Sunday, September 08, 2013

Attn Tourists: We Will Kill You

Note to the rest of the world: Planning on a sweet and cozy vacation for the spouse and kiddies? Here's some sound advice you'd be smart to heed: Stay out of the this place. We here in the good ol' USA want you dead. And if we catch you in the wrong place at the wrong time you're a goner, Buster. Of course the odds are much better than fifty/fifty that you'll get out of here alive but why on earth would you want to take such a chance - particularly when your loved ones are involved? Go out and hug a tree during a thunderstorm. It's much safer than visiting the United States of America. Think I'm kidding? Don't mess with us. Stay away from here if you know what's good for you. I'm not kidding.

Consider this: The Missouri state legislature is in the process of passing a bill that will nullify federal laws with respect to firearms. If they have their way it will be a felony in that state for federal agents to enforce any nationwide gun law. In states all across this country lawmakers are trying to pass legislation that will make it legal for anyone to carry any kind of weapon anywhere - restaurants, churches, bars - even public schools.

Let me repeat myself in no uncertain terms: Stay the fuck away from the United States of America. We may not end up killing you - but we're gonna give it the old college try.

Visit France. It's a heck of a lot safer than the US. Their waiters may be rude but the food is not to be believed. Visit England. Although their food is not to everyone's taste, their waiters are very polite - and you've never had fish 'n' chips until you've had them wrapped in wax paper and sprinkled with vinegar. But if you're absolutely hellbent on getting a taste of America, try visiting Canada. They're a lot like us in more-than-a-few respects. I've always said that Canada is America minus the psychosis. Besides, their beer is better.  

You can visit Hawaii if you like. Although technically an American state, due to its climate and culture it's less America-like than Canada is. The thing about the Aloha State that makes it an ideal tourist destination is that it is the safest place in this doomed nation as far as guns laws are concerned. Being a group of islands thousands of miles from the American continent, it's next-to-impossible to smuggle weapons "across state lines" so to speak. You're hundreds of times less likely to be shot in killed in Hawaii than in places like Florida or Texas. Still, for all it's "safeness" you have an easier chance of falling victim to gun violence in Honolulu than in London or Paris. I just wanted to give you something to think about. 

Come to think about it, you also stand a pretty good chance in the upper Northeast. Although you're not totally immune from crazy people with guns in that area of the country, states like Maine and Vermont are fairly safe. The gun laws there are somewhat reasonable and the people very friendly. You can also get the best breakfast in that region than practically any other place in the country. Yankee hospitality, you know? Their winters can be particularly brutal, though. Be forewarned.

Yeah, some states are a lot safer than others. Here's another handy and very dandy tip: Do not - under any circumstances - venture south of the old Mason-Dixon line. I'm just sayin'.

I want to give you a heads-up as far as visiting the "land of the free" is concerned. A people who live in constant terror wondering when and where the next massacre of innocent children will take place aren't very "free" at all when you think about it. And there will be other massacres, let's not kid ourselves. Our politicians have seen to that. I know that there will be some of my fellow countrymen and women who will judge me unpatriotic by advising foreigners to steer clear of this place - but as a humanitarian I have no other choice. When human lives are at stake, the hell with the Chamber of Commerce. 

There are too many talking heads to count who are working overtime trying to keep foreigners from migrating to the United States; my vocation is to prevent tourists from visiting this place. America has become too dangerous for comfort, and the situation is not going to get any better in the years and decades to come. In fact it's going to get much worse. If you're reading this in Asia, Europe or Australia, the chances are good that you've never even known anyone that was shot and killed, right? Consider this: Not only have I known in my life several people who fell victims of gun violence - I had two cousins who died in that matter. How many of you can say that? Let's see a show of hands. 

Who was the last British prime minister to be assassinated? Spencer Perceval on May 11, 1812 - two-hundred and one years ago! In less than one-hundred and fifty years time, four American Presidents have died at the hands of gun-toting assassins, with Harry Truman, Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan coming too-close-for-comfort to being numbers five, six and seven. 

And don't even think of falling ill while you're here. It could end up bankrupting you. Foreigners are not covered by Obamacare. NYAH!

Clip this little rant of mine out and send it to as many travel agencies all over the globe as possible. The United States is a dying country; in fact it's in ruins. As less and less billionaires are able to devour more and more of the nation's wealth, a lot of the rest are becoming increasingly desperate by the day. Paris was the place to be in the twenties. England was the place to be in the sixties. Japan was the place to be in the eighties. This is not the place to be in the twenty-first century. Trust me. 

I'll say it one last time: steer clear, ya hear?

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY


 Beef Jerky
by John Lennon


John, shot and killed December 8, 1980

Tracy Murphy 'n' Me

I have an announcement to make:

At 2:30 PM yesterday, after nearly a decade of correspondence, I had the honor and the joy of meeting Tracy Murphy in the parking lot of Petsmarts in Newburgh, NY. She actually exists in flesh and blood. All this time I almost believed that she was too good to be true.

She's very true, and I am quite grateful for that. It was one of those mountaintop moments I'll never forget. Better than meeting your favorite rock star. I once met Charlie Chaplin. That wasn't half as cool as meeting Tracy Murphy. Seriously. She's my hero, you know.

She had driven over six hours from her native Buffalo to make a connection - a dog from Georgia named Samsara that she had rescued from certain death. She's that kind of human being.

What Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King were to Human Rights, Tracy Murphy is to Animal Rights. I cannot even begin to describe to you how blessed I am to be even a mere footnote in this good and remarkable woman's biography. Life is beautiful.

At this writing, she and Samsara are safe and sound at their home in Newfane, NY.

I love you, Tracy Murphy.

Here is a link to a piece I wrote about Tracy nearly four years ago:

Here, also, is a link to Tracy's website, The Buffalo Vegetarian Soctiety:

Bon apetite!

