| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" |
| Date: |
01 Oct 2003 04:16:57 PM |
| Object: |
Where's the outrage? |
From today's Whie House press conference
"QUESTION: Scott, the President's father, as CIA director, when he
was dedicating the CIA, said at the time that outing an operative is
like one of the most insidious treasons.
MR. McCLELLAN: And the President has essentially said something to
that effect, as well. For a long time.
QUESTION: Okay. So why, two-and-a-half months ago when this became
public, what would have kept the President then from going to his
inner circle and directly asking each and every one of them whether
they were the source?
McCLELLAN: How many anonymous sources make all sorts of allegations
in the paper on a regular basis?
QUESTION: This isn't a routine allegation.
MR. McCLELLAN: Do you have specific information that suggests --
QUESTION: I know you're trying to turn this back on --
MR. McCLELLAN: No, no, no, I'm not trying to turn it back. I'm trying
to say that we should look at the facts, that if there's specific
information that you have -- I mean, all we know at this point is
they're anonymous sources. And it was not a White House name.
QUESTION: I know, but the fact that the name --
MR. McCLELLAN: Are we supposed to go throughout the entire
administration?
QUESTION: No, but as you said yourself --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, no, but are we supposed to, every time there's
an allegation in the paper, are we supposed to go pursue that
throughout the administration?
QUESTION: Anyone within your administration that would have access to
classified information, right, could have known this. What kept the
President, two-and-a-half months ago, from asking his staff --
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know that anyone who has access to classified
information could have -- I would direct that question to justice or
CIA about the people that would have access to classified information
of this nature.
QUESTION: Why did the President sit on his hands two-and-a-half-
months ago and not ask his staff?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry, I answered this question very clearly at
the time that it came up, and you need to go back and look at what I
said then.
QUESTION: But where was the outrage?
QUESTION: The President often says he gets his news not from reading
the papers or watching TV, but from aides because he's very busy. Do
you know if this was brought to his attention? Was he aware of this
on July 14th or 15th, or in that time frame, either by reading it
himself, or was it brought to his attention? I'm not asking you
whether he said anything should do anything about it, but was he
aware of this in a timely window --
MR. McCLELLAN: On July 14th?
QUESTION: When the Novak column came out, which I believe was July
14th. It was within that time frame.
MR. McCLELLAN: Call my predecessor. No --
QUESTION: Within a couple of days of that.
MR. McCLELLAN: John, I haven't even asked that question.
QUESTION: Scott, it seems like a good question to ask.
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?
QUESTION: That would be a good one if you can take it.
QUESTION: It's probably worth following up on.
QUESTION: When did he become aware of this?
QUESTION: Right.
MR. McCLELLAN: Sorry?
QUESTION: When did he become aware that --
MR. McCLELLAN: That there was an allegation that someone leaked
classified information? When was that first --
QUESTION: No, no, that an undercover official of the United States
government had been outed. When did the President of the United
States know that? When was he informed of that? And what was his
reaction? Where's the outrage, I think, was the question that was
asked.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the outrage has always been made known. If
someone leaks classified information -- are you -- when did --
QUESTION: When did the President know it, and what did he do about
it?
MR. McCLELLAN: When did someone make the allegation that this -- that
someone had leaked classified information?
QUESTION: On July 14th or 15th, it was clear that --
MR. McCLELLAN: I'll look back at the timing and post the information
--
QUESTION: -- that the American taxpayer had invested a lot of money
in the undercover status of a woman who had been outed in the
newspaper. What did the President know that and what did he do about
it?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'll look back at some of this and try to get some
information for you.
QUESTION: Scott, can you have something about how he was informed at
that time while you're doing that?
MR. McCLELLAN: I will look back at that time. Some of it was before I
became the press secretary, but I will look back at some of this
time."
http://tinyurl.com/pda8
--
"The privacy and dignity of our citizens [are] being whittled away by
sometimes imperceptible steps. Taken individually, each step may be
of little consequence. But when viewed as a whole, there begins to
emerge a society quite unlike any we have seen -- a society in which
government may intrude into the secret regions of a [person's] life."
--Justice William O. Douglas
Tim
"Fair and Balanced"
.
|
|
| User: "Pile Rogers" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 04:38:50 PM |
|
|
Finally!! The press is ripping into these guys. Wonder how long before Karl
stages a phony terrorist attack to blow this one away.
