I guess my political transformation is complete- Bob Somerby did not like my post on Joe Klein from the other day, and had this to say:
Many readers will understand these things—but apparently, the netroots will not. Who is this major, famous pundit? Who is saying these things about Bush and Rove? The major pundit is Joe Klein—but, because some regard liberal readers as children, liberal readers are being spoon-fed other excerpts from Klein’s column and are being told—“Oh My”—that Klein is kissing Bush’s ring once again. You can see your kind being treated like children at this post, or here, or here. (Or here.) These posts include only the parts of Klein’s column which liberal leaders want you to see. And by the way, can we explain to you what you might have realized if you weren’t being thoroughly juvenilized? When Klein says that Bush was being “frothy” last week, that isn’t meant as a compliment either. Nor is it meant as a reference to blow jobs—the only metaphor in which some “liberals” now seem able to traffic.
It’s sad to see liberals treated like children. But, all through the annals of human history, “leaders” have been happy to please the masses in this manner. They’ll feed you the tidbits they want you to swallow. The babyish spinning of this column by Klein is just the latest example.
Let’s set the record straight. First, I am no liberal. The other sites he links to are, indeed, members of the fire-breathing left, and proud of it. Second, I really have no desire to see liberals succeed, so much as I want the current ‘conservatives’ to be thrown out of office. In my opinion, many liberal positions are still disastrous, but less damaging than the current crap being heaved at us by the nanny-state Republicans.
Finally, I have no desire to to treat my readers ‘like children.’ I read the Klein piece, and I felt like I was reading someting from an alternate universe. I commented on it, and I excerpted the part that I thought was most fanciful. I then included a link, because unlike some people (*cough* – BOB), I assume my readers are adults and will click through to the link and read the whole thing. They then can make their own decisions about what Klein wrote, and when they are done, they can come back here and, unlike some websites (*cough* – Bob), they can leave their comments and let me know if they agree or disagree. To date, 177 of my ‘children’ have done just that.
Daily Howler, indeed.
BTW- this is really the funniest part of Bob’s post:
These posts include only the parts of Klein’s column which liberal leaders want you to see.
I excerpted the first two paragraphs of the piece and provided a link. I didn’t selectively ‘choose’ the most ‘damning’ part- I cut and paste the first two paragraphs to give readers a taste of the babble.
BumperStickerist
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
slide smells funny
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
ppgaz is on my side of the seat.
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
no … you’re a stupid head
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
I have to pee.
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Davebo
Sommersby has gotten a bit more snarky lately. And one wonders why since Al Gore seems to be making a bit of a comeback.
Because remember, with Bob, it’s ALWAYS all about Al.
As for him mistaking you for a liberal, well it happens. For instance, you list Glenn Greenwald as a righty on your blogroll.
John Cole
When I put Glenn on the blogroll, he said he wanted to be on the center/right. Things change, I guess.
Punchy
Thanks, Dad. Just curious how it feels to be link-lumped in with all those other way-lefty sites….I think you can see how many moderate progressives (and now moderate conservatives) feel–should we not dance in line with this Admin, we’re “fire-breathing lefties” or “far left” or “moonbats”…always the most extreme label for even the softest of criticism…
There’s just no acknowledgment–from both sides–of any “moderate” position. Criticize or support Bush, and you’re reflexively labeled a moonbat or wingnut, respectively, regardless of the extent or severity of said pro or con critique.
ppGaz
You are quite right, you are not treating anyone “like children” and the complainer you cite is full of crap.
And your blurb, quoted here, is … forthright and well stated.
Good post. I know you hate to have me agree with you, but sometimes you just have to grin and bear it.
(You actually are pretty much a social liberal, you know. No points will be deducted if you just want to wear the baseball cap once in a while).
Faux News
unless (hypothetically of course) some of your readers have a “baby fetish” and wish to be diapered and bottled fed? Saw that on Jenny Jones or Jerry Springer once.
Faux News
Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
I’m waiting for John to state rather firmly:
“don’t make me stop this blog”
Krista
{spits coffee across monitor}
“Who’s your daddy”, forsooth…
John Cole
The pain- it burns. My eyes!
Mr Furious
So would this be the first ever instance of a reader (Somersby) mistaking a post by you as one from that “Liberal Tim F”?