Photograph courtesy of Tracy Murphy

UPDATE, 9/18/13:

One week and one day after I wrote this piece there was yet another massacre in the United States - thirteen dead at the Washington Navy Yard. You'd better get used to this sort of thing.

For more recent postings on this site please go to the link below:

"The Rant" by Tom Degan


(Psst! They're working on that!)


At 10:50 AM, Blogger Patricia said...

That was an amazing rant. Hopefully tourists will take heed. It's a damn shame to see John Lennon's picture there as another sacrifice to our violent gun culture.

At 11:06 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Tom, I have to agree with ya'. I've always wondered why people from foreign lands, given a choice, come to the good ol' U.S. of A. for vacation. There are certainly scores of other places I'd put at the top of my list if I were them.

Maybe it's because they can't believe the ignorance and stupidity that has become the standard here, so, like any curiosity seeker, they have to experience it for themselves.

At 1:00 PM, Anonymous Chuck Morre said...

Wow Tom, I hope those foreign tourists at least visit where the strongest gun control laws are in place. Chicago comes to mind as being so much safer than Missouri to visit, because of it's strong gun control laws.
So please foreign tourists, visit The Windy City, it's wonderfully safe because of it's strictest gun control laws in the Nation. No one is murdered there by a gun!

Tom, you must share this information with the thousands of undocumented workers who cross our borders each month illegally. It is not safe to come here, go back home or at least to get out of Texas and Missouri where it is not safe!

Tom is your rant more about the States starting to stand up to the heavy hand of the Federal Govt in the their internal affairs vs. the safety of foreign tourists?

At 4:51 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Chuck falling into the old standby about "toughest gun laws..blah blah blah"

First off, Chicago has a HUGE population so naturally it's going to have more crime than Podunk Alabama, and second, the NRA has neutered the gun laws of this country to the point that they hardly exist at all.

Ans Thanks again Chuck for bringing up mexicans, people who have NO political clout which you have turned into boogiemen, even though illegal immigration is at "net zero" right now. Nice attempt at deflection there.

I suppose next you'll bring up Benghazi.

At 5:17 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Chicago comes to mind as being so much safer than Missouri to visit, because of it's strong gun control laws. - Chuckie "Goebbels" Morre

Squawking like the propaganda parrots who mindlessly repeat, Benghazi! Benghazi! They also love, Chicago! Chicago!

"Snarkasm" only works when a point is valid.

Never mind St. Louis has a higher murder rate than Chicago. That would be St. Louis, Missouri, Chuckie. Same with New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Birmingham and Memphis.

ALL higher murder rates than Chicago.

Yup, Chuckie gets it all wrong again.

Big surprise.

Time for Chuckie to post a "Dave Alinsky Dubya" comment with a commie link again. It's all he's got.

At 6:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

September 8th, 2013

American diplomat Greg Hicks, who was present the night of the attack on the Benghazi consulate one year ago, spoke to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos about the timeline of the events, and his doubts over whether everything possible was done for the Americans in the Benghazi consulate both before and during the attack.

“I don’t know exactly what was available,” Hicks said of the decision not to send additional personnel to Benghazi. “I still don’t quite understand why they couldn’t fly aircraft over to Benghazi. When I as a kid, I grew up watching Western movies, and the cavalry always came. I just thought that they would come.”

He also said the anti-Muslim video the administration initially believed to have incited the attacks clearly had nothing to do with them. “The video was a non-event in Libya,” he said. “We had heard nothing about protests. The building had been set on fire by the attackers, and our diplomatic security agents were heavily outnumbered.”

Thanks Greg for coming out and speaking about Benghazi. Just watch your back around Hillary, and lets hope you don't end up like Vince Foster.

That fat assed Hillary can really be counted on to help you in a tough situation LOL LOL LOL!

LOL Hillary you fat assed big bullshit artist, and your 2008 campaign ad:

“It’s 3 a.m., and your children are safe and asleep,” a narrator says, as images of sleeping babe after sleeping babe pass by. “But there’s a phone in the White House, and it’s ringing.”

The ominous ring ring continues throughout the ad as the announcer tells viewers they live in a “dangerous world.” They’re reminded that their vote determines whether they choose a leader who already has national security experience — or not.

At the end, the narrator repeats the line “It’s 3 a.m., and your children are safe and asleep,” but this time poses this question: “Who do you want answering the phone?”

Cut to a clip of Mrs. Clinton, wearing eyeglasses, answering a telephone in a darkened room.

At 8:18 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Maybe if the GOP controlled house hadn't voted down funding for added security in Benghazi. But thanks for proving me right about the deflection. You can always depend on conservatives to take the bait when you set the hook with their favorite food. One wonders where the outrage was though, when all those embassies got attacked under Bush, resulting in 13 deaths and only three short meetings in congress.

At 9:17 PM, Anonymous Chuck Morre said...

So stricter gun control laws don't work if the population is huge? Explain why that is?
Wouldn't it make sense that if the control law is effective and strict enough and is the only solution to gun violence, it wouldn't matter what the size of a city's population?

The NRA has neuter the gun control laws in Chicago and NYC and Washington D.C.? Really, I didn't know that. How could gun control laws be stronger in those cities? You know to make them more safe?

So is it the number of people murdered or the % of people murdered? That is a great point Dave, which city has more murders by gun, Chicago or St. Louis? Which one has the highest % of murders by any means to its population, Chicago or St. Louis? Do the results support stronger gun control laws or support the need to reduce the population of a city or at least its' density to make it safe for foreigners to visit?

And I shouldn't want and wish for undocumented workers who cross our borders each month illegally, to be safe? Is that a crime to hope illegals are safe from gun caused murders, after all they are a form of tourists? Maybe the solution would be to call them undocumented tourists instead of workers? Would that increase your concern for them up to my level?

