. I read they have been investigating couriers for years."
Yes. They were following his couriers, not waterboarding them.

"I guarantee you that OBL was not of primary concern..."
I know, right? In 2009 he was all, "Let's not get the guy who we don't know where he is." and then in the middle of 2010 he was all "Now that I'm comfortable, let's carefully plan and practice get the guy who we now know where he is." then in 2011 he's all "Let's get the guy now."
It's like he's making it up as he goes along!

"...to our marxist in chief..."
Really? When did he seize capital for labour? I see loans and bailouts, but no nationalization. Heck, you don't even have Single Payer*.



* Unless you're on Medicare/Medicaid/VA.

 
At 1:42 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

MO
For the record, I will give Obama full (as in 100%) credit for making the correct decision to take him out AND for the success of the operation. Against his democratic peers, he is a giant. Carter would have crashed all of the helicopters. Clinton shot a few missles into Libya to get the press of his Lewinsky problem. OBL would not have been a problem and we would not have a gaping hole in southern Manhattan if Clinton dealt with him the first time. The real credit, of course, goes to the military folks behind this. Being a member of that team is the greatest honor in a generation. I would have volunteered in a second.

 
At 3:56 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

JG –

Here’s the basic problem I have with your thoughts regarding “religion” – which are pretty much the accepted stance today. You say to keep religion private and “out of your government”. That is okay on the surface, and I don’t disagree to a certain extent. Perhaps you’ve read Locke’s views in his letter on toleration – I tend to agree along those lines for the most part.

However, at another level, it is really not possible. A secular (atheist/humanist/naturalist/whatever) point of view DOES, in fact, make a theological statement – quite a significant one, in fact. And, it carries with it significant theological premises and presuppositions that greatly color how a man views everything, including government and justice.

A person’s faith (or non-faith) in God is not something that can be privatized in an ultimate sense. It can only be limited in the way we limit government’s scope. We don’t allow government to tell us how to worship. But, we do allow government to judge a man for killing another based on something – not simply based on an arbitrary whim. The “Enlightened” ones created, as you know, social contract theories to sort of skirt the whole issue of morality – though a careful study ultimately leads back to the necessity for a moral standard and ultimate Truth.

So, as much as you can say to keep my religion out of your government, it is in there. I am a citizen and I am a Christian. I don’t believe my faith should be forced down your throat. But, my worldview will impact your government – it has to - just as your worldview will impact my government. We do not have to check our religious views at the door as citizens.

 
At 4:42 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Harley, I appreciate your response. It seems like it's been something you've been thinking about for awhile.

Before I go on, remember the context in which I said those words. Both Anonymous and Browns44 were degrading Muslim U.S. citizens, strictly based upon the faith they follow, and were advocating that these "groups" should be investigated by Congress (for what reason, I still don't understand). My reply, although I indicated I didn't believe in the same faith, was they should have every right to practice their faith "as long as they kept it to themselves" (in other words, didn't force or coerce me to believe in the same way) and "kept it out of my government" (that religious practices or formalities would be denied in anything associated with, or part of, taxpayer-funded functions -- such as public prayer, etc., etc.)

Now, your statement regarding worldviews is true -- we're all products of our environment and our collective experiences, and those experiences shape who we are, how we think and feel, and how we cope with this physical experience on Earth. Naturally, and obviously, these influence every endeavor in which we engage -- including how we view government, its role, and its limitations.

 
At 6:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Both Anonymous and Browns44 were degrading Muslim U.S. citizens, strictly based upon the faith they follow, and were advocating that these "groups" should be investigated by Congress (for what reason, I still don't understand)."
Re-Read the posts JG and you will realize that is not what was posted...If that were not the case, why did you have to ask for clarification so many times when others called your on your accusations?

 
At 7:10 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

JG
Until the peaceful population (majority or minority???) of mooselems denounce, express outrage, and stop supporting implicitly or explicity the terrorist/violent/misogynistic behavior within their own group, they, as a group, are guilty of aiding and abetting. The mormoms separated from fundamentalist mormons for obvious reasons, perhaps the mooselems should do the same. There are many in their group committed to the pursuit of violence and harm. They soiled their bed, they can sleep in it until they do the laundry. Don't moralize for them so they can avoid taking responsibility.