(kidding)
Mr Furious
Though, I suppose one could wander in here on any given day when Tim’s got a few posts up, you’re feeling cranky with the Republicans and ppGaz and the Steves are running rampant in the comments and you could easily mistake this as a liberal blog…
Jim Allen
But then Tim would have to have Friday ‘Brie and Chardonnay’ blogging.
MI
Off topic, but I had to share this with you guys. It’s fascinating. Be sure to read to the last line, which is simply orgasmic.
“Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq
Thursday, June 22, 2006
PHOTOS VIDEO
WASHINGTON — The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.
“We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons,” Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.
Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: “Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq’s pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.”
• Click here to read the declassified portion of the NGIC report.
He added that the report warns about the hazards that the chemical weapons could still pose to coalition troops in Iraq.
“The purity of the agents inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal,” Santorum read from the document.
“This says weapons have been discovered, more weapons exist and they state that Iraq was not a WMD-free zone, that there are continuing threats from the materials that are or may still be in Iraq,” said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.
Hoekstra said the report, completed in April but only declassified now, shows that “there is still a lot about Iraq that we don’t fully understand.”
Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn’t advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq.
Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.
“This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991,” the official said, adding the munitions “are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war.”
The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein’s intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq.
He also said that the Defense Department statement shortly after the March 2003 invasion saying that “we had all known weapons facilities secured,” has proven itself to be untrue.
“It turned out the whole country was an ammo dump,” he said, adding that on more than one occasion, a conventional weapons site has been uncovered and chemical weapons have been discovered mixed within them.
Hoekstra and Santorum lamented that Americans were given the impression after a 16-month search conducted by the Iraq Survey Group that the evidence of continuing research and development of weapons of mass destruction was insignificant. But the National Ground Intelligence Center took up where the ISG left off when it completed its report in November 2004, and in the process of collecting intelligence for the purpose of force protection for soldiers and sailors still on the ground in Iraq, has shown that the weapons inspections were incomplete, they and others have said.
“We know it was there, in place, it just wasn’t operative when inspectors got there after the war, but we know what the inspectors found from talking with the scientists in Iraq that it could have been cranked up immediately, and that’s what Saddam had planned to do if the sanctions against Iraq had halted and they were certainly headed in that direction,” said Fred Barnes, editor of The Weekly Standard and a FOX News contributor.
“It is significant. Perhaps, the administration just, they think they weathered the debate over WMD being found there immediately and don’t want to return to it again because things are otherwise going better for them, and then, I think, there’s mindless resistance to releasing any classified documents from Iraq,” Barnes said.
The release of the declassified materials comes as the Senate debates Democratic proposals to create a timetable for U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq. The debate has had the effect of creating disunity among Democrats, a majority of whom shrunk Wednesday from an amendment proposed by Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts to have troops to be completely withdrawn from Iraq by the middle of next year.
At the same time, congressional Republicans have stayed highly united, rallying around a White House that has seen successes in the last couple weeks, first with the death of terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, then the completion of the formation of Iraq’s Cabinet and then the announcement Tuesday that another key Al Qaeda in Iraq leader, “religious emir” Mansour Suleiman Mansour Khalifi al-Mashhadani, or Sheik Mansour, was also killed in a U.S. airstrike.
Santorum pointed out that during Wednesday’s debate, several Senate Democrats said that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, a claim, he said, that the declassified document proves is untrue.
“This is an incredibly — in my mind — significant finding. The idea that, as my colleagues have repeatedly said in this debate on the other side of the aisle, that there are no weapons of mass destruction, is in fact false,” he said.
As a result of this new information, under the aegis of his chairmanship, Hoekstra said he is going to ask for more reporting by the various intelligence agencies about weapons of mass destruction.
“We are working on the declassification of the report. We are going to do a thorough search of what additional reports exist in the intelligence community. And we are going to put additional pressure on the Department of Defense and the folks in Iraq to more fully pursue a complete investigation of what existed in Iraq before the war,” Hoekstra said.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
===
Now for the liberals and left wingnuts to downplay this find..