My advise to undocumented tourists is to not go to St. Louis Missouri if they want to avoid being murdered. Or the State of Missouri, it is very unsafe for them. Mozart and Dave Dubya have said so. That Chicago is much safer for them.

There Mozart and Dave, Ive seen the errors of my way and have corrected same. Go to Chicago where the streets are safe every night because of their gun control laws.


At 9:31 PM, Anonymous Chuck Morre said...

Just did some checking for you Dave and guess what the political party is for the Mayors of the cities you listed?

Chicago D
Memphis D
Baton Rouge D
Birmingham D
St. Louis D

Must be a coincidence, nothing here to see, keep moving.

At 3:44 AM, Blogger Tom Degan said...

Chuck Moore, you're either purposely distorting reality or you're abysmally ill-informed.

Where are state laws made? By city mayors? If you sincerely believe that then I suggest you pick up a remedial civics book as soon as is humanly possible. Even a palm-sized pamphlet will do the trick.

For your desperately needed information: State law is made in the legislature of each given state.

QUESTION: What party is in control of the states of each of the cities you mention?

Illinois: R
Tennessee: R
Louisiana: R
Alabama: R
Missouri: R

Nothing to see here indeed.

At 7:05 AM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Well Chuck, where the populations are higher there will naturally be more crime. It's not that the gun control laws don't WORK at all, it's just that the crime rates are going to be higher where the population is in the millions than they are in a place where the population is in the thousands. I guess they didn't teach basic math and logic in the one room schoolhouse you attended. Plus, thanks to the NRA lobby, most gun laws have been gutted to the point of near non existance anyway. Conservayive s love to latcgh onto a "slogan" and then completely ignore any facts that contradict it.

At 7:07 AM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Hey Chuck, the mayor of Salt Lake City is usually a Democrat as well. It's sort of an "honorary" position there so the Mormons can give the impressin of fairness. But the Church still owns the state.

At 11:37 AM, Blogger DutchHeretic said...

Seriously I have been to CD Juarez Mexico (the most dangerous and crime filled city in Mexico) twelve times, multiple weeks..
I traveled via El Paso Tx and I felt safer in Juarez than in Texas ..
Tom you are absolutely right ...

At 12:39 PM, Anonymous Chuck Morre said...

"Plus, thanks to the NRA lobby, most gun laws have been gutted to the point of near non existance anyway."

Dear Mozart, please provide proof of what you claim to be the truth in your statement above.

States where laws have been gutted and not gutted.

Thank you.

At 3:34 PM, Anonymous Jay said...

Hello again Tom,

I need to say once again: I hate when you beat me to a topic!

As much as we bitch about gun violence, the perceived notion that the NRA is behind all of this, and lament our absolute undying love for weapons--we are to blame.

We don't do a very good job fighting this scourge. We try to legislate and fall into the same talking points time and time again. Just look at the imbecile quoting Chicago. Thank God--they have Chicago!! What the hell would these people do otherwise without deflecting the issue of gun violence off on Chicago!?!

The simple and more effective argument that we are not using is basic responsibility. If gun groups and gun supporters can piss and moan about existing gun laws and hide behind the Constitution, they can jolly well stand in front of it as well!

"Illegal guns" are a myth. Any gun at one time or another was bought. This shit just doesn't grow on trees! They are legal guns. The problem arises when Joe-Six Pack "Patriot leaves his shit around for someone to steal. This is when pro-gun American labels them "illegal." With such labeling, Joe-Six Pack has absolved himself or responsibility.

I know right off the top of my head at least two cases where the children of "responsible" gun owners got into the 'stash' and wiped out the entire family. So these claims of: defense, criminals, and liberals killing people are bogus as well.

What needs to be a concern for everyone is not gun ownership -- but gun mentality.

Read the papers on the next shooting--and there will be one--and then scroll down to the comment section by readers. No doubt whether it's HuffPo, Yahoo, MSN, etc...some jag-off gun owner will go run and defend the guns.

You'll see no remorse for the victims. In the Florida school (almost) massacre, many of these lunatics didn't see a "big deal" over 500 rounds of ammunition and the rifle the kid was carrying wasn't "that bad." Of course, the school was to blame...and it goes on.

To make change on this front, we need to go after these organizations such as the NRA in a VERY public way.

We hear so much about "responsible" gun ownership coming from them, but they've never made the simple statement of "hey assholes--lock up your guns."

Tom, you may have missed the article where Iowa is giving gun permits to the legally blind. The pro-gun response? Well the chopped up the definition of "legally blind" and how blind wasn't all that blind.

I shit you not.


At 3:40 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Chuck, since 90% of the public would be outraged at the NRA for interfering in the legislative process, do you REALLY think they are going to leave an obvious trail?
But check southern states and the laws they pass concerning guns.

Plus, we all saw how congress refused to enact tougher background checks, even though every poll conducted showed at least 80% of the public (including NRA members) wanted said laws passed. Wayne Lapeirre was all for them 20 years ago, but NOW he's frothing at the mouth AGAINST them. It's even a federal crime now to create a database on gun ownership, which law enforcement says wouold help them a great deal. Who do you think is behind these laws, the Sierra Club?

At 4:22 PM, Anonymous Jay said...

@ Mozart~

Gun database? Why should the police have a gun database? The NRA already has one.

That's right boys & girls, next time you see ol' LaPierre screaming about "tyranny" and gun databases--listen real closely for the sound of envelope stuffing too.

Hey you can't pay LaPierre's $800K salary without having a good ol' fashion nontroversy!!

So gun lunatics listen well--sell everything you have and send it the NRA who wants to protect you from evil gun databases, so that they can use THEIR database, to send you fundraising material, to fight databases.

Act now!! Sell you daughters into whoredom--they don't care!! They need your money!! Okay...they really don't "need" your money---but you're an idiot gun owner and will send it anyways. Support the cause!! FREEDOM!! 'Merica. Tyranny!! Socialism!! Send Your Checks!!