 
At 7:34 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

TD
Raised Catholic, but can't say that I am entirely pleased with the misconduct within the Church. I subscribe to the Judeo-Christian value set. If there is a God, who created the known universe with a couple hundred billion galaxies, he is probably a big picture guy. I doubt he loses sleep over monikers.

 
At 7:34 PM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

boltok, what religion are you? Mind if I ask?

The reason for the question is because (first of all) you say that peace loving "mooselims" refuse to denounce the extremist practitioners of Islam.

You're watching too much FOX Noise, friend.

The fact is that most Muslims abhor and denounce Osama bin Laden. The reason you have not acknowledged this fact is because you refuse to listen. You have rendered yourself deaf, dumb and blind.

Again, without revealing your identity (I realize that cowards and fools need to maintain their anonymity): What religion to you profess to? It's very important.

Sincerely,

Tom Degan

 
At 7:36 PM, Anonymous John Galt said...

Anonymous said...
"Both Anonymous and Browns44 were degrading Muslim U.S. citizens, strictly based upon the faith they follow, and were advocating that these "groups" should be investigated by Congress (for what reason, I still don't understand)."
Re-Read the posts JG and you will realize that is not what was posted...If that were not the case, why did you have to ask for clarification so many times when others called your on your accusations?


JG sure knows how to read the minds of others and fabricate conclusions. It is just the kind of hubris that leads people to believe that they should centrally plan our society and economic system!

 
At 7:42 PM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

boltok....

Ouch! I re-edited my posting while you were posting yours! That is why your answer appears before my question. I hate when that happens.

Okay. You are a Catholic. As am I.

Please tell me, would you appreciate it if you were held responsible for the actions of these perverted priests? Don't you feel a sense of outrage (as I do) that in the minds of most people, Catholic priests are now seen as targets of scorn - when in fact most of them are true to their vows? What nationality are you?

All the best and sincerely,

Tom Degan

 
At 7:42 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

TD
Neither coward nor fool. I have an explicit policy that goes beyond my comments on blogs to have a minimal cyberspace footprint. I have no facebook, myspace, linkedin or any other profile. There is no upside in it. I have been somewhat amazed that you and others put your name and address out there for the world to see. There are identity criminals and all sorts of deviants out there besides us conservatives.

Also I am competitive. I wouldn't put my picture up until I could sport a more defined 6 pack than JG. I am not making much progress on that front.

 
At 7:51 PM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Yes, "coward and fool" was a tad harsh. I've had a couple of drinks. I apologize.

As far as my identity is concerned, I put my name, address and e-mail out there for all to see - not my social security number or ATM code. I'm not as fool (as I acknowledge you're not as well). I am only saying that I have nothing to hide.

What nationality are you. That's the last personal question. I promise.

Tom

 
At 7:51 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

TD
On priests. I have had this argument with the more devout many times. I honestly believe that there should have been a major and thorough house cleaning in the Catholic church. My opinionated self thinks the celibacy requirement of priesthood attracts a certain group of people, at least in America. Not all of course, but a significant group.

If you know anything about management, CEOs, or in this case Popes, don't like matters that affect their and the institution's reputation. In corporations, if an individual does something that compromises the organization they get hammered. If the CEO finds out its systemic, he tries to cover it up. Unfortunately, I think the problems were pervasive and the church operated in damage control. If it was Pope Boltok, there would have been hangings. Even if it meant cleaning house down to the last priest. That is the gist of my religious discontent.

I do try to practice what I preach.

 
At 7:55 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

European mutt, mostly of counties on the ass end of European history.

 
At 9:45 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Barack obama sucks he will always suck as long as he walks earth he didnt do shit on setting up bin ladens death, this shit was planned long before obama was even a thought in american presidency, this started back in 03 he just got lucky that bin ladens capture happen to fall during his term, I still think hes a socialist piece of shit who wants to outlaw gun rights in our country, he gave 31 million dollars to an anti gun charity in 2009, amongst other socialist garbage,that,i could keep going on about but dont have enough time in a day to talk about.

 
At 9:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What has obama achieved to better our country since 2008, thats what I thought absolutely nothing at all, except drive our country to its worst debt since the great depression, gas prices are at an all time high power rates are going through the roof, if you find that a good achievement you need a good life lesson.

 
At 10:10 PM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

boltok "My opinionated self thinks the celibacy requirement of priesthood attracts a certain group of people, at least in America. Not all of course, but a significant group."
And what is that "a certain group"?

