Breaking Dim Bulbs

Big Dog, Republicans would rather rebuild Iraq than America

2009-02-10T21:07:00.000-08:00

Notice the howling on the right about how the stimulus bill will supposedly bankrupt us?

Notice how the amounts being discussed for the stimulus package are about as much as has been spent/allocated/wasted/lost in Iraq? Here is one Iraq war cost counter:

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

This is a pretty conservative figure as it excludes the costs of a lifetime of caring for wounded vets, replacing equipment, eventual withdrawal, etc. In fact, the war, which, according to it's defenders, was the result of 'intelligence mistakes' will almost certainly have costs exceeding at least $1 Trillion. I defy anyone to find any Republican besides Ron Paul who has EVER decried the unending waste of US tax dollars (not to mention lives) in the rudderless Iraq war.

You'll never hear wingnuts & Republicans talk about this though. They'd rather rebuild Iraq than America.

Why don't they do us all a favor and move to Iraq since they love it more than they love America?

More jumping to ridiculous conclusions by big Dog

2008-03-24T20:32:00.000-07:00

This is a perfect glimpse into the mind & logic of a moronic wingnut. As usual, the wingnut in question, big Dog, has chosen not to publish my comment because he's too delicate to be called out on his blog.

You'll note that it's a photo of Hillary Clinton standing in front of a banner that appears to say 'Count' but Hillary blocks the 'o' so it reads C*nt.

big Dog then demonstrates his intellectual laziness by saying the following about the photo:

I do not know if this is real or shopped but if it is real I am absolutely certain the photographer took this angle on purpose.
The amazing thing is that the photograph has a certain truth to it, like it was karma or something…

So, to review, big Dog has no idea if the photo has been photoshopped but proceeds to say that it's amazing that the photo has a certain truth (not humor or offensiveness) to it, like 'it was karma or something'.

Watch his blog for this pattern. He often jumps to such sweeping, invalid conclusions - it's 'karma or something' - in spite of the fact that he's not even sure if the photo (or evidence or data) are authentic.

This probably mirrors the reason he (and his low-IQ commentors) accept Christianity, as well. An analogy would be him getting bitten by a snake and not getting sick. It's not that the snake might not be poisonous - it's that God saved him!

Iranian President Ahmadinejad Given Warm Welcome in Baghdad. Does this mean we're winning?

2008-03-03T00:56:00.000-08:00

The Iranian President visited Iraq and didn't even bother sneaking in like a scared little girl like our own President. I guess this is just yet more evidence of the 'success' that the right wing is always boasting about. Speaking of Iraq and the right wing, they sure don't write about the war much anymore, do they?

Anyhow, regarding Ahmadinejad's trip, this news report said:

The trip by Ahmadinejad, who once fought Saddam Hussein's Sunni-dominated regime as a member of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, was a dramatic illustration of one of the unintended consequences of the 2003 U.S. invasion - the replacement of Saddam with Shiite forces closely allied to the cleric-led Islamic republic next door. [My comment: Who would have ever thought this would happen? Oh right, all sorts of people! Even this crazy moonbat, from before the war even started (watch from 1:44:50).]
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, a Sunni Kurd, greeted Ahmadinejad with an honor guard and a band that played both countries' national anthems. The two held hands at the red-carpet welcome ceremony in a traditional display of friendship. Talabani told Ahmadinejad to call him "Uncle Jalal," as he known in Iraq's Kurdish north.
Talabani said he and Ahmadinejad discussed economic, political, security and oil issues and planned to sign several unspecified agreements.
"We had very good talks that were friendly and brotherly,"
Ahmadinejad said. "We have mutual understandings and views in all fields, and both sides plan to improve relations as much as possible."
Then he cut through the Green Zone to visit al-Maliki in his Cabinet offices. The sprawling, American-controlled zone contains a massive new U.S. embassy and is heavily protected against occasional rocket attacks, which the Americans have
blamed on Iranian-backed Shiite extremists.
Ahmadinejad denied the charges at least twice during the day.
"Such accusations increase the problems of the Americans in the region," he said.

Al-Maliki said Ahmadinejad's visit was "an expression of the strong desire of enhancing relations and developing mutual
interests after the past tension during the dictatorship era."
About 1 million people died in the catastrophic war that erupted after Saddam invaded Iran in 1980. But when Saddam's regime fell to the U.S.-led invasion and Iraq's Shiite majority took power, long-standing ties between the Shiites of both countries flourished again.
Ahmadinejad said he was "very pleased with his visit to an Iraq not ruled by a dictator," and stressed that Iran wanted a stable Iraq that would benefit the region.
"A united Iraq, a sovereign Iraq and an advanced Iraq is to the benefit of all regional nations and the people of Iran," he said.
He announced the dates of his visit in advance, landed at Baghdad International Airport in daylight and drove through the capital, albeit in a heavily guarded convoy, on a relatively quiet day. Iraqi forces provided security.

President Bush's visits are typically a surprise and involve trips to U.S. military bases, like his journey to an air base in Anbar province last September.

Isn't this exactly what wingnuts were hoping would not happen? Am I still not allowed to say that our President is a failure, based on his own objectives? Mission accomplished, indeed!

Grover Norquist, Anti-Tax Crusading GOP Ultra-Insider, Employed ILLEGAL (!) at His Organization

2008-02-21T23:17:00.001-08:00

Big Dog, what's the verdict? Throw Norquist in jail for hiring ILLEGALS?

Immigration experts said that when it hired Kamburowski, the Norquist organization either failed to comply with federal laws requiring it to verify his work status or was badly hoodwinked.
"The guy was working here illegally and living here illegally," said San Francisco immigration attorney Martin Lawler, who reviewed the case for The Chronicle. "... Either they were really
sloppy in checking, or he conned them, or they knew...."
With control of illegal immigration a hot-button topic for Republicans in the 2008 election, the apparent violation by one of the nation's leading conservative voices underscores the
challenges of the issue, political insiders say.
The Kamburowski case "shows that the illegal immigration debate is far more complicated than just a bunch of people coming across the Mexican border," said Bill Whalen, Hoover Institution research fellow and Republican strategist. "It's an onion with so many layers to it, and it's not simple as saying 'Build a fence and deal with the Mexican problem.' "

Norquist was also one of Jack Abramoff's money launderers, by the way. Read it and weep, sucker. These are the criminals who dupe 'conservatives' time and again as 'conservatives' stupidly applaud their own fleecing. Don't believe me? Read their own e-mails that were made public during the Abramoff hearings/trial. These leading 'Conservatives' refer to the Republican base as Christian 'wackos'.

Petty GOP Criminality in the News Today

2008-02-18T18:49:00.000-08:00

Note: If a non-Republican did this, I'm sure it would have been in all of the press. Republicans on the other hand, are ignored. Could it be because it's so common?

1. Pat Robertson speaking about his cocaine using 700 Club Producer (with video!)

2. Federal Judge nominated by Bush busted for DUI, dressed like a woman:

When cops arrived, the paper reported, Somma was wearing a cocktail dress, fishnet stockings, women’s heels and fumbled through a purse for his driver’s license....

He told police he drank two gin and tonics at a Manchester bar. He said he came to New Hampshire because his wife was out of town and nobody knew him in the city, the paper reported.

Rudolph Giuliani, Mayor of 9/11, of course was surrounded with such criminals and holier-than-thou Republicans were predictably mum.

Big Dog: Mistakenly Thinks Regulation = 'Socialism'.

2008-02-15T22:19:00.000-08:00

I think Big Dog should avoid discussing anything related to economics primarily because he knows absolutely nothing about it. Decide for yourself though - he accuses Hillary Clinton of wanting to 'take over', among other things, oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, credit card companies, etc.:

Hillary and big government are going to take over all these businesses and people and tell them how they have to conduct themselves, how much profit they can make and how much they may charge for their services.

Memo to Big Dog: Regulation does not equal socialism. There is no evidence in your laundry list of Hillary statements that she plans to 'take over all of these businesses.' You simply made a wild and fantastical leap that once again demonstrated your complete lack of understanding of economics. Remember: Regulation does not equal socialism. Write that down so you don't forget!