If only idiot gun owners knew how they were being played. Too bad they're so fearful to ask a question.

At 9:12 PM, Anonymous Chuck Morre said...


Hang on between your's and Jay's posts I need to make and put on a tin foil hat to protect my self from what ever is coming from outer space or the NRA HQ and effecting your brains.

Have either of you seen black helicopters with NRA painted on them in gray flying over your house?

I'd be concerned if were you.

At 10:52 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Chuck, just admit defeat. Making a comlete fool of yourself is entertaining but hardly neccesary. The Bears won and the Packers lost so my weekend is already complete.

At 2:25 AM, Anonymous Chuck Morre said...

How are those strictest gun control laws in the country working for the murder rate in Chicago?

I follow the Frontier Professional Baseball League and the team in Schaumburg has made it into the post season. What's great is that team is selling tickets with the line "come see the only professional baseball team in Chicago land in the playoff this year."

Follow the link when you click on my name.

At 7:13 AM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Oh Chuck, the "bubble" must be particularly thick with you.

Naturally crime rates are going to be higher in Chicago and othe places like LA and New York even though they have strict gun laws. THEY ALSO HAVE MUCH HIGHER POPULATIONS THAN PLACES LIKE PODUNK MISSISSIPPI. Jeez, come out of the conservative bubble, stop letting people like Mike Huckabee write your material and breath the free air for a while. You will feel better.
Plus I gave you a start on your own research into how the NRA is gutting gun laws. I doubt you will look into it since Fox news will not provide that information.

At 4:41 PM, Anonymous CHUCK MORRE said...







At 7:57 PM, Anonymous Dave Alinsky Dubya said...

Hey Cassandra,

If you are still reading this blog, I am a radical left winger. I go to Tea Party rallies pretending to be a Tea Party member and bring a poster of Obama with a bone in his nose!

At 8:26 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

LOL Chuck you never cease to entertain. Tell us Chuckles, if there are so many people free to carry guns in those states, why would you be suggesting there is any crime at all?

At 12:41 AM, Anonymous Americans For What Ever Obama Wants. said...


Don't go to Colorado, voters there just recalled State Senator John Morse D on Tuesday night, ending a historic recall election saw the one-time state Senate (D) president lose his seat just months after leading the effort to enact stricter state gun laws. The election was a back lash driven by the covert arm of the NRA, who using the "no need for a voter ID to vote laws", MotorVoter, and early voting laws was able to steal the election. "We need stronger voter registration laws and photo ID's on elections like this where the opposition could use the tactics we normally use to steal election", said Mozart, spokesperson for "Americans For What Ever Obama Wants.

Even though the population is not as dense as Chicago's, who has the strictest gun control laws in our country, Colorado's laws are not as strict and may become even more liberal.

Therefore since lower populations mean few gun murders, but weak gun control laws mean unsafe locations, Hawaii is pushing for the tourist trade of Colorado to visit their safe state. It's got it both, strict gun laws and low population. Who could ask for anything more!

At 1:56 AM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Change your name all you want Chucky, you still look like an idiot.

At 9:40 AM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Maybe they come here because they enjoy it and they actaully don't feel threatened. Nah, can't be.

At 11:45 AM, Anonymous Chuck Morre said...


Is there a problem with someone using the name "Dave Alinsky Dubya" to post under?

I can post under any name I want to post under.

At 11:52 AM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Thanks for admitting it was you Chucky. I have to admit, when you set out to make a fool of yourself, you really go all the way. I use simple logic in explaining that where populations are higher there is going to be more crime than where it is lower, and you not only dip your toe in the water of ridiculous childish retort, you swim to the bottom and hold on to the drain.
Upon reading your posts, the common response around here is "Wow, THAT guy is a piece of work isn't he?"

Thank you for the entertainment.

At 11:56 AM, Anonymous "Honest" Chuck Morre said...

Thank you. I get a tingle up my leg harassing all you liberal commies.

At 2:17 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Chucky, laughing at your stupidity is not "harrasment" it's entertainment. If you get a "tingle up your leg" entertaining men, perhaps you are in the wrong business. Or are you? What do you do for a living?

At 3:10 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

The Dutch Atheist said...

"Seriously I have been to CD Juarez Mexico (the most dangerous and crime filled city in Mexico) twelve times, multiple weeks..
I traveled via El Paso Tx and I felt safer in Juarez than in Texas ..
Tom you are absolutely right ..."

In 2011, El Paso had the 4th lowest crime rate of US cities less than 500,000.

Of the top 50 murderous cities in the world, 12 are in Mexico. And, though it has been improving some lately, Juarez has regularly been known as one of the most violent cities in the WORLD.

You might want to quit trusting your "feelings". But, then again, you are a man of reason and logic...

At 4:02 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

In 2011 El paso had a population of 665,000. How could it be considred "under 500,000"?

At 5:00 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Right, more than 500,000 not less.

Good catch.

At 5:02 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Mozart -

"paso" should be capitalized and you misspelled "considered"...

Normally I allow irrelevant issues pass unnoticed...

At 6:26 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Since you obsessed on typos, I assume you hade no valid argument to my post

At 7:35 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...


At 7:38 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

Lets see if by doing this I can end the posting under my name by others.

At 8:15 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Yes, well done, and well said, indeed.

Lets see if by doing this I can end the posting under my name by others.

I'm with you, brother.

It would really be nice if all that kind of stuff ended, wouldn't it?

At 10:16 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Mozart -

Of course I answered your post. You simply weren't clever enough to pick up on the sarcasm.

I said "Right, more than 500,000 not less. Good catch."

That was sarcastically saying, "Obviously I mistakenly said 'less' when I should have said 'more'. In no way does it have anything to do with the point of the post."