 
At 10:32 PM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "...he didnt do shit on setting up bin ladens death…"
{citation needed}

"...this shit was planned long before obama was even a thought in american presidency…"
{citation needed}

"...this started back in 03…"
{citation needed}

"...he just got lucky that bin ladens capture happen to fall during his term…"
{citation needed}

"...I still think hes a socialist piece of shit…"
{citation needed} (on the "socialist" part, not the "I think" part)

"...who wants to outlaw gun rights in our country…"
So this is, what, a feint?

"...he gave 31 million dollars to an anti gun charity in 2009…"
{citation needed}

"...amongst other socialist garbage…"
{citation needed}

"...that,i could keep going on about but dont have enough time in a day to talk about."
You apparently have so little time that you can't cite your statements.

Anonymous "What has obama achieved to better our country since 2008, thats what I thought absolutely nothing at all, except drive our country to its worst debt since the great depression…"
So, Stimpy, let me get this straight; one man can't dig out from under the evaporation of ten trillion dollars (Mortgage Bubble), the ensuing collapse of revenues (the "huge increase in spending" is mostly assisting the victims of the recent unpleasantness, via Medicaid, unemployment insurance, etc), two off-the-ledger wars, a sizeable structural defict (that wasn't his), a too-small/too difused Stimulus, bailouts that preceded his presidency, a party that [on the few occasions he takes a liberal stand] won't back him up, and an opposition party whose declared goal is not to help dig the country out of recession (or, indeed, govern at all) but to "deny Obama a second term".

"...gas prices are at an all time high…"
*Cough*

"...power rates are going through the roof…"
See above.

"...if you find that a good achievement you need a good life lesson."
If you consider that a good post, you need a history lesson.

 
At 8:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The question isn’t whether we, as a nation, are making our enemies mad. The question is what are we doing as a nation so that our enemies will not attack again."
Texas state Sen. Brian Birdwell

Let's hear what that "expert" on all things American, MR. MO, has to say about this statement.

 
At 2:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about this Mr. MO, is the UN right?
GENEVA, May 3 (Reuters) - The United Nations' top human rights official called on the United States on Tuesday to give the U.N. details about Osama bin Laden's killing and said that all counter-terrorism operations must respect international law.

Navi Pillay, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that the al Qaeda leader, killed in a U.S. operation in Pakistan on Sunday, was a "very dangerous man" who had claimed "command responsibility for the most appalling acts of terrorism", including the Sept. 11 attacks on America nearly a decade ago.

"This was a complex operation and it would be helpful if we knew the precise facts surrounding his killing. The United Nations has consistently emphasised that all counter-terrorism acts must respect international law," she said in a statement issued in response to a Reuters request. (Reporting by Stephanie Nebehay; Editing by Louise Ireland

 
At 5:58 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Guess Europe doesn't love us or our President any more as Mr. Obama get more on the job training for the toughest job in the world.

Norway: Americans are ‘terrorists’; bin Laden was an ‘idealist’

Norway’s cultural elite loved Obama – until he actually did something terrific.

In today’s Aftenposten, Norway’s #1 communications consultant, Kjell Terje Ringdal, who founded the country’s first PR firm and runs the Washington Seminars (which takes Norwegian politicians to Washington and teaches them about “politics and PR”), offers up a “rhetorical analysis” of Obama’s speech about killing bin Laden. The speech, Ringdal says, was “a hymn to revenge,” a “cowboy action,” a rationalization of state terror. By announcing that the U.S. had Osama’s remains, Obama sought “to humiliate”; it was “a kind of Indian reference – a moral scalp.” (In other words, Obama taking Osama’s corpse was like cowboys scalping Indians.) When Obama referred to the 9/11 victims and families, it was to justify the killing – for only by citing the suffering of mothers and children could he hope to make such an atrocity seem acceptable. The speech’s closing flourish – in which Obama said that “we can do these things not just because of wealth and power, but because of who we are: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all” – “sums up the entire psychology and politics of Americans.” Ringdal does not mean this as a compliment.

One plus: though Obama, says Ringdal, has proven to be, like Bush (and like all Americans), at heart a “cowboy,” his rhetoric is at least more “elegant,” more – yes, yes, wait for it – “European.”