Even more hilarious was Big Dog's acknowledgement IN THE SAME POST that regulatory agencies (the FDA in particular) help maintain the safety of our food and drugs, among other things. At least they did until Bush put industry lobbyists in charge of the agencies that are supposed to regulate those industries. It's also worth pointing out that these agencies, which are designed to protect investors, enforce mine safety, etc. are almost always created by so-called liberals because liberals try to protect ordinary Americans. Big Dog and his conservative friends, on the other hand, would rather support big business and millionaires. They love having their wealth and tax dollars redistributed to people and entities that are already wealthy. Wingnuts are truly a bunch of suckers. They love getting duped.

Of course, in typical cut-and-running fashion, Big Dog decided not to publish my comment pointing out his confusion over regulation and 'socialism', which is why I had to address the issue here.

Big Dog: Doesn't Understand Why America Does Business with the Saudi Decapitators

2008-02-07T21:54:00.001-08:00

Yes, he actually is this stoopid:

I would never let my wife go to one of those filthy places for any reason, business or not.

BD doesn't seem terribly concerned about American female soldiers being stationed in such places! He continues:

First of all I would not want her around all those filthy, smelly, camel jockeys. Second of all I would not take kindly to my wife being treated improperly by these stone aged barbarians. I can’t understand why anyone does business there and certainly cannot understand how people tolerate the backstabbing goat herders they pass off as men.

I guess he forgot - if that's actually possible - that they're the world's largest oil producer and America needs to feed it's oil addiction; therefore we cozy up to fundamentalist monarchs, along with assorted other oil producing dictatorships. I guess Big Dog (who suffers from Clinton Derangement Syndrome and therefore strangely shares the same nickname as Bill Clinton) won't be spurred to actual action and call his representatives demanding the development of alternative sources of energy so that we can stop financing the corrupt Saudi monarchy, which in turn finances the Sunni insurgency in his favorite war. Wait... I know he'll call for drilling in Alaska, which will buy us, oh, 1 year worth of oil maybe. I'm sure he'll also suggest coal plants with voluntary pollution controls - in another community, of course.

But in the end, he's barking at the moon, as usual. He will NEVER address the deep and long-standing business relationships between the Bush family and the Saudi monarchy (and bin Ladens). He won't give up his gas guzzler to stick it to the Saudis. He'll happily give them his money and won't say a word when Bush sells them $20,000,000,000 worth of weapons.

When forced to reconcile his political choices & his lifestyle with the uncomfortable reality that he's funding the decapitators, he'll fall into line and do whatever the hell Bush tells him to do. And he'll be grateful for the disinformation his right wing sources give him.

Big Dog is good sheeple. Racist, too, as the ignorant, sweeping diatribe above demonstrates.

Republican values - do they really want to have this debate?

2008-01-23T23:55:00.000-08:00

This video pretty much sums up the values of the Republican leaders and of course the Rudy bit - spoken by his 2nd wife - at the beginning shows you just what a fraud he is.

Oh look... another one.

Will wingnuts ever learn to pay attention to the ACTIONS of their leaders or will they continue to buy into the flag-waving, bible-thumping rhetoric? Seeing as how this has literally been going on for years and there are still a substantial number of wingnuts who are incapable of connecting the dots (or just don't care), my forecast is that they'll continue to get duped - and enjoy it, because that's simply the type of sheeple they are.

Glamour Grandpa Fred Thompson moseys on out of the Republican race; Wins Louisiana hours later (!?)

2008-01-22T21:50:00.000-08:00

I imagine he'll resume his long-term career as a lobbyist/Hollyweird actor.

I never understood the enthusiasm amongst so-called conservatives for Thompson. He was transparently lazy & unfit for the job. I think that because he was a self-identified conservative and an actor, conservative morons just lept to the childish conclusion that he was the 2nd coming of Ronald Raygun.

Thompson might have actually had a fighting chance if he would have given his hot 2nd wife a more prominent role in the campaign ;-) His campaign should have also created campaign ads where he pretends to be a President who cross examines 'terrorists' in the kangaroo court at Gitmo. Wingnuts love that sort of razzle-dazzle; that's why they're so easy to dupe.

It could have happened if Thompson was actually capable of having an original thought & wasn't so goddamn lazy.

UPDATE: It seems Thompson would have won the Louisiana delegates hours later if only he knew what the hell was going on. More evidence that he was totally unfit for the job. More evidence that Wingnuts love incompetence as long as the incompetent *sounds* tough & authentic.

Dick Cheney: Sleepy, corrupt old man with a bad ticker

2008-01-21T23:07:00.000-08:00

Big Dog, ever the crusader against the evil Clintons, has a post up about Bill Clinton sleeping during Reagan's funeral (Reagan slept thru the criminality of his entire 2nd term) as well as during a service commemorating MLK.

Does Big Dog remember - or care - about Cheney falling asleep on the job pretty constantly? Even during emergency briefings?

I wonder if he's going to get his panties in a bunch about that?

Bush dancing with actual Islamofascist (video); GoOPer indicted for financing Islamic Terrorism

2008-01-19T04:58:00.000-08:00

Hi Big Dog (and other delusional, low IQ wingnuts),

See this video of Bush dancing around with the Islamofascist decapitators?

What about the former Republican Congressman - and Reagan Administration appointee - who was indicted for aiding Islamic Terrorists?

Imagine the outcry that would have accompanied these news items if it would have been a Democrat!

Bonus video: Predictably, FOX News didn't find the terrorist financing Republican Congressman's political affiliation worthy of including in their report. FOX News: All Spin, All the Time! FOX News viewers: Gullible naifs who like being duped and lied to!

Big Dog's Jaw-Dropping Stoopidity: Doesn't Know the Difference Between Voter Fraud & Voter Disenfranchisement

2008-01-16T01:24:00.000-08:00

In a sea of mediocre, poorly thought out garbage that is found at Big Dog's weblog, his recent post about 'Voter Fraud' stands out as an especially putrid piece of crap.

Big Dog thinks Voter Fraud (pretending to be a legitimate voter when you're not) and Voter Disenfranchisement (removing legitimate voters from the rolls) are the same thing.

And, as usual, Big Dog drops another load of lazy thinking and attempts to pass it off as an attempt at being even handed.

I am not saying that fraud does not exist and I am sure that it happens in both parties.

This 'I'm sure it happens in both parties' type of statement is how he justifies his continued support of GOP fraud & criminality. Naturally, he doesn't supply any evidence to support this sweeping statement, either. He never does.

When the boogeyman of 'Voter Fraud' was raised on his blog previously, I asked him for evidence (before he banned me) and he pointed me to the website for the "American Center for Voting Rights", an organization which existed for approximately 1 year and then fell off the face of the earth forever. And the ACVR was supposed to have volumes of information on alleged Democratic Voter Fraud. Alas, it was nothing more than a GOP front group (with Abramoff connections and everything) and Big Dog got duped, just like he always does. How did little old me find out that they were a bogus front group? Teh Google. Big Dog should try it sometime. It took less than 5 minutes to realize they no longer even had a website. He likes getting duped by his Republican superiors as evidenced by his complete lack of concern when he found out he'd been duped. A normal person would admit such a mistake, as well. Not Big Dog though! He'll never bow down to liberals - let alone the truth! He'll happily pass fake 'news' off onto his unsuspecting readers.

Is he stupid or does he knowingly attempt to pass crap off onto people? Probably both, but I guess we'll never know because he's a cut-and-running fool who is too scared to debate.

Will Big Dog be chastised into actually learning about his topic before writing about it? That's probably unlikely, too.

Big Dog acknowledges occasional American 'not nice' deeds

2008-01-07T17:46:00.000-08:00

I wonder if he has the balls to tell us which 'not nice' deeds he's referring to? I'm not holding my breath because then he'd actually be required to confront some uncomfortable historical truths which is something that childish wingnuts simply cannot allow themselves to do. When such situations arise, the wingnut response is to cut-and-run by jamming their fingers in their ears and screaming at the top of their lungs. That or simply try to sweep it under the rug by feigning ignorance.