*** They are old munitions from pre 1991
Answer: They were not distroyed per UN resolutions
***They have no lethality..
Answer: Mustard Gas canister have lost some lethality, Sarin is very dangerous. and if found by insurgents would have been the new IED…
Bottom Line: Saddam had em, lied to the world, the UN, and the IAEA, and UNMOVIC inspectors, hid them, and could have possibly used them against coaltion forces. He has used them in the past against his own people and against his neighbors….
I am not particularly concerned that those who opposed the war, will try to spin this to insignificance. We did not go in just for WMD, although that has been the rallying cry of the left and liberal leaning on the BV and for that matter the world. But, it will be interesting to see how the world reacts.
Last night, Fox carried the news. Nobody else. What does that tell You???”
Indeed.
jg
That FOX has no problem passing on bullshit from the right. 15 year old chemwems that have degraded to the point of being useless are not the reason we went to war.
Jim Allen
From the Iraq Survey Group Final Report:
From MI:
That some people will believe anything.
Punchy
That’s the longest spoof post I’ve ever seen….
Ready? YAWN…..
(a little hint: if this really were true and legit, they’da unpacked this “gem” in October of 2004…)
jg
Sadly it doesn’t need to be true for the right to leap on it. its only through nuance that one sees this as bullshit. Its too truthy for the wingnuts to ignore. They want his to be true, their leadership knows this.
There’s plenty of flimsy circumstantial evidence of WMD in Iraq. The wingnuts don’t need solid evidence to convince them their beliefs are true. It must be so fun to be a republican politician these days.
Andrew
The amazing thing is that Fox also did actual reporting on this and called the DoD, which said, in not quite so few words, that Rick Santorum is a HUGE FUCKING IDIOT.
jg
I don’t know if he was talking about you here John. I think it was on Eschaton that I saw a whole slew of Klein quotes that made him look like a self loathing liberal.
D. Mason
Clearly Saddam was a huge threat to America.
lol
MI
When I put Glenn on the blogroll, he said he wanted to be on the center/right. Things change, I guess.
I’ve always wondered about that.
Perry Como
It was imperative that we take out his 100mm guns that were aimed at D.C.
Mike in SLO
Hey, don’t let MI veer the comments off the subject of this post! The post is about Somerby. If you want to go off topic wait for an open thread and don’t be see G*ddamn greedy as to post a 30 paragraph “off=topic” comment. Go post on Townhall instead—you’ll get a much more receptive audience.
John D.
Given my own experiences, I’d say it’s not Glenn who changed, but the midpoint of the left/right designation. Which, as far as I am concerned, is the stupidest invention in discourse ever, even topping “Whasssssssssssup”.
I’m socially liberal, fiscally conservative, and a staunch civil libertarian. So am I a lefty, a righty, a big “L” libertarian, small “l” libertarian, or a duck? More importantly, does it matter?
An argument should stand on its own merits, completely apart from the person making the argument. While I’m wishing, though, I’d like a million bucks, a Porsche, and a pony.
ppGaz
The also discovered a cache of used razor blades stuffed into a slot in a bathroom in Saddam’s palace. These dangerous blades could have been used to slit the throats of Americans had they been slipped to terrorists, which was clearly their intended purpose.
Bruce Moomaw
The current Cole-Somerby donnybrook is just further evidence for my growing belief that God has retired and left the management of the Universe to Lewis Carroll.
The Other Steve
Right. As opposed to the Matt Drudge, creating quotes out of context by stringing together random words from page 4, page 12, page 3, page 24, page 13 of a speech with ellipses.
Right… blockquoting two paragraphs of a Klein op-ed is treating us like children by comparison.
The Other Steve
That’s not entirely true. Crazy Hoekstra and Whacky Santorum are running around spouting this as gospel too…
link
Frankly anybody still running around claiming we found evidence of WMDs in Iraq is not right in the head.
demimondian
Wow! MI is going to terra code braun! Because Fox News has…yes, you’ve guessed it…regurgitated an old report from the original weapons inspectors who found expired weapons that had already been declared. What’s this, the fourth time it’s come back? Man, that’s some tough zombie, eh?
Dave Ruddell
Does this mean that John Cole is now a “Jane Hamsher of the Left”? He’s come full circle!
D. Mason
I was pretty young at the time of the first gulf war so pardon me if my information is way off here. Didn’t we give weapons and support to kurdiush rebels inside Iraq before leaving them high and dry when we pulled out?If so, is it also possible that they gained access to part of Saddams arsenal?