"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote in message
news:Xns940791B4CC6E9timsomecallme@216.168.3.44...
From today's Whie House press conference
"QUESTION: Scott, the President's father, as CIA director, when he
was dedicating the CIA, said at the time that outing an operative is
like one of the most insidious treasons.
MR. McCLELLAN: And the President has essentially said something to
that effect, as well. For a long time.
QUESTION: Okay. So why, two-and-a-half months ago when this became
public, what would have kept the President then from going to his
inner circle and directly asking each and every one of them whether
they were the source?
McCLELLAN: How many anonymous sources make all sorts of allegations
in the paper on a regular basis?
QUESTION: This isn't a routine allegation.
MR. McCLELLAN: Do you have specific information that suggests --
QUESTION: I know you're trying to turn this back on --
MR. McCLELLAN: No, no, no, I'm not trying to turn it back. I'm trying
to say that we should look at the facts, that if there's specific
information that you have -- I mean, all we know at this point is
they're anonymous sources. And it was not a White House name.
QUESTION: I know, but the fact that the name --
MR. McCLELLAN: Are we supposed to go throughout the entire
administration?
QUESTION: No, but as you said yourself --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, no, but are we supposed to, every time there's
an allegation in the paper, are we supposed to go pursue that
throughout the administration?
QUESTION: Anyone within your administration that would have access to
classified information, right, could have known this. What kept the
President, two-and-a-half months ago, from asking his staff --
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know that anyone who has access to classified
information could have -- I would direct that question to justice or
CIA about the people that would have access to classified information
of this nature.
QUESTION: Why did the President sit on his hands two-and-a-half-
months ago and not ask his staff?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry, I answered this question very clearly at
the time that it came up, and you need to go back and look at what I
said then.
QUESTION: But where was the outrage?
QUESTION: The President often says he gets his news not from reading
the papers or watching TV, but from aides because he's very busy. Do
you know if this was brought to his attention? Was he aware of this
on July 14th or 15th, or in that time frame, either by reading it
himself, or was it brought to his attention? I'm not asking you
whether he said anything should do anything about it, but was he
aware of this in a timely window --
MR. McCLELLAN: On July 14th?
QUESTION: When the Novak column came out, which I believe was July
14th. It was within that time frame.
MR. McCLELLAN: Call my predecessor. No --
QUESTION: Within a couple of days of that.
MR. McCLELLAN: John, I haven't even asked that question.
QUESTION: Scott, it seems like a good question to ask.
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?
QUESTION: That would be a good one if you can take it.
QUESTION: It's probably worth following up on.
QUESTION: When did he become aware of this?
QUESTION: Right.
MR. McCLELLAN: Sorry?
QUESTION: When did he become aware that --
MR. McCLELLAN: That there was an allegation that someone leaked
classified information? When was that first --
QUESTION: No, no, that an undercover official of the United States
government had been outed. When did the President of the United
States know that? When was he informed of that? And what was his
reaction? Where's the outrage, I think, was the question that was
asked.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the outrage has always been made known. If
someone leaks classified information -- are you -- when did --
QUESTION: When did the President know it, and what did he do about
it?
MR. McCLELLAN: When did someone make the allegation that this -- that
someone had leaked classified information?
QUESTION: On July 14th or 15th, it was clear that --
MR. McCLELLAN: I'll look back at the timing and post the information
--
QUESTION: -- that the American taxpayer had invested a lot of money
in the undercover status of a woman who had been outed in the
newspaper. What did the President know that and what did he do about
it?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'll look back at some of this and try to get some
information for you.
QUESTION: Scott, can you have something about how he was informed at
that time while you're doing that?
MR. McCLELLAN: I will look back at that time. Some of it was before I
became the press secretary, but I will look back at some of this
time."
http://tinyurl.com/pda8
--
"The privacy and dignity of our citizens [are] being whittled away by
sometimes imperceptible steps. Taken individually, each step may be
of little consequence. But when viewed as a whole, there begins to
emerge a society quite unlike any we have seen -- a society in which
government may intrude into the secret regions of a [person's] life."
--Justice William O. Douglas
Tim
"Fair and Balanced"
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 05:54:54 PM |
|
|
"Pile Rogers" <progers@socal.rr.com> wrote
Finally!! The press is ripping into these guys.
Right. All they're doing is getting this out of the way now,
so it can't come back to haunt Bush next year.