Then, I came back with an (again sarcastic) over-obsessive pointing out of insignificant typos in mocking mimickry to hammer the point home further.

My first post was valid.

Your rejoinder was pointless.

My replies to your rejoinder were again valid and very clever.

Try to keep up.


At 10:59 AM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Harley, I hope your love for yourself does not hinder any actual relationships. Your "sarcasm" was neither clever nor connected to any "point".

Maybe if you were not such an unabashed defender of all things stupid I would have thought to look for "sarcasm". As it is you are just another version of "chucky".

At 11:09 AM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

I wouldn't paint Harley and Chucky with the same brush. Harley is open to discussion, has a better grasp of the bigger picture, and answers questions more than Chuck "I give the GOP a pass" Morre. Chucky is openly gleeful in his malevolence towards those who disagree with his beliefs.

In other words Harley behaves more like a real Christian.

At 12:39 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...


What you take as my being "openly gleeful in his (my) malevolence towards those who disagree with his beliefs" is the use of my sense of humor to point out the inconsistencies and failures of the left. Does the Left really believe that the use of "sarcasm" is for their use only? Reading some of the responses to my posts one could make that argument. Sorry, that's not the way I see it.

I am searching for examples of Christ being ok with what is wrong and for examples of His being willing to compromise. If you can find example of same, please advise. Understanding yes, forgiving to the REPENTANT, yes, but willing to compromise? Still searching for that example.

Since Nixon, the left has owned the use of political humor to ridicule their opponents positions. Today I find it very easy to do the same, to the Left. Predictably, the Left reacts with their historical trump cards, IE the Race Card being just one. In the past these cards won the day for them, especially before the internet, (invented by Al "Man is causing Global Warming" Gore). Today not so much.

Example, Dave you keep posting things like Benghazi, Benghazi, (right up to the one year anniversary of the murder there of our Ambassador) as if you were Chief Clancy Wiggum. "Nothing to see here, keep moving". Need I remind you of the promises Obama made about the bringing to justice those who murdered our fellow Americans? You seem offended that anyone would remind you of that promise, much less hold Obama to it. The reason being if Obama cant keep his promise there, why should anyone trust his other promises? But the absolute best, most humorous defense from the left when dealing with Obama and his failed administration, is their claim that Obama is really not left enough or liberal enough. That leaves me gasping for air it's scope of denial of reality. Having a degree in Physiological, this defense opens up a complete life time of research and possible source for a PhD, whose thesis would be titled "Denial and Projection used by Liberals in Defense of the Reality of their Policy Failures: BPD or full Borderline Disorder?".

Yet at the same time the left continues to blame Bush, the NRA, the GOP, the Tea Party, Conservatism, Big Oil, Wall Street, Big RX, Justice Thomas, and the Flat Earth Society for all of Obama's failures. Just read the apologetic responses for Obama, that Mozart offers for examples.

Or the fact that Unions are now not happy with Obamacare, after they supported his election and reelection, because I guess, they read the bill and found out what was in it. Is that malevolence on my part? Or is it pointing out the irony and the truth of the events unfolding as Obamacare continues to run off the track?

And in closing (loud cheers), you make the claim that I show "malevolence towards those who disagree with his beliefs". Have you ever read the exchanges between James and I? The ones you malevolently ridicule with your post's calling me Pastor Chucky. Yet at the same time, you ignore or fail to hold to the standards of at least being consistent in their positions, the actions of REV. Sharpton and Jackson?

Thank you for reading.

At 2:51 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...


Yes, Benghazi is a tragedy, but it is also a Right Wing political hammer. They forgot how many Americans died under Reagan in Lebanon. Do you remember that tragic waste of life, or do you give Reagan a pass, too?

What else but sarcasm is appropriate for someone who copy and pastes without credit, plagiarizes, and ignores questions, while always demanding answers?

It’s fine to “point out the inconsistencies and failures of the left”. But when it comes from someone who always “gives the GOP a pass” it is nothing but partisan hackery.

I believe we should always question leaders and politicians. All of them. You do not. You often choose to mock and accuse liberal individuals, and not the politicians. That is what I’m talking about.

Believe it or not, liberals are opposed to and skeptical of Obama’s actions more than you care to admit.

Why? As many of us state repeatedly, he is not the “Most liberal” guy ever. Not by a long shot. In fact, only a corporate friendly person can be elected president. That is simply the truth. Both parties are largely bought and paid for by Big Money. You refuse to see this fact as well. This makes it extremely difficult to reason with you.

Would you like to know where Obama stands politically from an objective viewpoint, based on actions and not just his words or claims by his opponents? You probably cannot comprehend it, but Obama is quite close to Romney. They are in the same quadrant politically. Believe it or not. I happen to share Gandhi’s quadrant, like most real progressives.

Check the political spectrum at political compass.

The site illustrates the politics of political figures and the individual states and other nations as well.

You can also take a test to see where you are on the political spectrum. Note the grid is not just left/right but also authoritarian/libertarian.

If you honestly answer the questions, you may likely agree with where it puts you on the political compass. Just take the test and then view the “Analysis” page.

Tell us what you find. We could then have a platform for discussion.

At 3:48 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Mozart -

I admittedly have trouble not picking at you. You are overly rude way too often in my opinion. And, you argue in bad faith. Believe me, I bite my tongue far more often than engaging you. I've learned it is generally not worth my time.

Example of bad faith argumentation: When you say my sarcasm was "not connected to any point", that is simply wrong to the most casual observer. My sarcasm was connected to the fact that I was pointing out that (in my opinion) YOUR pointing out of the "more" not "less" error was a distinction without difference. That's a point.

In fact, logically, one cannot use sarcasm without having a point. Just a technicality - food for thought.

To say I love myself or that I defend all things stupid is pointless, by the way. And not accurate.