Meanwhile, Dagbladet reports that after Osama’s death Norwegian novelist Elin Brodin tweeted: “R.I.P. Osama bin Laden. No matter what one may otherwise think of him. Achtung: I will not tolerate any crude and flippant chitchat here.” In an interview with the newspaper, Brodin expanded on her tweet: bin Laden was “brave,” an “idealist” who “put his life in danger for what he believed in.” He was David, she said, taking on Goliath: “We don’t listen to those who don’t think the ‘right’ way; it must be very frustrating for them. We must learn to see things from other people’s perspectives even if we don’t agree.”

David taking on Goliath: what a brilliantly original analogy! Boy, those novels of hers must be dazzling.

Now the question is "when is Mr. Obama going to bring our troops home, July 2011? And shift all the military spending to hand outs?

 
At 6:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JG, tell me again that there isn't a problem with Islam in America, I cant recall your reason for defending it.

WARREN, Mich. (AP) — Authorities say a Minnesota man killed his 20-year-old stepdaughter in Michigan because she left home and wasn’t following Islam.

Rahim Alfetlawi, 45, was being held today in the Macomb County Jail without bond after being charged with first-degree murder in the death Saturday of Jessica Mokdad at her grandmother’s home in the Detroit suburb of Warren. He was arraigned Monday and awaits a May 12 preliminary examination.

Warren Police Detective Lt. Michael Torey says the Coon Rapids man went to police in neighboring Center Line to report the shooting. Torey says Alfetlawi told police the gun accidentally discharged when he pulled it out but police believe he intentionally shot her in the head.

Alfetlawi requested a court-appointed lawyer. A number listed for Alfetlawi in Minnesota wasn’t in service.

 
At 6:44 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "How about this Mr. MO, is the UN right?"
Mental exercise: Imagine, say, Iran or Saudi Arabia conducting similar operations outside their country. Do you still stand against transparency or international law?

 
At 7:08 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "Let's hear what that 'expert' on all things American, MR. MO, has to say about this statement."
One: Not an expert. Not even in air quotes. I am pretty awesome, though. They tried converting me in to code and putting me in a calculator, but they kept getting a 'divide by awesome' error. True story.
Two: Your quote appears poorly, um, quoted. The only site with your version appears to be The Statesman. Other sites have;
"The question isn't whether we as a nation are making our enemies mad. The question is what are we doing to make sure our enemies learn never to make us mad. Last night's operation answered that question..." (which I had linked, but my comments kept disappearing)

 
At 6:52 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

I love how people in this country think Europeans are enlightened and that Europe should be a model. Historically, Europe is the deadliest place on earth. England hung skulls off bridges and starved people. The countries of mid and eastern Europe all have a strong history in genocide. They were constantly at war with each other. All of those countries still hate each other. Make no mistake, without the US, they all would be speaking german, even the french.

Economically, historically, 10% unemployment is a major economic success in europe. The only country that is growing with a balanced budget is Poland and that is the country often ridiculed.

In American, it just so happens, that our little grimy malcontents from the Kennedy/Wilson school are genetically similar to grimy euro elite. Hence, a significant portion of our bureaucracy tries to emulate their socialist power structures.

I am amazed that anyone takes those people seriously. I have far more respect for asians. At a minimum, they are industrious and have a work ethic.

Europeans on peace and respect of national borders is a joke.

 
At 8:07 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

HEADLINES FROM INSANE LIBERALS!
+++++++++++++
Senate Indian Affairs Committee Chief Offended by Bin Laden Code Name “Geronimo”.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
UN’s Top Human Rights Official Demands US Explain Bin Laden Killing…
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MSNBC: If Only We Had An Enlightened President Like Barack Obama To Save Us From Our “Overreaction to 9/11".
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Alan Colmes: No, Rumsfeld Says Waterboarding Didn’t Help Get Osama

NOW FOR SOME TRUTH
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . Rumsfeld an Hour Later: Yes, Waterboarding Helped Get Osama.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
CIA Chief Leon Panetta: Yes, Intelligence From Waterboarded Detainees Was Used to Track Down Bin Laden…
++++++++++++++++++
I'm not going to hold my breath for this to happen, but some body owes GWB and his staff an apology for all they said (for starters "the Surge wasn't working", or "we have lost the war") about their running the war against terrorism.
Could that start here?

 
At 1:20 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Boltok, you said the following to Tom Degan [bold print my own, for special emphasis]...

"I have been somewhat amazed that you and others put your name and address out there for the world to see. There are identity criminals and all sorts of deviants out there besides us conservatives."