Tom in Texas
Hey MI, while we’re fawning over Fox News;
E.D. Hill, that pretty lil’ blonde host on Fox and Friends, wrote an article? editorial? To borrow half their motto: you decide.
Somehow this morning anchor got information no one else in the media is privy to, ‘cuz she knows for a fact that those two kidnapped and tortured soldiers (sorry Blogreeder) ha(d) “their hearts cut out, their testicles cut off, their penises cut off and stuffed in their mouths, arms contorted and eyes gouged?” And also they were betrayed by our supposed allies. So she reacts like Ed Anger would in My America. (Any WWNews readers out there? Best satire ever, with the possible exception of The Simpsons).
ppGaz
That these lying fucks have no respect for the intelligence and judgment of the people?
Tom in Texas
And Mason: it is quite likely that these are in fact weapons Reagan, Cheney, and Rumsfeld sold to Saddam during his war with Iran in the 1980’s.
MI
Just to be clear, what I posted was a post from a right-leaning site that I found wildly amussing. I’m only responsible for the quick intro and the “indeed”.
Tom in Texas
MI; who wrote:
? I ask because it was not in the article itself.
Jim Allen
Jeebus, man, learn to use block quotes and links!
Tom in Texas
Sorry I’ll read you posts in the future.
D. Mason
Tom – Yeah you’re unfortunately right… probably, but what I’m wondering is is Saddam remained in control of them during the 90’s. I mean, he clearly destroyed alot of his chemical weapons so this begs the question: Why keep the stuff with an expiration date? The whole thing seems a little silly to me. Like a game of gotcha or something.
The Other Steve
We provided air support, and basically prevented Saddam’s forces from getting into the area. This allowed the Kurds to prevent much govern themselves.
I don’t know if we gave them weapons per se, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they obtained weapons from Saddam’s arsenal left behind.
sidenote: It’s interesting… whenever we give weapons to these guys over in the middle east, it’s generally Russian equipment. AK-47’s… RPGs, etc.
MI
Oh I’m definitely guilty of being code-inept, sorry about that. Italics and Bold I have down, but that’s about the extent of my knowledge. Is there a guide out there I can check out?
Richard 23
You are obviously a cheap date. And no, I’m not interested.
This intro reeks of spambot. I wonder how many other places this “off topic” post has been plastered.
This is a really great blog! Off topic, but I found this post searching for male erector sets. You can find more info on my blog all about male erector sets. Bleh.
Tom in Texas
MI;
There are shortcuts on the posting form itself on this blog. If you look on top of the window you type your response in, there will be a small button that looks like “>>”. Click on it and it’ll expand. There ya go!! Just hit “B-Qoute” at the start and “/B-Quote” at the end of a long pull and it’ll be in one of those gray boxes! Highlight the word/text you want to link, click “Link” and type in the address to link. Voila!
MI
Holy shit! Thanks, Tom. I (obviously) never noticed the little arrow thingy. This is great!
caroline
I have a question. I have met a lot of people like John Cole recently. Many use reason like John and on some issues we agree while on other issues we disagrees. However, there are other republicans out there who when you point out issues using reason devolve into screaming about Nancy Pelosi. It’s like they have absolutely no reason to be a Republican other than Nancy Pelosi? heck, most of them can’t even defend the GOP.
John S.
Right you are, John D., and this sentiment has been repeatedly expressed by Greenwald himself:
Andrew
One day, sweet Caroline, you will realize that about half of the people in the country are total idiots who afraid of gay Mexicans getting married and taking away their guns.
JoeTx
I’ll hold off on posting to MI to prevent further threadjack..
Thats pretty much what I am. But pretty hard to fit on a bumper sticker, so I’d guess we’ll have to wait for the Duck party.
This is what burns me up so bad. The right MAKES it matter to further divide us. Every other word out of their mouths is “Liberal” or “Radical-Left”. Like it was in your early school days, they can’t win the arguments on facts, only drowned us out with name calling.
I PREFER to be called an AMERICAN!