If you want to attack the point I was making in reference to the silliness of Dutch Heretic's assertion, go right ahead. I will gladly entertain the "point" of your original correction of my post, but I truly don't know what it was. I'm 99% sure it was needless nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking.

I assure you, if you want to engage in debate, I'm game. And if you will act in good faith, it will go well and will be collegial.

At 4:38 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Your condescending attack notwithstanding, you are 100% wrong about me. I notice you don't attack Chucky, even when he admits to using multiple screen names to hide his uber right wing nonsense. 650,000 IS more than 500,000 but that's not the point of the article. The point of the article is that there are Americans that WORSHIP guns. Their alleged right to own military assault weapons and carry them wherever they want has become more important than the tens of thousands of people, including an increasing number of children that are being killed because of it.
It is simple basic logic that where populations are higher, so will be the crime rates. Chucky's STUPID reference to Chicago (go figure it happens to be where Obama is from)is the same argument made all over the internet by like minded people, and is misleading and inaccurate. It comes straight from people like Rush Limbaugh who know their audience will not think beyond the surface of the statement.
Debate that.

At 4:50 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

If someone wishes to translate Mozart's confusing nonsequitur into a debatable point, please do.

Otherwise, I'm getting off the crazy train...

At 6:29 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...


So because Benghazi is a Right-wing hammer, it should not be treated as a current event but instead equated to events under Reagen how many years ago? Whose but are you trying to cover with that statement, Obama's or Clinton's?

That is the weakest and most frequent argument the Left has, and that's relativism. It's like two kids on a grade school playground, fighting on whose team is best this season. One says the Dodgers are because of their current record, the other says the Yankees are because of their record in the 50's.

The Yankees are not relative to the current season and to bring there past is only because this year the Yankees really suck and as a Yankee fan you hate the Dodgers and want to remove some of the shine from the Dodgers current year.

Do you understand? If we can not be critical of Obama now because of his failures, unless we talk about issues from past President's actions, how the heck do you resolve the fact that the promise Obama made has not been kept? That's the issue, the broken promise.

What does anything else have to do with Benghazi? Did Reagen force Obama to make the promise? So by introducing your question, you end up defusing the fact that Obama is failing to keep his word. How does my giving or not giving a former President a pass have anything to do with Obama's current accountability?

I do not "always give the GOP a pass", that is a misquote of me by you at best and an out and out lie by you at worst. Enough said there.

"You often choose to mock and accuse liberal individuals" darn right I do, because they support the liberal leaders and politicians with their vote, support and money. Look, if the leaders of political position and their policy can have it's failures brought to your attention, wouldn't it stand to reason that those who support that position should also be a part of that dialog? Or do you wish to limit my freedom of speech in some unstated, undefined manner? For what reason, to prevent hurting the individuals feelings? Look, I believe that what the liberals are doing to our country under the current President and his political Party and it's membership may damage what was once a great nation beyond any hope of repair. I should be concerned about feelings if I believe that?

I do not refuse to see anything, what I refuse to do is to believe the solution to the mess being made, is more big government and more liberalism. I know you do not believe that, but as much as Tom and I think you sing the praises of Eisenhower do you realize based on his words, policy's and writings he was against what the Liberal left has put into place and is calling for more of today? He would be aghast at the way the federal govt has grown and taken control over the freedoms that allowed Americans to become the best their skills can make them. That's just for starters.

I don't care how close Obama was to Romney, the fact is Romney was not AS liberal or left as Obama is, and that in its self was enough reason to vote for him. The same reasons many voted for Obama, because he was not as Right as Romney was. It works both ways. And honestly who cares now anyway. Our task is to face the continued failure to govern and the failure to keep promises on a daily basis.

I'm going to run out of space. Gotta go.

At 6:42 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

Your are telling a lie, I admitted to no such thing. It was Dave D who admitted to using different names.

The murder rate in Chicago has nothing to do with that being Obama's home.
It has every thing to do with the strictest gun control laws and their failure in preventing the murder with guns every weekend with in it's borders. The numbers speak for them selves on that matter, it is you who chose to see Obama as an issue, not me.
Ok, I'll debate you, what has Russ Limbaugh got to do with the current gun control laws in Chicago?

And here's the best part, saving it for last for you Mozart, what is misleading and inaccurate? The fact that strict gun controls in Chicago have not had the desired outcome? Next stop Saneville, getting off the Mozart Crazy Express.

At 7:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anybody hear from lately from Ellis D and ModusOperandi? Last I heard they got married and adopted a child.

At 8:36 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Back to the barrage of questions, we see. How many this time? I lost count around ten.

Since you never answer any questions, I only think it’s only fair and balanced that I answer yours, “Right”? Right.

Weak “relativism”? Oh, you mean the relativism between 4 dead Americans in Benghazi and 248 dead Marines in Beirut? The Marines were ordered not to carry loaded weapons. Yeah. Reagan was warned that there would be retaliation for a naval bombardment. Reagan didn’t listen. That must have made you furious! Probably even madder than you are at Obama, Right?

It’s a relative, Right? Or is it relative to something else in your mind? Sure, it’s relatively old news, compared to news over a year ago.

But that aint current events anymore, sport. It’s the political machinations of FOX(R) and Republicans...or is that redundant? Honest.

Of course if you think FOX(R) is “news” and what happened over a year ago is “current events”, well......That’s life in the bubble.

Here’s a great chronology of FOX(R) Benghazi mythology

And speaking of your bubble. Are you talking about this Eisenhower?

"This is what I mean by my constant insistence upon "moderation" in government. Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history.

There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

Or this Eisenhower?

“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

As to the misquote, “gives the GOP a pass”. Your exact phrase was “I give the GOP a pass”. You can look it up.

If we can not be critical of Obama now

And one more time, attention now....NOBODY is saying “we can not be critical of Obama..”


At 8:41 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

OK. Here’s the truth.

Are you ready?