Big Dog's quote from a meandering post about Ron Paul:

"I have a hard time taking his blame America for everything position. Yes, we as a country have done some things that are not nice. But we are not to blame for all the world's woes."

My comment to him, which I'm almost postive he won't publish because he's a control freak who's afraid of being shown up on his blog:

So in other words, you're acknowledging that America has done some bad things that might cause others to get upset with us. Wow... an honest statement! By extension, don't you think it's common sense that if some people are upset enough, they may try to attack us? I know you feel most comfortable debating straw men, but I'm not aware of anyone (even Paul) who said America is 'to blame for ALL THE WORLD'S WOES [emphasis mine]'.

Biblical Violence & Smut; is this literally the 'Word of God'?

2007-11-30T01:00:00.000-08:00

Which Abrahamic religion is the religion of peace again?

What a bunch of superstitious fairy tales and what a crock of violent mumbo-jumbo.

Right, Big Dog?

Does Nurse Big Dog Wear a Skirt?

2007-11-07T21:43:00.000-08:00

I thought this would be a valid question since he asked the same question about John Edwards recently.

Nurse Big Dog seems unconcerned that Rudy Julie-Annie, Mayor of 9/11, wears actual skirts from time-to-time. I haven't seen the Good Nurse mention Julie-Annie's cross dressing on his blog. Maybe he's been busy investigating mysterious deaths around the Clintons that have already been debunked.

In Nurse Big Dog's post, I also found the following gem of raw ignorance. Says the Nurse:

"...real men do not send their wives out to take up for them."

I guess this would be true, unless you're a Republican. IOKIYAR!

Big Dog swings - and misses - and gets pelted by reality, again.

And he's really going to kick my ass now that I call him Nurse Big Dog, even though he is an actual RN. It's not like I'm accusing him of having his hair in a bun or wearing funny nurse shoes. As he frequently points out now that the cats out of the bag about his profession, he makes lots of money as a nurse. It's important that everyone know that - it helps him overcome his insecurity about working in an honorable, female-dominated field. John Edwards hasn't had to deal with the sexism that the Good Nurse has dealt with, right Big Dog? And BD can't just come out and admit that he likes helping people, either. To gain acceptance in the right wing blogosphere, you get no points for helping the sick; you only get points for violence, or at least violent posturing. Hence, his blog is completely free of any reference to his career as a nurse. Instead, his blog is filled with vague but menacing threats against largely imaginary foes.

Hmmm... A person makes a 'lifestyle' choice that he finds embarrassing so he overcompensates by tough posturing. Where have I seen that before? Oh right, Larry Craig, Ted Haggard, etc.

Big Dog about to hermetically seal himself in right-wing echo chamber; finally cut and ran, like all of the other wingnuts

2007-10-15T19:16:00.000-07:00

The one right-winger, Big Dog, who actually had the balls to mix it up with people who were not wingnuts got his ass handed to him yesterday at Sadly, No! (his posts appear around the 4pm mark and continue until about 5:15pm) and in a pique of juvenile frustration, he stormed off, left a couple of psychotic comments here on my blog and banned me from his blog.

He finally succumbed to his authoritarian impulses. They always do, some just take longer than others. Mild Bill, Texas Fred & Basti, all exterminationist dorks, succumb to their authoritarian cowardice almost immediately. Big Dog, on the other hand, took much longer. Right wing blogs demand obedience to power - including their own 'power' to police their blogs. They exercise this power with puerile, Dogbert-like enthusiasm. That's why so many of them ban commenters or simply close off comments entirely,

Their self esteem is too fragile to deal with the harsh realities of the real world, where people call them on their shit and expect verifiable facts and adherence to reality. It's the same reason Bush only speaks to hand-picked audiences, it's why Hannity will not allow interviewers to play back his own quotes when he's being interviewed, it's why Malkin closes registration to become a commenter at her website. These people literally cannot accept information that contradicts their cherished notions about the world and the smarter ones know they'd have their asses handed to them in an open forum.

It's too bad about Big Dog, though. I was impressed he had the courage to venture outside of his virtual gated community. (You sure won't see Kat, the world's most timid Christian, do it.) People were piling onto Big Dog by pointing out his own comments in the same rough-and-tumble manner that Big Dog has no problem with on his own blog. What's so bad about that? It's almost like he was embarrassed by his beliefs and has run back home with his tail between his legs.

Kender Proposes Defunding the Military, Inadvertently; Wingnuts Approve

2007-10-09T18:00:00.001-07:00

Kender, representing the thoughtless & clueless special-ed wing of the Republican party, has devised a great tax evasion scheme for Americans to employ if Hillary becomes President thereby denying Hillary the chance to turn America 'Socialist" or something. It sounds similar to what Mild Bill proposed a few months ago and would amount to defunding the troops, which of course will be fine as soon as a Democrat takes over, won't it?

Why does Kender hate America so much that he would stop funding the military completely?

I'm sure now that he's been called out on his stupidity, Kender, like Kat when she proposed creating monuments which invited terrorist attacks, will say he was simply being hyperbolic. Big Dog gave it his stamp of approval though, so presuably at least he considered the ramifications of the proposal. Or maybe he didn't?

Do these guys ever consider the consequences of their actions?

Oral Roberts University: More Corrupt Evangelical Shenanigans?

2007-10-07T23:18:00.000-07:00

Yet another scandal is threatening to engulf yet another Evangelical stronghold. What a surprise, eh Kat? Among the bizarre allegations:

A longtime maintenance employee was fired so that an underage male friend of Mrs. Roberts could have his position. (My comment: WTF does this even mean?)

Mrs. Roberts — who is a member of the board of regents and is referred to as ORU's "first lady" on the university's Web site — frequently had cell-phone bills of more than $800 per month, with hundreds of text messages sent between 1 a.m. to 3 a.m. to "underage males who had been provided phones at university expense."

The university jet was used to take one daughter and several friends on a senior trip to Orlando, Fla., and the Bahamas. The $29,411 trip was billed to the ministry as an "evangelistic function of the president."

Mrs. Roberts spent more than $39,000 at one Chico's clothing store alone in less than a year, and had other accounts in Texas and California. She also repeatedly said, "As long as I wear it once on TV, we can charge it off." The document cites inconsistencies in clothing purchases and actual usage on TV.

Mrs. Roberts was given a white Lexus SUV and a red Mercedes convertible by ministry donors.

University and ministry employees are regularly summoned to the Roberts' home to do the daughters' homework.

The university and ministry maintain a stable of horses for exclusive use by the Roberts' children.

The Roberts' home has been remodeled 11 times in the past 14 years.

What would Jesus think about this sort of corrupt Christianity? When will the Sheeple who donate to these frauds finally get a clue?

Kat: Chickenhawk Conservative Christian who thinks like bin Laden (UPDATED)

2007-10-06T20:34:00.000-07:00

In the irrational, outer reaches of Right Wing World, there are actually people who hope that America is attacked again, 9/11 style. One such person is a woman named "Kat". Here are some choice quotes from a recent post of hers about the Pennsylvania memorial to 9/11 victims that she (along with many other wingnuts) thinks shows insufficient animosity to radical Islam. They seem to think it's actually a memorial to the terrorists themselves due to it's Crescent shape:

This "Bowl of Embrace" is an abomination, and ought to be replaced (as should the Twin Towers) with something that BEGS the Islamofascist terrorist murderers to try and destroy them. We need to raise up memorials which scream
We will never surrender!
We will never back down!
We will never forget!
We will hunt you to the ends of the earth and destroy every last evidence and memory of your intolerant, barbaric and insane ideology!

I have to admire her shrill stridence. Her last statement about destroying 'every last evidence and memory of your intolerant, barbaric and insane ideology' actually reminds me of the Taliban blowing up the Buddhas of Bamyan in 2001. Conservative Chrisitans, Taliban... what's the difference, really?