Pb
John D., JoeTx,
Yeah, me too, actually I think a lot of people here are libertarians or ‘liberal-libertarians’ of some flavor or another. But no, last I heard, it makes you a flaming pinko commie seditious traitor hippie murderer Frenchie sympathizer surrender monkey who wants to give away the home front to the gay Mexican al-Qaeda hordes on the border and watch all our troops die when obviously the right path is to ‘stay the course’ right down the toilet.
Tom in Texas
You are a moonbat. You are presumably for gay marriage and stem cell research, for the estate tax and repeal of the tax cuts, and against the NSA program and the torture of Arabs in secret prisons. Wear the term proudly, BDS sufferer. You are a moonbat.
Aaand in another blatant threadjack, I now present a panel of right wing blogger’s opinions of the worst people in the world, Numbers 10-1:
10) Markos Moulitsas Zúniga (18)
10) Jesse Jackson (18)
9) George Soros (19)
7) Nancy Pelosi (22)
7) John Murtha (22)
5) John Kerry (23)
5) Al Gore (23)
4) Cindy Sheehan (26)
3) Hillary Clinton (27)
2) Ted Kennedy (28)
1) Michael Moore (36)
Personally I’m shocked at Kos’s rank. He beat out Clinton, Dean, Carter, Chomsky, and Rather. It also continually amazes me the amount of venom people harbor towards Sheehan. I don’t agree with everything she says, but I don’t consider her to be one of the worst living Americans. Guess I’m a moonbat too.
Rusty Shackleford
What that guy said. Thanks!
Pb
Andrew,
Heh. How sad that mine isn’t even the first ‘gay mexican’ post. Props. Vote for fear, etc.
Tom in Texas
Rusty;
You are very welcome. Such an feature might work well at your own site. I’m assuming you are the proprietor of the Jawa Report, so I’ll go on assuming. It’s a shame your site was sabotaged. I’m betting you printed a picture of the prophet Muhammad in binary code or something.
p.lukasiak
Somersby is a moron.
One of the things about blogtopia is that you learn to build trust in the bloggers you read. So if Jane Hamsher cites something Joe Klein wrote, I know she’s presenting it in context.
The point of most “liberal bloggers” criticism of Klein is that he is supposed to be Time’s “liberal” columnist, but he spends a great deal of his time trashing liberals and praising Bush. When he does either, he gets called on it — and Klein can’t handle criticism.
Richard 23
Why a duck? Why not The Pirate Party?
JoeTx
gay marriage – I’m for civil unions whether it be man-man, man-women, women-women (can I watch?), man-snake, snake-snake, whatever. Governance shouldn’t be based on personal moral values.
stem cell research – DUH! Of course, why would we NOT want to research new ways to fight and cure deseases.
for the estate tax and repeal of the tax cuts – you promise us a responsible administration instead of drunkin sailers in port for the first time, who spend what they have, who spend responsibily, then we’ll talk. You don’t cut taxes until you can PROVE you know HOW to balance a budget. You don’t balance budges by cutting social domestic programs and cutting money on national infrastructure projects and at the same time continue to increase the military spending, that is just immoral…
and against the NSA program – I am against any programs our government refuse to submit to any oversite. Our founding fathers would role over in their graves if they saw the level of intrusion our government has put upon us…
and the torture of Arabs in secret prisons. – Losing the moral high ground does nothing to win the hearts and minds internationally. We should not lower ourselves to the lowest common denominator terrorist. I am NOT proud of what Cheney is doing to our country…
Rusty Shackleford
Here
Here
The (bogus) WMDs story is growing legs on Right.
Tom in Texas
JoeTX;
I was being sarcastic with the moonbat jibe. I tried to slip it in with the “guess I’m a moonbat too” thing at the end, but maybe I was offbase. I agree with every one of your stances for the reasons you state, with the exception of manimal marriage — I think a marriage should be mutually agreed upon by two or more people who are capable of understanding the decision they are making. I am ok with polygamy, cousins marrying, and gay marriage, but not animal, kiddie, or human vegetable marriages. But that’s what makes this tent so big — we moonbats are so diverse.
On a side note, where in TX ya from? I hail from Houston myself.
Rusty Shackleford
That’s not me. I think “Rusty Shackleford” may be a popular alias. Dale Gribble (King of the Hill) uses “Rusty Shackleford” as his alias.