Boltok, that's the only truthful statement you've written while you've been monitoring this blog for all these months. (Oh, and by the way, who employs and pays you to do this?)

 
At 1:48 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

JG
Who pays you to write nonsense? The reason that know one asks that question is that there really isn't a market for bullshit. I assert that this is at least my second truthful statement.

 
At 4:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In other news, Chuck Norris returns from Pakistan later today.

 
At 5:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Go figure, Islam is a religion of peace.


LAGOS, Nigeria, May 3 (CDN) — Christian leaders have called for an investigation into political violence that targeted churches and Christian homes, with at least one clergyman saying yesterday that Islamic attacks following the election of a Christian president were premeditated.

Pastor Emmanuel Nuhu Kure of Throneroom Trust Ministry based in Kafanchan in Kaduna state, reportedly said at a press briefing that the religious component of the political violence should not be discounted.

“How would you explain a spontaneous call to prayer on most of the loudspeakers of the mosques across the city at the same time, at 9 p.m. or thereabout in the night, with a shout of ‘Allah Akbar’ as Muslims began to troop towards the mosques and designated areas, to be followed at 10 p.m. with another call on loudspeakers – this time with a spontaneous shout of “Allah Akbar” from the mosques and most of the streets occupied by Muslims and the burst of gunfire sound that shook the whole city?” Pastor Kure said. “This was repeated a few times, and the killings and burnings began.”

Christians suffered many casualties in the north-central state of Kaduna after supporters of Muslim presidential candidate Muhammudu Buhari lost the April 16 federal election to Goodluck Jonathan, a Christian. Primarily Muslim rioters claimed vote fraud, although international observers praised the polls as the fairest since 1999.

“How come the Muslim fighters . . . were neatly surrounding the walls of the Anglican Cathedral and the Yoruba Baptist pastor’s house and setting them on fire while shooting, without any resistance, if it was not premeditated and planned?” Pastor Kure reportedly said.

As many as 300 Christians were reportedly slain in Kaduna, with 14,000 fleeing their homes after Islamic attacks.

 
At 7:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

liberals are one strange species!

Shooting and killing an unarmed man is OK when a Democrat is President but waterboarding a man when a Republican is President is a crime against humanity!

liberals, please stop reproducing!

 
At 8:01 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "HEADLINES FROM INSANE LIBERALS!...Alan Colmes..."
Colmes is paid to play the role of the liberal (and to argue poorly and to lose against the conservative). He's the Washington Generals.

"NOW FOR SOME TRUTH
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . Rumsfeld an Hour Later: Yes, Waterboarding Helped Get Osama."

Rumsfeld Exclusive: There Was No Waterboarding of Courier Source (from newsmax, of all places)
*Also, if it turns out that it was related to information extracted through torture, does that make it right? And does this mean that the Right is abandoning the "ticking time-bomb" scenario as the reason justifying it? Will you only abandon it when, as with Hitchens, it's you on the table?

Anonymous "Shooting and killing an unarmed man is OK when a Democrat is President but waterboarding a man when a Republican is President is a crime against humanity!"
Hands up anyone here who would've lambasted Dubya for killing Bin Laden in an operation in a walled compound with armed hostiles?
I can't tell for certain, but I'm pretty sure nobody put up their hand.
While I would've preferred he'd been captured, the hard facts indicate that would've been much harder to pull off.
And shooting him in a gunfight is not equivalent to torturing a non-threat goat herder behind bars for up to a decade.

 
At 11:06 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Hands up anyone here who would've lambasted Dubya for killing Bin Laden in an operation in a walled compound with armed hostiles?
I can't tell for certain, but I'm pretty sure nobody put up their hand."

BULL SHIT

 
At 1:58 AM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "BULL SHIT"
Yeah, you sure told us. Look, not everything needs to be a partisan issue.

I doubt anyone would've shed a tear if he'd been got at Tora Bora under W's administration, or when Clinton's cruise missiles just barely missed him in '98.

 
At 7:03 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

MO
Spielberg could save effects money and pay Alan Colmes to be the protagnoist in "ET 2, The Liberal Nut Job from Outer Space."

 
At 8:56 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I doubt anyone would've shed a tear if he'd been got at Tora Bora under W's administration, or when Clinton's cruise missiles just barely missed him in '98."

More BULL SHIT

 
At 10:27 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous, you did see that part with "...when Clinton's cruise missiles just barely missed him..." right?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home