I suggested that instead of demanding that provocative memorials be built in other people's communities (a Chickenhawkish statement if I have ever heard one) that she instead create a provocative, anti-Muslim memorial right on her own property. Maybe she could also burn Mohammed in effigy every afternoon on her front lawn. She completely ignored my suggestions, said she was being hyperbolic (I invite you to read her actual post and decide for yourself) and continues to insist that the memorials should be in-your-face. I think she's ignoring my suggestions that she erect provocative anti-Muslim memorials on her own property because she subconsciously realizes her neighbors would think she's insane. But she did then say this:

I will concede that I frequently wonder whether another attack on American soil is the only thing which will remove liberal craniums out of anal orifices. Considering that we're having this discussion only six short years after 9-11, and after almost 10,000 terrorist attacks around the world, I doubt it.

So, there you have it. Like bin Laden, she actually hopes Islamic terrorists will continue trying to attack America because, in her mind, we need to 'remove liberal craniums out of anal orifices.' So she kind-of, sort-of wishes that bin Laden would attack the US again so that we could somehow get rid of liberals, who are apparently the real enemy in her mind. I will remind the reader that Kat is a self-proclaimed 'Christian." What would Jesus think of such filthy language? What would Jesus think of such violent desires? Maybe we'll get lucky and she'll tell us in the comments.

Lastly, she pointed out that there has been 10,000 terrorist attacks worldwide since 9/11 so I am also interested in knowing if there have been more 'terrorist' attacks after 9/11 than before. I left a comment at her blog mentioning that if we were 'winning' the war on terror the number of attacks post-9/11 would be going down (by definition) and asking for evidence, but I'm not holding my breath. She'll throw out the 10,000 attacks figure but otherwise she doesn't generally deal with evidence and numbers. She demonstrates Sheeple-like faith and thinks that's a good thing. A true dead-ender, she is.

UPDATE: As expected, Kat couldn't muster her 'Christian' courage to venture into my lion's den but I did try engaging her further at her own blog and predictably, she did the online equivalent of jamming her fingers in her ears and screaming "LA-LA-LA-LA-LA!", as you can see below. It happens a lot with delusional wingnuts. This was her response to my last comment there:

Yes, BJ, I disappeared your comment. I told you I was sick of you. And, no, I didn't read it first. Buh-bye.

Buh-bye, Kat! It was as easy dismantling you as I thought it would be. Next time I want to indulge my desire for Republican-driven, pagan-tinged mysticism parading around as 'Christianity', I'll drop by your blog to read your ill-conceived, poorly reasoned, Christian holy war-mongering, superstitious mumbo-jumbo.

Score so far:

Me: 6
Wingnuts: .5 (Big Dog at least keeps trying without cut-and-running like Mild Bill, Kat, Texas Fred, Kender, Basti, et al)

Texas Fred: Tinfoil hat wearing, Cut-and-running dumbass

2007-10-01T19:05:00.000-07:00

Texas Fred is wondering why the 'liberal' mainstream media and insurgents always have film of insurgents & terrorists shooting at Americans.

I guess he hasn't searched YouTube to find videos of Americans & contractor forces shooting shit up in Iraq. I tried posting the following text on his website, but because he's a cut-and-runner, I was banned from his oh-so-macho, politically incorrect website months ago when I dismantled him in about 3 sentences.

My comment to the post above:

Maybe you should search YouTube. Here are some videos of contractors and military kicking ass in Iraq, and they filmed the videos themselves:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4BnEVP8hc0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlNORX006-c

It's difficult to imagine why a majority of Iraqis would oppose the American occupation after viewing this evidence of freedom on the march.

US Military Vets: Only human?

2007-09-19T01:44:00.000-07:00

It looks like the multi-million dollar Veteran's Oral History project run by the Library of Congress is marred by errors and outright fraud. That's too bad, it sounds it could have been a fascinating resource.

It's symbolic of a larger question though. Does this mean I can stop worshipping veterans now since they are obviously capable of lying or am I still required to never question them at all, ever?

Maybe the people who investigated the fraudulent histories on the Veteran's Oral History website could settle the issue of Vietnam Vet John Kerry and his medals once and for all?

Maybe they can also determine where George W. Bush disappeared to while he defended America from Mexico as a member of the Texas National Guard's 'Champagne Unit'?

Gathering of Eagles OR The Most Scared People in America

2007-09-15T18:46:00.000-07:00

The liberal Washington Post says GOE turnout poor.

It also sounds like the GOE attendees live life in Depends because they're constantly pooping their pants in fear of a Muslim invasion of the Homeland that will somehow occur some day in America. As usual the details of the feared invasion are vague, and ridiculous. I have yet to hear a non-comical explanation from GOE-types about how Muslims, who have no Navy and no Air Force and therefore no way of transporting enough people to take over America, are going to invade a country where the majority of residents identify themselves as Christian, guns are widely avaiable, and we're protected by a military that spends more than every other military on earth.

Their fears would make a good horror movie. Not good government.

E-Coli Conservatism in non-Action

2007-09-15T18:32:00.000-07:00

SALINAS, CALIF. - Government regulators never acted on calls for stepped-up inspections of leafy greens after last year's deadly E. coli spinach outbreak, leaving the safety of America's salads to a patchwork of largely unenforceable rules and the industry itself, an Associated Press investigation has found.

The regulations governing farms in the central California region known as the nation's "Salad Bowl" remain much as they were when bacteria from a cattle ranch infected spinach that killed three people and sickened more than 200.

Tell me again why anti-regulation Republicans deserve to be entrusted with our government functions? And these people tell us that they alone can 'protect' us?

Thompson supports due process for bin Laden; Wingnuts silent

2007-09-12T03:53:00.000-07:00

Imagine what wingnuts would have said if a Democrat said this. Wingnut bloggers would take out their best cans of semi-literate indignation & probably put up an image of the offending Democrat along with a graphic of a dog urinating on the Dem.

But when Glamour Grandpa, Fred Thompson, the 2nd coming of Ronald Raygun and the great White hope of Hollyweird-worshipping wingnuts everywhere says it, it's collectively ignored.

I thought Wingnuts wouldn't be happy with anything less than sticking high explosives into every orifice of bin Laden's body and summarily executing him, conveniently before bin Laden had a chance to talk about receiving American money back when he was fighting the Soviets in Afganistan.

Go figure!

Wingnuts! What's the verdict? Deport?

2007-08-31T04:32:00.000-07:00

Foreign-born widows face deportation (issue background, short article)

Based on what you read about the issue at the link above, what would you do with this ILLEGAL?

Anti-ILLEGAL immigrant-types, please leave your thoughts in the comments.

177.8 attacks in Iraq per day in June, highest since May 2003; Are We Going Backwards?

2007-07-22T01:59:00.000-07:00

I'm sure this will please right wing nutcases, thought they'll lack the balls (as usual) to respond in the comments.

If we're supposed to start classifying our enemies in Iraq as al Qaeda because the Administration has changed it's Orwellian rhetoric, then this would mean that there are approx. 5,000 terrorist incidents in Iraq every month, and the numbers are expected to rise.

Attacks in Iraq last month reached their highest daily average since May 2003, showing a surge in violence as President George W. Bush completed a buildup of
U.S. troops, Pentagon statistics show.
The data, obtained by Reuters from the Defense Department, showed an upward trend in daily attacks over the past four months, when U.S. and Iraqi forces were ramping up operations against insurgents and militants, including al Qaeda, in Iraq.

If Bush was waging an effective war on terror, a person would logically assume that the rate of attacks would go down - especially after "Shock and Awe" when we showed the Islamofascists what we could do to them with our high-priced weaponry. Well, the Islamofascists took that message and escalated their attacks. Hmmm, that's the opposite of what a successful war would accomplish, isn't it?

End result? There are now more terrorist attacks on US forces every single week (or day) than there were terrorist attacks on the US under every other US President combined. There weren't even this many terrorist attacks on US forces "over there" (as opposed to "over here") before Bush II.

For Chrissakes, when did the US last have an embassy that was openly fired on several times a day? In Vietnam? It makes quite a target for terrorists in training, I suppose.

Way to go, Bush! You have delivered yet another failure that only a conservative (and bin Laden) could love. Strange bedfellows that Conservatives and bin Laden make! Bush is lucky the Senate Republicans obstruct any attempt to change his course in Iraq and that the media can't bring itself to utter the word 'filibuster' when discussing Republican obstructionism.