Hank Hill is the type of Republican we need more of. He even showed respect to Jimmy Carter. Too bad he’s a cartoon.
King of the Hill trivia
Pb
Tom in Texas,
I find it particularly incredible that Murtha is #7. And then of course you have Markos at #10, Soros at #9, Kerry at #5, Gore at #5, Sheehan at #4, Kennedy at #2, etc… why do Republicans hate the military, veterans, and their families *so much*?
In a related note, if we could agree on the top 10 (or top 100… or perhaps top 1,000… etc.) worst Republican Political Hacks and Shills in America, (no, no, not ‘worst people in the world’, that’s just ridiculous… note how Republicans apparently don’t actually think foreign dictators are bad, or at least not as bad as *liberals* with opinions!) do you think they’d have even close to that much military experience?
They used to, you know, back when they weren’t miring us in foreign wars. You had George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole, and many others. I guess McCain’s still around, but even he’s somewhat on the outside of the current warmongering party core that’s in power now. I guess it’s not surprising that they’re woefully incompetent *and* have no real experience in this department.
Pb
Rusty Shackleford,
Just you wait until they find out about the 500+ tons of yellowcake that’s been sitting over there forever, too… then they’ll *really* go crazy. After all, little details like facts and context and timelines don’t matter to these shameless shillers, as they continue to prove, every hour of every day.
Rusty Shackleford
Here
How the hell did the liberals get stuck with Fred Phelps?
Tom in Texas
Pb;
In all fairness the contest was a play off of Olbermann’s new book. The standard as set by Keith was
And from the poll’s administrator:
Doesn’t change your point as to their hating our troops, but still, the reason they didn’t pick Saddam ond Bin Laden is because they couldn’t.
Tom in Texas
I found a can of decomposed mustard gas on my trip to Belgium. What are the Germans hiding?
Tom in Texas
And Rusty. King of the Hill ranks pretty damn high in the satire department, especially if you are from Texas. Only a Texan can truly appreciate the name LuAnn Platter, foir instance.
Pb
Tom in Texas,
Well, that’s something, then. I didn’t look into the details of that particular poll (obviously) but I remember seeing at least one similar poll previously where there were no such restrictions, and quite a few prominent liberals cluttering up the list (as opposed to the ‘brutal dictators’ and terrorists you might expect).
Pb
John McCain (5)? ROFL!
After doing almost no research, I have found that the list actually reads like a who’s-who of who Scaife, Horowitz, and friends want you to hate this week, through their websites, think-tanks, and shills in the media–I guess that ties in quite nicely with my proposed Worst Republican Shill list–just trace back who-smeared-who the most, and it practically writes itself!
Punchy
You took the words out of my mouth. The ONLY guy telling the truth in this whole affair…the only guy meeting equally with troops, generals, G.I. Stumps in Walter Reed, Iraqi politicians, and US officials…and he’s the 7th most hated?
Rusty Shackleford
Anybody see this?
Tom in Texas
Pb;
Actually McCain got 5 votes in the contest — tied with Schumer, Paris Hilton, and Lane Fonda for 30th place. Still, did anyone push the button for O’Reilly? Limbaugh? Savage? Coulter? Drudge? If so, it wasn’t many.
Krista
yep. That pretty much describes most of the people on this site, I’d say. It’s called being responsible and minding your own damn business. The Grown-Up Party, in other words.
Rusty Shackleford
How did we get stuck with Paris “Estate Tax” Hilton?
Do they just assign every objectionable celebrity to the left?
Pb
Tom in Texas,
Didn’t I just say that?
I’m thinking… only if they asked Mr. Keith (#17 with 12 votes) Olbermann… :)
JoeTx
Hey Tom, I’m from Houston as well!
The snake reference was from Cobert Report the other night!
Zifnab
Is she even alive anymore? Why not put up Elvis for polluting our sweet American youth with his devil-loving rock and or roll?
I’m also horribly shocked to see that the Center-Right is so divided on this issue. Surely they should have all come together and voted on the same candidate. Perhaps this shows a deep lack of conviction from the conservative center. Or maybe they were just confused because Rove hadn’t already released a memo on this.
I don’t know. I’m not a big reader of… whatever site that was.