YOU cannot be critical of Reagan for hundreds of dead Marines in Beirut Oct. 23, 1983, but you are furious at Obama for what FOX(R) tells you about Benghazi.

Want some more truth?

I don't care how close Obama was to Romney,.... Romney was not AS liberal or left as Obama is

You obviously didn’t even look at Political Compass, let alone take the test, Right?

If you looked at what I linked to, you’d have seen neither Obama nor Romney on the left. They were both cozy on the Right, with Romney higher on the authoritarian scale.

Here’s what I’m talking about

So go ahead, take the test. It’s quick and easy. Agree/disagree. Click, click and you’re done.

What are you afraid of, sport?

Oh, I know, I know just what you are afraid of. You are so out on the fringe, so much a believer in an extremist dogma, and so frightened, that you think liberals are destroying America.

You know that is just not true. Obama is no Marxist. Liberals don't hate America. And the Constitution allows for regulation of commerce, taxes, and providing for the general welfare.

Really, I swear to God. We are not destroying America. That is a dangerous delusion, son. It is loaded with fear and resentment for your fellow Americans. Many are fellow Christians, in fact.

Whoever would want you to believe such hateful nonsense?

And why do they deserve a pass?

Sorry about the questions. You are excused from answering. After all, you too, deserve a pass, Right?

At 10:10 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

Ok Dave here's what I think about example you demand I address instead of dealing with te arguments I made to support my position.

Beirut attack was over in minutes, zero tie to react to the attack

Benghazi took how many hours for the attack and murder of our people?

Then you bring up Fox News as if they mean a thing to me.

Enough Dave, deal with reality for once. I'm so finished having this circular debate with you. Deal with the lies you say about me before I waste another second of what ever time I have.

BTW my questions are used to force you to rethink your positions. I guess doing that and using humor to expose liberalism is not fair.
Tough, get over it.

At 11:07 AM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Chuckie, Chuckie, Chuckie,

"Circular debate" LOL! No. A debate includes offering facts, evidence questions and rebuttal. You avoid facts, offer no evidence, and NEVER answer questions. You throw out accusations though.

Hint: Calling me a liar without evidence is not a debate.

Deal with the lies you say about me

Ah, time for more wild eyed accusations. Not enough that "Liberals are destroying America", eh?

Show us the lies, and tell us the truth, instead of just your usual general accusations. Never happens.

How "Right" of you.

And just what "arguments" to support your position are you talking about? You mean Benghazi is a current event? LOL!!

Reagan was warned. He didn't act on the warning. Hundreds died. Facts. Deal with it.

Or keep giving the GOP your permanent pass.

Here's more truth, you hate Obama for not fixing what Bush left, more than you resent Bush for leaving the mess. Blame Bush? No, you blame Obama for what Bush did. As you blame ALL liberals. This is your cult dogma.

We're ready to hear your "facts" on Benghazi. None whatsoever offered yet, except it being a "current event". Let's see your facts. Bet they're the same as FOX(R)'s "facts". Bet you didn't check the link debunking the FOX(R) crap you embrace. Bet you $10,000.

So do these questions help you rethink your position that liberals are destroying America?

That is a dangerous delusion, son. It is loaded with fear and resentment for your fellow Americans. Many are fellow Christians, in fact.

Whoever would want you to believe such hateful nonsense?

And why do they deserve a pass?

Foolish question, Right? Since when have you rethought anything? For you, beliefs trump reason and evidence.

We note you used the word "force" to rethink. That seems to indicate your authoritarian nature. Take the test and see for yourself.

What are you afraid of, besides Right Wing propaganda that tells you liberals are destroying America?

Take the test, I dare you, tough guy.

Or are ya chicken, afraid of everything that challenges your extremist beliefs?

You've yet to explain what a liberal has done that is worse than the Bush/Wall Street Recession that you want to blame on liberals and Obama.

Time for more accusations and “Dave Alinksy” commie crap, is it?

At 2:54 PM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

Chuck, has it not occured to you that without the gun laws (which are pretty gutless thanks to the NRA) the crime rate might be HIGHER? Has it not occured to you thqt being one of the largest cities in North America population MIGHT be a factor?
Or do you just pick the one part of the situation that fits your agenda like a good Fox news dittohead?

At 8:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is good to see free speech on Tom's blog unlike Dave Dubya's blog.

Dave's blog has one guy who believes in freedom taking on a half dozen commies and kicks their ass on a regular basis. lol lol.

At 8:52 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Yeah, "one guy who believes in freedom taking on a half dozen commies and kicks their ass" is the exact opposite of free speech. Right?

Now THAT is funny.

Anonymous you so smart. Yup.

At 9:00 PM, Anonymous Try this on for size said...

Craig Andresen

The AFL-CIO and the SEIU are having a closed door meeting with Obama at the white house today.


First…Obama’s military strike against Syria was going to be DECISIVE…Then…It was gonna be LIMITED…Then, according to Kerry…IT WAS GOING TO BE REALLY, REALLY SMALL and finally, Obama said that OUR MILITARY DOESN’T DO PIN PRICKS!!!!!

This is the administration that’s in a wazoo measuring contest with the guy in Russia THAT KILLS GRIZZLIES WITH HIS BARE HANDS????

And…After 2 socialists LOST in a COLORADO RECALL over GUN RIGHTS…Debbie WHAT’S HER NAME – SCHULTZ blamed it on…VOTER SUPPRESSION!!!!!

Schultz said that, “ numerous procedural changes to the state’s election laws confused voters. “


Back in 2005…The BBC, having bought into Al Gore’s HOT AIR…Reported that the ARCTIC would ICE FREE by 2013 DUE TO GLOBAL WARMING!!!


And now that’s it IS 2013?


Oh nooooooooo…..




Naturally…Climate RESEARCH CENTERS that have been screaming “THE SKY IS FALLING…THE SKY IS FALLING” are giving credit to all that GREEN ENERGY CRAP!!!!!