Republicans and their wing-nutty base own this war and it's aftermath. No wonder they never want to talk about Iraq anymore. While the Right Wing's definition of 'success' is close, if not identical, to bin Laden's definition, it is at odds with how thinking human beings would define it: a decline in enemy attacks.

Ron Paul raises more money from military than every other Republican candidate combined

2007-07-17T00:00:00.000-07:00

The troops support an Iraq War opponent like Ron Paul? Boy, this is going to piss off the right wingers! I just know they are going to unleash a fury upon these defeatist troops. Right?

Right wingers can't abide by this, right? Or maybe they're just incapable of explaining why they selectively criticize 'Dhimmicrats' but studiously avoid addressing the collapse in support for the war elsewhere?

Congressman Ron Paul has defined his Republican presidential candidacy with a staunchly critical stance on the Iraq war, saying during the June 5 debate in New Hampshire, for example, that it was a "mistake to go and a mistake to stay."
Paul has often reiterated his views that US security has been worsened by its military presence in Iraq, and that Bush's pre-emptive war doctrine represented one of his administration's greatest moral failings.
One might think such criticism of the war and the Commander-in-Chief's leadership would make Paul a pariah to the military community, however, the latest figures indicate the antiwar Republican is receiving more donations from employees of the US military than any other Republican candidate.

First Sitting White House Official to be Indicted & Convicted in 130 Years has Sentence Commuted; Right wing celebrates

2007-07-03T01:43:00.000-07:00

Bush said he'd fire anyone who was responsible for leaking Plame's identity and yet never did so. Libby was found guilty of obstructing the CRIMINAL investigation and yet the President never told him (or the rest of the White House) to stop obstructing the investigation? Some "leader" Bush is! People in his own White House were breaking the law and he couldn't bring them to heel. Is it because they have no respect for him or because he's ineffectual?

If the outing wasn't a crime, why did Bush even bother saying he'd fire whoever was responsible? He could have said from day 1 that it wasn't a crime, right?

If it wasn't a crime, why did the CIA ask Justice to open an investigation?

If it wasn't a crime, why did Justice agree to investigate?

If it wasn't a crime, why did Ashcroft recuse himself?

If it wasn't a crime then was Libby convicted of obstructing a "not-crime" and sentenced by a Reagan-appointed judge?

If it wasn't a crime, why on earth did Bush allow it to go on for years when he could have stopped it and saved taxpayer money?

I guess it was just tough talk & a flip flop rolled into one.

Does any right winger have answers? I've looked for answers in the right wing blogosphere but you're too busy celebrating criminality, drawing false analogies and comparing the behavior (favorably, I might add) to the standards set by the hated Bill Clinton. What else is new, right Big Dog?

Interesting fact about commutations:

Section 1-2.113 Standards for Considering Commutation Petitions
A commutation of sentence reduces the period of incarceration; it does not imply forgiveness of the underlying offense, but simply remits a portion of the punishment. It has no effect upon the underlying conviction and does not necessarily reflect upon the fairness of the sentence originally imposed. Requests for commutation generally are not accepted unless and until a person has begun serving that sentence. Nor are commutation requests generally accepted from persons who are presently challenging their convictions or sentences through appeal or other court proceeding.

Special Ops: Wimping out in GWOT?

2007-06-27T23:54:00.001-07:00

I think the US military has been infiltrated by either Islamofascists or the Peace Corps. These people are clearly not taking the great advice of right wingers and simply blowing everything up and killing as many people as humanly possible.

The special operations guys are talking about being more sensitve in the war on terror and talking nonsense about not indiscriminately killing everyone in sight:

It is not uncommon for a battle-ready Army special forces team to rumble into a remote village and spend most of its time painting mosques, drilling wells and running medical clinics.
"It's basically anything that doesn't involve combat operations against terrorists," said Andrew Feickert, a national defense specialist at the Congressional Research Service in Washington. "As Admiral Olson has said, we're not going to kill our way to victory." [Emphasis mine]

What'll they do next, propose that we actually work with other countries thru diplomacy and aid?

Fridovich will run the Center for Special Operations, a 4-year-old organization located at MacDill that plans and oversees anti-terrorism campaigns. He will replace Lt. Gen. Dell Dailey, who has retired and been nominated by Bush to be the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism.
Fridovich has spent the past six years in the Pacific region helping guide what the military considers a successful effort against Abu Sayyaf, an al-Qaida outgrowth in the Philippines. In a recent edition of the military journal Joint Force Quarterly, Fridovich wrote that the U.S. "cannot simply enter sovereign countries unilaterally and conduct kill-or-capture missions. It must blend host nation capacity building and other long-term efforts to address root causes, dissuade future terrorists, and reduce recruiting."
This indirect approach, Fridovich added, "demands diplomacy and respect for political sensitivities." [emphasis mine]

Goddamn! The special operations commander is talking like a libtard. What do right-wingers have to say about this?

I expect right wingers will rise up and condemn such softness from our most elite warriors. This Dhimmicratic rhetoric will demoralize the other forces. I'm sure right-wingers will consider this change of course to be traitorous and suitable only for surrender monkeys and that they will write a lot of posts condemning this assistance to Muslims. One of these clever right-wingers will have to come up with a funny label to smear the Special Ops guys. Special Surrender Monkey Forces? Pink Berets? Defeat Force? Marine Force Retreat?

What next? Gay special forces recruits?

Passionate America, Wild Bill: No longer covering the war

2007-06-23T19:49:00.000-07:00

I just looked thru the Passionate America website and see that NONE of the contributors, let alone the stay-at-home-dad who runs it, 'Wild' Bill, have posted about the Iraq War, the Afganistan War or the Global War on Terror (GWOT) since at least the beginning of May. When I recently asked them who in their lineup of contributors would be covering the war, I was informed:

Billy Joe if you would like to cover the war then go ahead on your blog. We’ll get to it on our own schedule.

I wonder why they're so nonchalant about getting all of the good Iraq news out? Is it because the Commander in Chief declared victory 3+ years ago? Did they get bored with their favorite war? For a group of people who supposedly support our troops & their mission so much, doesn't it seem like they would spend more time paying attention to the wars and perhaps even devoting more than 1 occasional, vague sentence that lamely expresses their "support" for the troops.

A few years ago, they used to bitch that the 'liberal' media wasn't covering the good news about the wars. Now, right-wingers don't even bother covering the good news themselves. If we're engaged in WWIII (or is it WWIV now?), as they claim, why do you suppose the wars no longer warrant their own posts on the Passionate America blog? I bet back in WWI & WWII war hawks discussed the war and it's progress every single day. Instead, over at Passionate America, you have news about everything but the war.

What's wrong, right wingers? How will we win the war when you guys are cutting-and-running from even fighting for the mission on the web? I fail to see how a complete failure to discuss the wars shows any sort of respect to the soldiers who are over there.

Wild Bill proposes defunding US Troops, Iraq War, GWOT

2007-06-20T20:36:00.001-07:00

Who would have imagined? Wild Bill is so spitting mad about illegal immigration that he's proposing a general strike against the US government to deprive them of money and to punish them for not building a new Berlin Wall along the US-Mexico border. He sounds like a raving Communist! Says Bill:

I say we show them what happens when everyone decides it is acceptable to break one law. How long do you think it will take them to spring into action once the coffers have run dry?

Who's going to finance his favorite war, that he hardly ever writes about? Is he planning to abandon the troops in Iraq with no bullets?

Does he expect us to borrow ALL (not some) of the money to fight the war from the Saudis, the Chinese and the Japanese?

Regarding the strike concept he's proposing which amounts to staying home from work until Washington listens: It's easy for him to do - he's a stay-at-home dad!

Once again, Wild Bill leads the charge from the rear. I do hope he'll let us know how it goes.

I'm not fundamentally against what he's proposing, but there are consequences and one of those would be to deprive the military of money that they need to fight Bush's war. Is Bill saying he'd rather surrender to the Islamunists? Given the real-world implications of his proposal, that's what it sounds like to me.

I can't wait 'till the other right wingers lay into him for being a surrender monkey!

Why are Iraqis fleeing from the Freedom (tm) we gave them?