HyperIon
regarding
it reminds me of a conversation i had many years ago:
he said: i’m really a libertarian but i vote republican.
i said: i’m really an anarcho-syndicalist but i vote democratic.
SeesThroughIt
Awesome.
I, too, am a member of the Duck Party. Or at least I would be if I weren’t so busy chairing meetings for the Gay Commie Satanist Illegal Immigrant Abortionists.
The Other Steve
It’s one of the sad aspects of the whacko right, that they have to smear people by calling them the “Worst person in the world”, rather than just acknowledging that they disagree.
The Other Steve
Man, here I thought it was going to be a lotto where you could pick the time that the Congress finally authorized bringing the troops home.
It’s a good strategy. I mean when you’ve got Hastert and other Republicans manipulating things to line their own pocket, the best way to motivate them is for them to have a chance to win millions by manipulating the bill such that their time slot wins.
Ancient Purple
Only in their minds. I just saw a bit of Hardball and even Pat Buchanan was literally rolling his eyes at Santorum about this story. Nora O’Donnell (sitting in for Matthews) all but called Santorum an idiot.
Only people like Hugh Hewitt see this as something other than Santorum desperately trying to save his Senate seat.
scs
This is not completely related to this thread, but I was just looking at the NYT website to see what their opinion was on the disclosure yesterday by Rick Santorum of 500 shells with mustard and sarin found in Iraq, which Fox talked about all day yesterday. I thought they would probably pooh pooh of course, it but just wanted to see how. So I looked around, didn’t see anything. Thought maybe it ran yesterday. So I did a search on ‘sarin’ – nothing. Did a search on shells, 500, nothing. So unless I missed it, the NYT ran NOTHING about this story!
Okay granted, some people call this disclosure no big deal, but it is the first detailed, concrete confirmation we’ve been made aware of that Saddam definitley lied and there were defintily WMD there, whether or not you consider them a real threat. Or at least the fact that Santorum called a news conference to try and talk about this was some news. So even if they didn’t think the WMD angle was big, it was a REAL news story in some way at least and they could have at least mentioned it.
I remember them doing a total news blcak out on the whole Kerry SwiftBoat thing as well. Although I love many of the articles in the NYT, their editor’s inclination to totally black out certain news items remind me of the Soviet newspaper. That is shocking to me for a international paper. Someone needs to speak out on this.
scs
Okay Ancient mentioned the WMD thing right before I posted. Good, my post is related now.
Punchy
Where do I begin? That’s the very fucking reason (“a real threat”) we went in!!!!
Ya know, if I grew 80,000 bananas in my yard in the 80’s, and then was told to dispose of all of them…every last trace…chances are, I’m going to miss a banana or two. Of course, 15 years later, who the fuck am I going to kill will 1 or 2 20 year-old bananas???
Perry Como
:cough:
John S.
As usual, your doe-eyed analysis is so wide of the mark that it is positively frightening:
Source
Useless weapons from before the first Gulf War do not a news story make, no matter how breathlessly you and Rick Santorum want to gasp about it.
tBone
Fellow Duck Party member here. You guys in the GCSIIA really suck, though – you totally ripped off the name of the organization I chair, Gay Commie Satanist Illegal Immigrant Flag-Burning Abortionists.
Richard 23
And that this is such a big story that Santorum (R-brings dead fetus home to bond with his family) is the only one wise enough and brave enough to be alerting us to it suggests what, scs?
Oops. I’m shooting the messenger rather than his laughable revelation. But oy, what a tool.
Ancient Purple
It’s all a conspiracy, scs. A conspiracy run by the hordes of fundamentalists in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America located in that liberal haven called Mesa, AZ.
JoeTx
{snark} But you forget, that is just the big bad ol “liberal” media “suppressing” good news for Bush! {/snark}
That sounds funny, but a saw that on a right-wing blog I am NOT going to honor with a link to…
Krista
No, Ancient Purple. It’s a conspiracy, all right, but the truth is that the entire staff of the NYT consists of DougJ and his minions.
Andrew
DougJ became operational in Urbana, Illinois on the 12th of January, 1992.
JoeTx
It really doesn’t matter if its true or not. All it takes is one “source” to get it “out there” then its gospel…
The Other Steve
I don’t recall sarin or mustard gas turning into a mushroom cloud.