I guess if you spend hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars on solar firms that go bankrupt…


I’m still waiting for these “GLOBAL WARMING” PINHEADS to offer up an explanation as to HOW the ICE AGES kept as to HOW the ICE AGES kept COMING AND GOING…WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF GOVERNMENTS!!!

frankenkerryThe Syria DEBACLE just keeps getting WORSE and WORSE for OBAMA AND HIS MINIONS!!!

Last week, during a senate hearing on the possibility of STARTING WW3…



“DR.” O’BAGY had written that, “contrary to many media accounts, the war in Syria is not being waged entirely, or even predominantly, by dangerous Islamists and al Qaeda die-hards.”


Ruh Roh…







“Those of us who work in Syria, as reporters or researchers, are a very small group of people. We’re all incredibly cautious. We’re all protective of each other. It’s a very difficult job and difficult war to work in. It’s not a war to cut your teeth in. A lot of people were quite shocked when a 26-year-old Ph.D, so-called SYRIAN EXPERT, WHO APPEARED TO HAVE…NEVER…WORKED IN THE REGION AND WHOM…NO ONE HAD HEARD OF…APPEARED ON CNN AND OTHER NETWORKS…AS A SYRIAN EXPERT!!!”



Wonder if Biden whispered in the community disorganizer’s ear…”THIS IS A BIG F-ING DEAL!!!”


Thanks for reading!

At 1:00 AM, Blogger Mozart1220 said...

"Try this on for size"...there are so many things wrong with your post that I don't know where to start. Suffice it to say that you need to tell your writer, Rush Limbaugh that we are not buying his bullshit.

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

Name one Mozart, just one.

At 12:12 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Someones foaming at the mouth again.

Isn’t it nice that many progressives agree that military intervention in Syria could be a huge mistake? Even some conservatives have learned that war is not always the answer. Then there are the nitwits who only oppose something because Obama is for it.

Too bad Republicans and Corpo-dems wrote Obamacare. No wonder it’s so corporate friendly. Medicare for all is the only sane and compassionate health care system. The rest is all “wealthcare” for insurance companies.

The BBC, having bought into Al Gore’s HOT AIR…Reported that the ARCTIC would ICE FREE by 2013 DUE TO GLOBAL WARMING!!!

Wrong. Sport. You sound like Glenn Beck chortling, “Here’s your global warming”, after a snow storm. You guys are real experts. LOL!

The BBC reported one scientist’s model that suggested that. If you could read, instead of copy and paste FOX(R) and other Murdoch corporate media sources, you’d find the error of your sentence.

“Northern polar waters COULD be ice free...” was the wording used. See the difference? Don’t care? Obviously not.

More proof fanatics are always certain of themselves. This is also why they are wrong so often.

For anyone interested in real fair and balanced reporting:

As University of Reading climate scientist Ed Hawkins noted last year,

"Around 80% of the ~100 scientists at the Bjerknes [Arctic climate science] conference thought that there would be MORE Arctic sea-ice in 2013, compared to 2012."

The reason so many climate scientists predicted more ice this year than last is quite simple. There's a principle in statistics known as "regression toward the mean," which is the phenomenon that if an extreme value of a variable is observed, the next measurement will generally be less extreme. In other words, we should not often expect to observe records in consecutive years. 2012 shattered the previous record low sea ice extent; hence 'regression towards the mean' told us that 2013 would likely have a higher minimum extent.

The amount of Arctic sea ice left at the end of the annual melt season is mainly determined by two factors – natural variability (weather patterns and ocean cycles), and human-caused global warming. The Arctic has lost 75 percent of its summer sea ice volume over the past three decades...”

Seems reasonable to a reasonable person.

Now for the forecast from the Right:

Professor Anastasios Tsonis, of the University of Wisconsin, said: ‘We are already in a cooling trend, which I think will continue for the next 15 years at least. There is no doubt the warming of the 1980s and 1990s has stopped.”

“No doubt”.

When a Right Winger says “no doubt” you’d better doubt. Remember Cheney and Bush saying “no doubt” about “nuklular” aluminum tubes, ‘biological labs”, WMD’s, and al-Qeada and Saddam hatching conspiracies together?

Time will tell on this, as it did the other false “no doubts” of the Right.

At 6:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Come on Mozart, name just one.

DD didn't you post that one of the things that made you so upset with Chuck Morre was his being "openly gleeful in his malevolence towards those who disagree with his beliefs"?

Are you aware of your own double standard on treating those you disagree with, with "malevolence"?


"Chuckie "Goebbels" Morre"

At 8:19 AM, Blogger Logic Prevailes said...

What I find interesting here is that if you are fearful of guns, then you might also include a myriad of other nations such a Brazil Mexico and many others, which have very tight gun control laws. But if you only worry about violent crime, and not the tools used you would most defiantly avoid many other countries including the UK and Australia. According to in 2011 there were about 1500 violent crimes per 100 k population. Australia is lower but it far out paces the US which has a violent crime rate of just 386.3 per 100k as per the FBI UCR. As of late the cherry picking of data to support specious arguments has just gone off the rails of reason. When you see data, look it up for your self, then get a real picture of what is actually occurring.

At 8:21 AM, Blogger Logic Prevailes said...

What I find interesting here is that if you are fearful of guns, then you might also include a myriad of other nations such a Brazil Mexico and many others, which have very tight gun control laws. But if you only worry about violent crime, and not the tools used you would most defiantly avoid many other countries including the UK and Australia. According to in 2011 there were about 1500 violent crimes per 100 k population. Australia is lower but it far out paces the US which has a violent crime rate of just 386.3 per 100k as per the FBI UCR. As of late the cherry picking of data to support specious arguments has just gone off the rails of reason. When you see data, look it up for your self, then get a real picture of what is actually occurring.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home