2007-06-20T08:23:00.000-07:00

I guess because Freedom is on the march and they don't want to get crushed by the tank treads?

According to the UN (I know, you can't believe their 'liberal' statistics and data), the number of refugees worldwide increased 14% last year (up to 9.9 million).

No less of a moral authority than the Pope himself, defines 'Refugees' as:

people “forced to flee from their countries as a result of true life-threatening dangers.”

And guess what? We're involved in two of the four countries who experienced a rise in the number of refugees

Last year was one of the worst on record for refugees and the crisis is deepening in 2007 thanks to conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Sudan’s Darfur region...

Mission Accomplished indeed. 2 million fleeing Iraqis won't destabilize the Middle East and provide fertile recruiting targets for Muslim radicals at all. Gee... I wonder why the U.S. is viewed as one of the most dangerous countries in the world?

At last, something we can probably agree on.

2007-06-19T03:56:00.000-07:00

Are you ready to take off your training wheels and venture outside of the virtual gated right-wing online community?

There's a good post about how American firms circumvent US labor laws to import cheap technology workers. And it's at Daily Kos (gasp!). There's a video of a legal conference on how to NOT hire American workers.

I'd like to think it's something we can all agree is outrageous. Please feel free to leave any comments. When I'm not trying to break your balls, I actually do like knowing what you guys think.

Basti vs. Kender: Do you prefer vomit or diarrhea?

2007-06-19T02:13:00.000-07:00

In the Special Education, Tourette Syndrome afflicted, Ken Mehlman violated sphincter-end of the Republican party, we find:

Basti: A cut-and-running two-bit authoritarian, who seems to think that he is magically protected from radioactive fallout that will rain down on him when we follow his harebrained advice and nuke "ragheads" in the middle east and libtards in his proposed concentration camps in America.

Kender: I'm sure he spends much of his day eating battery acid & urinating into funky PET bottles that surround him in his hovel, but in his spare time, he challenges me to back up my assertions and when I do, he channels his inner left behind child, ignores my point and swears like an illiterate, inbred retard.

Have a look in the comments to my previous posts. Kender apparently thinks it's A-OK that America is arming Saddamists and Sunni insurgents that we just spent $1/2 Trillion to defeat and who we know have killed Americans. Yes, Kender has no problem at all arming the "evildoers" & "terrorists". Some people might call someone like that a traitor. I wonder what Kender calls it? Maybe we'll be lucky and Kender will defend himself in the comments. Maybe he'll surprise us with "reason" or "logic". Either way should be fun. If he responds as he usually does, you'll see again how mentally deficient he is. If he attempts to explain what he thinks he'll probably show us how mentally deficient he is, anyway.

If I had to choose which one is the dumbest person I have encountered in the right-wing blogosphere (that is an incredibly low hurdle, by the way), I would have to choose diarrhea, er, Kender. Basti is a cut-and-running fool and dumb as a doorknob, but Kender is belligerently ignorant. Facts are of no concern to Kender. He sacrifices his extremely limited intelligence at the alter of ideology and simply ignores everything else, like America arming Saddamists, again, or Republicans criticizing the military.

Will they ever learn?

Meet the (Saddamist) Allies

2007-06-18T19:09:00.000-07:00

Does this mean the Iraqis are standing up and that we can stand down now? Who gets to deliver the news to the American victims' families of these people to tell them that we're rewarding Saddamists with power and arms and that their family members died for no reason whatsoever? I doubt that task will fall to the Commander in Chief.

According to senior Iraqi Government official, who described the US military policy of partnering with Sunni groups as "nonsense":

"Every three months they have a new strategy. This is not only a distracting way to conduct policy, it is creating insecurity for all. I don't think these strategies have been thought through deeply. It is all about convenience," the official said, who spoke on condition of anonymity. [Emphasis mine: Gee, it sounds like a harebrained scheme that would be dreamed up by a right-winger!]

"In reality, they are forcing the Iraqi government and the Shi'a and the Kurds to reconcile with the Saddamists," the official added. "This is similar to going to the South in 1865 and forcing the Confederates to reconcile immediately with the Northerners. And this is not going to happen."

What? The quote above seems to be implying that Iraq is mired in a civil war. Can we use the word "Civil War" or do we need to wait until Karl Rove & George Bush give their approval?

Some of these groups, believed to be affiliated with such organizations as the Islamic Army or the 1920 Revolution Brigades, have received weapons and ammunition, usually through the Iraqi military, as well as transportation, food, handcuffs, and direct assistance from US soldiers. In Baghdad's Amiriyah neighborhood, a local group of Sunnis, the Baghdad Patriots, were driven around earlier this month in American and Iraqi vehicles and given approval by US forces to arrest suspected Al Qaeda in Iraq members.

Wild Bill, Smokey, Big Dog, Kender, or anyone else: do you guys have any opinion about the fact that the Bush Administration is arming Saddamists who have killed American troops? Do you think it's a good idea to arm groups called "The Islamic Army" or the "1920 Revolution Brigades"?

Right Wing Blogosphere, Drinking Canned Indignation

2007-06-17T00:16:00.000-07:00

Right-wingers are in an uproar over Harry Reid calling the recently fired General Pace "incompetent." Like Pavlov's dogs, when Karl Rove decides to create a side show to distract the public from the rudderless war in Iraq, the right-wing jumps into action.

It seems the military is above reproach and cannot be criticized under any circumstances, ever. Unless a Democrat is Commander-in-Chief and then it'll probably be perfectly acceptable. But anyway, it seems military leaders should not be criticized, ever and Big Dog, for example is so fricken mad over it that he wishes Pace would beat up Senator Reid.

Of course, the story is never as simple as the right-wing likes to think it is:

Gordon Smith (R-OR) said the following:

As the 109th Congress drew to a close, Sen. Gordon Smith took to the Senate floor and delivered a scathing indictment of President Bush’s policy in Iraq. Gordon said, “I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way being blown up by the same bombs day after day.” Smith added, “That is absurd. It may even be criminal.” Watch it

Did you catch that? Smith wasn't just saying incompetent. He was actually saying that either the Pentagon's handling of the war or the White House itself may be CRIMINAL.

How about this one, from McCain:

McCain himself made "disparaging remarks" about the "commander of our troops in Iraq" in January. Casey served as commander of the coalition forces until February 10, and on the January 21 edition of NBC's Meet the Press, McCain told host Tim Russert that he was concerned about Casey's "failed leadership":

RUSSERT: Failed policy. General Casey now is returning back to the United States. He's been nominated to be the chief of staff of the Army. Will you support and vote for his confirmation?

McCAIN: I have very serious concerns about General Casey's nomination. I'm concerned about failed leadership, the message that sends to the rest of the military. I have hard questions to ask him, and I'm very skeptical about it.
RUSSERT: As of today, you're leaning no.
McCAIN: Yes. Yes.

when these remarks are pointed out to right wingers, I get back either no response or something that is so mind-bogglingly moronic that it's almost brilliant, like this little gem from Kender:

why should I comment on what mccain says when I don’t care what he says….he isn’t goingto get the nod for the run at the office, he is an appeasing dumbass that only a twit like you would pay attention to…..

So there you have it, folks! Kender has just come out and admitted he doesn't even care about the truth. Apparently he'd rather save his indignation for Democrats because Republicans who say such things aren't of interest. Willful ignornace in the right-wing blogosphere... Who would have known?

Definition of Treason

2007-06-16T23:41:00.000-07:00

Dictionary definition: betrayal of country: a violation of the allegiance owed by somebody to his or her own country, e.g. by aiding an enemy

From George Bush Sr., former head of the CIA:

"We need more human intelligence. That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors." - George H.W. Bush, April 16, 1999, Dedication Speech, George Bush Center for Intelligence

Valerie Plame was a covert agent. If she wasn't, why did the CIA request an investigation into the leak of her identity and why did the Bush Justice Department agree to do the investigation? And why did Bush claim (wrongly, it turns out) that he would fire whomever was responsible for the leak? But anyway, Plame was working on issues of nuclear proliferation. Her identity was exposed by the Bush Administration and Cheney's former Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, was found guilty of Obstruction of Justice and Perjury in a jury trial conducted by a Bush appointed prosecutor in front of a Bush appointed Judge.