This stuff was apparently known to the UN inspector teams, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it wasn’t found at the locations we bombed the shit out of in 1998.
Anyway, you’re grasping at straws, and the idiots like Hoekstra and Santorum make themselves look like morons.
THE US DID NOT INVADE IRAQ BECAUSE THEY WERE IN VIOLATION OF UN SANCTIONS. WE INVADED IRAQ BECAUSE WE CLAIMED THEY HAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS CAPABILITY.
Any violations of UN sanctions would have been dealt by the UN, but they said “Let’s wait for the inspectors and then we’ll talk” and we told them “Fuck you, we’re going in anyway.”
The Other Steve
I have heard confirmed reports now that GW Bush is living off a diet of puppies and rabbit heads.
And Dick Cheney drinks cat blood.
No links, sorry. But Fox News was talking about this all day yesterday, so you know it has to be true!
scs
All of you are missing my point. I did not post so much on whether the WMD story was true or particularly meaningful (although as an fyi it does seem to me the first actual confirmation of WMD’s that I can remember). No. I posted more on the fact that the NYT chose not to mention it AT ALL. They could have at least mentioned it to make fun of it, so that at least their leftie fans would know what the heck people were talking about at the water cooler at work the next day when they brought up Santorum and WMDs.
If they aren’t mentioning this tidbit, what else aren’t they mentioning? I think this does show the lengths that leftie libs will go to to control the spin for their cause. It’s Pravda all over again.
The Other Steve
You are right.
The NY Times should publish an article about how Fox News uses contrived propaganda to try to deceive the nation.
I am sorry.
The Other Steve
BTW, I find it strange how you equate the NY Times with Pravda when it was Fox News that was spreading propaganda.
In Pravda there is no news, and at Fox News there is no Truth.
Pb
They didn’t mention that you’re a gay Mexican terrorist either! WHAT ELSE AREN’T THEY MENTIONING??
MikeLucca
MI says:
Bottom Line: Saddam had em, lied to the world, the UN, and the IAEA, and UNMOVIC inspectors, hid them, and could have possibly used them against coaltion forces. He has used them in the past against his own people and against his neighbors….
That’s extremely premature, to say that Saddam had WMDs for sure. The jury is still out on the question, at best. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t a threat to the world and his people. We’re better off with him out of power. But let’s not get carried away.
Jim Allen
Well, if we’re going to be forming the Duck Party here, Tim will have to add Thursday Pinot Noir Blogging to his Friday Beer Blogging duties.
MikeLucca
Jim, I think Pinot Noir is a little light to go with duck. A syrah or grenache-based wine, or even zinfandel (depending on how the duck is prepared) would be a better accompaniment.
Ancient Purple
This past Wednesday, the Prime Minister of Sweden had a chocolate mousse for dessert rather than the chocolate cake. But the NYT didn’t mention this.
If they aren’t mentioning this tidbit, what else aren’t they mentioning????????????
Krista
Well exactly! We certainly can’t trust the media to decide what is actually newsworthy, due to their biases. Why should they have that kind of power? Our elected officials should decide what is newsworthy, and should then notify the media, who will then print the stories for the rest of the citizenry.
That’s weird. Why am I suddenly craving borscht?
Tim F.
Any media outlet that downplays this story is doing Rick Santorum a favor. Since you asked, they’re also not reporting that Rick Santorum has never lived in his registered house in PA and that he says wacked-ass shit like this all the time.
Jim Allen
Aha! You fell right into my little trap! You’re no conservative, you’re a wine-drinking, elitist, leftie, commie spoof!
That aside, there are some full-bodied Pinots Noir from Oregon that pair up nicely with duck. But you’re right about the syrahs, and (some) zinfandels.
RalphF
Somerby is an idiot. He thinks he is smarter than any one else on the planet.
CaseyL
Betcha there are a lot of spent cartridges and empty magazines in Iraq the NYT isn’t mentioning, either.
I can’t get angry at what wingnuts believe anymore, because it’s like getting angry at an Alzheimer’s patient for bedwetting: they can’t help it, because their brains just don’t work.
arnott
when will American’s obsession with the 2 parties stop , and they will start using their common sense when choosing candidates ?