If someone supports Libby's attempt to protect the indentity of the leaker(s), would this not make them accomplices to treason? Kender? Maybe you could help us out? Maybe you could try to do it without profanity for once? It's funny how right-wingers like to assail "libtards" as being traitors and anti-American. Ann Coulter wrote an entire book about it. But when it's thrown back at them, they get so indignant.

Mind you, this Administration violates the Constitution itself on a regular basis (warrantless wiretapping, for example), so they should already be impeached on that basis alone, but right-wingers won't care about that until a Democrat is doing it and then right-wingers will be forced to deal with the consequences of their indifference to such violations when Bush set the precedent. Way to go, guys!

Can someone besides bin Laden tell me how this = success?

2007-06-16T19:55:00.000-07:00

Graph from the DoD showing the number of attacks in Iraq over time. Notice a pattern?

Notice how attacks on "Coalition" forces represent almost 70% of the total. I wonder how much those would go down if we left? It seems self evident to me that they would decline to zero or near zero because US forces would be out of range of their guns & car bombs. The other question is what would happen to attacks on Iraqis and Iraqi government forces if we left? Would they skyrocket? Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing for sure.

Anyway, it's quite a situation the Commander-in-Chief has gotten us into, isn't it?

Financial cost of US Empire about to increase?

2007-06-15T21:31:00.000-07:00

Interesting news about NY suing diplomatic missions for property taxes, unpaid parking tickets, etc. Embassies and their staff are often exempt from taxes, have legal immunity, etc.. The UN could be sued, too.

I suppose this would bring a tear of joy to the eyes of anti-UN types. NY alone stands to gain $100,000,000+ in property taxes and penalties from the foreigners.

The problem is, now those countries will be free to reciprocate in relatiation. What's good for the goose is good for the gander! Why would this bother Americans who don't give a flying f**k about foreign countries? Because we have massive embassies in prime real estate around the world.

For example, they said, the cash-strapped localities of Baghdad and Kabul could now argue that Washington should pay taxes on the U.S. embassies there, both of which contain housing quarters for hundreds of staff. If the United States objects, they could decide to sue given the Supreme Court ruling.
"The cornerstone of diplomatic relations is reciprocity; without reciprocity the whole system fails," said lawyer Andrew Odell, a former general counsel for New York City's U.N. and Consular Corps Commission. "Any affected country will in some fashion seek retribution. They will do something to mete out reciprocity, it's just the nature of bilateral relations."

So, if this holds, get ready to start paying more to maintain America's overseas empire. I don't know if it affects military bases overseas, but if it did, we'd probably owe billions more in Japan, alone.

More broadly, the finding could also jeopardize traditional rights and privileges that date back to ancient Greece and are enshrined in international treaties, notably the Vienna Convention, which grants immunity from most civil and criminal prosecutions to diplomats on foreign soil.

This slippery slope could result in Americans losing diplomatic immunity overseas. How would this affect intelligence operations? How would this affect our ability to go after terrorists? Time will tell.

Who knows, maybe Americans are about to learn the true price of empire maintenance. At least then, they could decide if it's something they actually want.

Introducing Wild Bill, Unemployed Conservative

2007-06-15T02:29:00.000-07:00

Wild Bill recently wrote a "proposal" (I'm using this term very loosely) to solve the problem of illegal immigrant "beaners" on his blog. In that post, he wrote:

The conservatives are too busy working and paying taxes to take a day off and round up a person just trying to make a better life for themselves and there family.

Wild Bill gained a bit of notoriety in 2006 when, just prior to the election, he outed the Congressional page who was being sexually harrassed by Mark Foley. Following this journalistic breakthrough, the (liberal?) Wall Street Journal did an article on Wild Bill. Here's what we learned about him:

It has been a heady time for the unemployed Mr. Kerr. He says he had been fired from several jobs over the years -- installing car radios, working for a call center -- and was discharged from the Navy in 1993 after faking a suicide attempt. He volunteers that years ago he was arrested for burglary. These days, he is a stay-at-home dad, taking care of his two sons, the younger of whom is 3 years old. Mr. Kerr's wife supports the family with her job at a call center here. Mr. Kerr says he has never met a famous person or a member of Congress. "I need to get out of the house more," he says.

So, when Bill refers to "conservatives being too busy working and paying taxes" he's not actually referring to himself. While it would be nice if he fit into his own preconceived notions of what a conservative is, he doesn't. His wife does, but he himself doesn't.

Maybe he should try humility for once? Even the "beaners" are working while he stays at home surfing the web.

Iraq news: Pentagon (the military!) says violence in Iraq escalating

2007-06-14T07:08:00.001-07:00

If you haven't actually read any Iraq news this week:

...al-Maliki had pledged in January, when President Bush announced his commitment to send more U.S. troops to Baghdad, that there would be no political interference in the security crackdown and no sectarian favoritism.

"To date, operations in Baghdad indicate that Iraqi government delivery on these commitments has been uneven," the report said. "For example, there have been reports of political involvement by some leaders in tactical and operational decisions that bypass the standard chain of (military) command."

Great! On a scale of 1 to 100, the Iraqis are at "2". At this rate we'll only have to be there for 100 more years. Why don't we just grant them their wish and leave their country already?

The Pentagon is calling this an "increase in violence". There are even more American and Iraqi deaths. Yet the Commander in Chief calls this success. Dick Cheney said the insurgency was in it's "last throes" - more than a year ago, before things had spun this far out of control. Even Big Dog considers this "winning".

Right-wing Iraq war cheerleaders define an escalation in violence plus more Iraqi & American deaths as "success". Just like bin Laden.

Talk about strange bedfellows.

In battle to get out the good Iraq news, right-wingers shoot blanks, still haven't noticed

2007-06-14T01:53:00.000-07:00

The right wingers are still not getting the good news out about Iraq. Why are they cutting-and-running when there is supposedly so much good news and we are so "winning" the occupation?

Inexplicably, the few times recently that right-wingers can bring themselves to mention the Iraq war, it's in the context of implying that Al Gore would have done the same thing Bush did. Would he have done it as incompetently? The question is moot. This is Bush's war now - he's the Commander in Chief - and he has to take responsibility for the success or failure of it.

Other happenings in Wing-nutia:

Big Dog gives his readers some frightening immigration numbers that a friend e-mailed to him. We should all exercise the same level of intellectual rigor as Big Dog and use data from unsourced e-mails to debate our opponents. In right wing world, that counts as hardcore research. Hey, that sounds a bit like how we got ourselves into Iraq when I think about it. Anyway, checkmate libtard!
No mention whatsoever of the fact that the US is now arming Sunni Militia and Saddam loyalists in Iraq after spending $500,000,000,000 to defeat THE SAME PEOPLE. And no alarm whatsoever that such aid to anti-Iraqi government forces might come back to haunt us. NOTE: Wing-nuts still having difficulty grasping the concept of cause and effect. NOTE TWO: Everyone else, get ready to pay the price for the stupidty of Wing-nuts. Again.
At Passionate American, ignorance is bliss.
At Smoke Signals, nothing.

Right Wing Blogosphere: Paris Hilton is back in jail! Meanwhile, US aligns itself with Sunni militia, Saddam loyalists.

2007-06-10T03:47:00.000-07:00

Right-wing blogs have been abuzz over the news about Paris Hilton. I bet next week they'll offer us wall-to-wall Lindsey Lohan coverage. Whoopee! I find it revealing though that none of them have directly addressed the war in Iraq for more than a week (some of them much longer). I guess Paris Hilton is more important to at least some of them. Yes, Weiner Dog and Smokey, I'm talking to you.

Meanwhile, look who our new allies are in Iraq! Saddam loyalists, who I thought we just spent a 1/2 trillion dollars fighting, and also Sunni Militias, who we're also arming, by the way. (Full article available here):

The American soldiers in Amiriyah have allied themselves with dozens of Sunni militiamen who call themselves the Baghdad Patriots -- a group that American soldiers believe includes insurgents who have attacked them in the past -- in an attempt to drive out al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Americans have granted these gunmen the power of arrest, allowed the Iraqi army to supply them with ammunition, and fought alongside them in chaotic street battles.

Says a US intelligence officer:

"We have made a deal with the devil," said an intelligence officer in the battalion.

In one particular battle between the militias and al Qaeda it was reported:

To the Americans, the fighters on both sides appeared nearly identical. They wore similar sweat suits and carried the same kind of machine guns. "Now we've got kind of a mess on our hands," Salge remembered thinking. "Because we've got a lot of armed guys running all over the place, and it's making it very hard for us to identify which side is which."

Mission accomplished! Boy, this is going to turn out great, I just know it!

Bush is really the best Commander-in-Chief in the history of the universe. I can't wait 'till Fred Thompson, the man who can speak English well and who played the roles of leaders on teevee, gets into office and then he can finish the terrorists off. Once we figure out a way to tell apart the terrorists and the militias, that is. Maybe Thompson will take Weiner Dog's advice and "kill all of their leaders and cripple their religion". Whatever that means. Weiner Dog's plans are no different from those devised by a 5 year old, or by Smokey for that matter. I can seldom determine what they're actually advocating or if it is in anyway realistic. If anyone else has brilliant ideas for winning the war, please leave them in the comments.

Final note, right-wing nutjobs really should use their blogs to get out all of the good Iraq news they're always talking about! Failure to do so could result in Chickenhawks sounding like they're losing their will to fight the war from the comfort of their basement.

Fred Thompson, R-Hollyweird: Lobbyist, lawyer and thespian energizes right wing morons!

2007-06-08T00:44:00.000-07:00

Looking around the right-wing blogosphere recently, I'm struck by how desperate the Republicans have become to find someone who will represent the traitorous, Scooter Libby-defending chickhawk wing of the Republican Party.

Who would have imagined their savior would be a lawyer-turned Senator turned lobbyist turned Hollyweird actor? Much to the delight of the of the kill-em-all, pro-life right wing branch of the Republican Party, Fred Thompson, the 65 year old "Tennessee Stud" (as he was known before settling down recently with his buxom 40 year old second wife), is kind of talking about maybe getting around to filing his paperwork so that he can run for President.

Frankly I'm not sure why he's any better than, say, Tancredo, or Brownback and I have yet to get any sort of explanation from right-wingers, but I think it's because they are star-struck. In spite of their protestations to the contrary, it fills them with endless joy to know that their candidate will be the man who has pretended to be a leader on TV before. I guess that's a little more inspiring than the current leading candidate who is being considered largely because he was caught on film walking thru the ground up remains of the WTC complex where he stupidly placed his emergency bunker, but I digress.

Instead of traditional campaign commercials, Thompson should pay for weekly 30 minute TV slots. FOX would probably give him a discount. His staff could create mini-dramas, maybe with Jack Bauer, of Thompson leading America in an ass-kicking of the world. There could be "Law and Order: Gitmo" where he pretends to condemn a hapless goat herder (who was sold to the US military by a rival goat herder) to death. Another episode could have him dressed up in military uniform nuking the UN headquarters and NY liberals.

Another episode could have him directing a sexy secret agent (his 2nd wife!) as she wears a tight bodysuit like that worn by Ms. Underestimated. As Thompson barked commands at her, she could obediently, like a good Christian woman, waste illegal border crossers with the gun she keeps strapped to her younger, sexy leg.

The possibilities are as endless as examples of George W. Bush incompetence. Such mini-drama commercials would show that Thompson is serious about fighting terrorism and Mexicans.

Then, when he's President, he can "think beyond Iraq" (I guess that's one way for him to avoid hard Iraq questions!) and we can get ready to invade the next Islamofascist country with our not-broken-at-all military. We'll be able to finance the next war with all of the money that grows on trees somewhere. It's going to be so awesome when we finally defeat Islamofascism and the right wing scaredy cats can finally get out from under their beds and buy gas without fearing the former-Muslim-but-newly-converted gas station attendent. Right-wingers will be able to get a life and it will all be because of Fred Thompson.

Fred Thompson will have streets in Damascus and Tehran named after him. With his Hollyweird Razzle-Dazzle, the rest of world will love him. It'll be just like the movies, with Fred Thompson playing the role of his life: The President who knew more about makeup than Hillary.

Have an idea for Fred Thompson poltical commercials? Please add them in the comments. I think we should leverage his Hollywood past.

Basti: Two-bit authoritarian; Cut-and-Running Coward

2007-05-18T02:06:00.000-07:00

My inaugural post is dedicated to "Basti" of Basti Says.

Basti is an embarrassment to knuckle-draggers everywhere. His (her?) ill-conceived "solutions" to the world's problems would probably get him killed if he ever decided to get out from under his bed, which is surely located in his mommy's basement and presumably surrounded by GI Joe dolls, Rambo posters, and Cheeto crumbs. Fortunately for us, he seems to be nothing more than another tough-talking right-wing blowhard whose motto is: "CIVILIZE THE BASTARDS WITH A NUKE! SEE HOW THAT WORKS FOR THEM!" As far as I can tell, Basti is not out actually participating in the Global War on Terror. He's more of a spectator vicariously living in a cartoonish fantasy world.

The text below is from an exchange we recently had. He proposed rounding up "traitors", putting them all in Nevada and killing them with a nuke. I asked him if rounding up one's political opponents and exterminating them en masse had ever happened anyplace before and what his proposal suggested about him. Instead of replying, he deleted my comment from his lightly trafficked blog like a cut-and-run coward.

See the full text here (hopefully he won't delete it) and lets see if he has the balls to respond.

Billy Joe Says: May 13th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Hi Basti,
I notice at the top of your blog there it say “Civilize the bastards with a nuke! See how that works for them!”
are you referring to anyone in particular?

Basti Says: May 14th, 2007 at 10:58 am
Yeah Rag Heads and traitors!
LittleOleLady Says: May 14th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Just imagine how this would have been received if these muslims had been Christians instead!
Hypocrisy.. pure politically correct hypocrisy!
Billy Joe Says: May 15th, 2007 at 1:34 am
Hi Basti,
Thank you for answering my question.
I was just wondering how exactly you would protect the Israelis, our allies and our own troops in the region from Nuclear fallout that would contaminate them when we nuked the “rag heads”? And then how would we get the oil from the fields that are contaminated with radioactive fallout?
I suppose the traitors you refer to would be in America so the radiation that would result from bombing them might contaminate you, also.
It’s a good thing you’re not running the war. You’re literally too stupid to live. Why would anyone take your advice?
Are there any signs of intelligence in the right wing blogosphere?

Basti Says: May 15th, 2007 at 10:46 am
You want to complicate things and its not complicated. Nuke Mecca for a start and see how that works for them. Give them a taste of 9/11 for a change. You don’t like it, tough. And btw, no one is running the war or we would not be FUBAR like we are now. The idea is to ‘WIN’ not make nice with the bastards.
As for the traitors of which you are apparently one, we round you all up in camps in say a Nevada desert and then nuke you.
I have no time or patience with traitors the Left or the damn Mussizes. They are all a danger to America and should be dealt with, ASAP!

Billy Joe Says: May 18th, 2007 at 3:40 am
For the sake of posterity, I’ll repost the first comment that you deleted (without answering) like a coward so that I can post it at a new blog I’ll create where I point out how moronic you and other right-wing bloggers are.
Your solution for dealing with “traitors” is interesting. I wonder if rounding up one’s political opponents and exterminating them en masse has ever happened in human history before? Can you think of any instances? What does that say about you?
regarding your proposal to nuke Mecca to give “them” a taste of 9/11, do you think the Israelis will care that we’re dropping nukes in their neighborhood and possibly exposing them to radioactive fallout? What about our troops and allies in the region? Do you think that nuking Mecca will be enough or will we have to eventually reduce the whole region to a radioactive plain of glass? If so, how will we retrieve the oil, genius?
You still seem to think that even if you could carry out this ill-conceived plan of yours that you’d be magically protected from radioactive fallout. You’re almost too stupid to live but just smart enough to not die. You certainly don’t give much thought to your ideas, do you?