It's like the myth of "The Sixteen Words." They'll bat this
one around for a while, keep the Democratic contenders
off the front pages, and wear out the public's attention span
long before the next election.
They won. You lost. Get used to it.
In a few years you'll be looking back at the times when they
*Only* compromised CIA agents for partisan political gain,
and wishing you could return to those days....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 05:57:01 PM |
|
|
On 01 Oct 2003, "JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> posted this:
<snip>
So are you still claiming it's old news?
--
Another [C-SPAN] caller made the point more angrily
'For every American who gets killed, they should take
20 Iraquians (his term) and hang them from lamp posts.'
This, he explained, is how the Klingons from Star Trek
would handle it.
-- William Greider
Tim
"Fair and Balanced"
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 07:51:44 PM |
|
|
"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote
So are you still claiming it's old news?
It's no claim, this story broke more than two months ago.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 09:24:42 PM |
|
|
Lo, many moons past, on Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:51:44 -0400, a stranger
called by some "JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> came forth and told this
tale in alt.atheism
"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote
So are you still claiming it's old news?
It's no claim, this story broke more than two months ago.
How long did the GOP hound dog the Monica Lewinsky story?
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Ezekiel 13:20 "Wherefore thus saith the
Lord GOD; Behold, I am against your pillows"
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 11:53:48 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote
How long did the GOP hound dog the Monica Lewinsky story?
Do we have a different media now then the one that lapped up
every partisan word & begged for more?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 07:56:05 PM |
|
|
On 01 Oct 2003, "JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> posted this:
"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote
So are you still claiming it's old news?
It's no claim, this story broke more than two months ago.
Then please forgive me for all the posts I've made providing new
info.
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or
that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only
unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American
public."
--Theodore Roosevelt
Tim
"Fair and Balanced"
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 11:52:34 PM |
|
|
"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote
It's no claim, this story broke more than two months ago.
Then please forgive me for all the posts I've made providing
new info.
Jeeze! Don't get all defensive. I don't recall telling anyone to
stop posting and I certainly didn't mean that you should. All I
was doing was cautioning people from making too much out
of this.
This story -- like the previous "Sixteen words" myth -- is getting
aired now because the public has to be board of it before the
next election. As an added bonus, it's also keeping the media
away from the Democratic hopefuls, who do little more than
bash the crap out of Bush anyway.
This story is hurting Bush, granted, but if this story wasn't being
covered than he'd get hurt anyway, even as the Democrats
benefited from some media coverage. That, and there's always
the chance that this would come back to haunt him next year.
Bush & his people may not be bright, they may not be talented,
but they do know how to bully the media. We've seen this
demonstrated again & again. If you've got any reason to believe
that this suddenly changed with the coming of a two-month old
story, you let me know.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Old Samurai" |
|
| Title: Those 16 words...Re: Where's the outrage? |
07 Oct 2003 09:29:07 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 18:54:54 -0400, "JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote:
Right. All they're doing is getting this out of the way now,
so it can't come back to haunt Bush next year.
It's like the myth of "The Sixteen Words." They'll bat this
one around for a while, keep the Democratic contenders
off the front pages, and wear out the public's attention span
long before the next election.
They won. You lost. Get used to it.
Those 16 words are just the tip of the iceberg.
Now look at the rest of that paragraph.
That was "old news" too. And why did it break
when it did? Wilson farted. That's all it takes.
Then there the Repub circus in California.
You better get used to Duh Duh Duhbya's
tumbling polls, and a Dem President and
Congress.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
02 Oct 2003 07:04:22 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 21:16:57 +0000, Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced wrote:
QUESTION: When did the President know it, and what did he do about
it?
Hm... that oddly sounds familiar...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
From alt.atheism only
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Peter Vos" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 04:47:36 PM |
|
|
Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced <tim@somecallme.net> wrote in
news:Xns940791B4CC6E9timsomecallme@216.168.3.44:
MR. McCLELLAN: I will look back at that time. Some of it was before I
became the press secretary, but I will look back at some of this
time."
hooooo.... "is not my yob...." "before my time...."
sounds like someone is working very hard to get out of the way of a freight
train....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fair and Balanced Limbaugh Fart Detector" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 05:56:16 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 16:47:36 -0500, Peter Vos <pvos58@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced <tim@somecallme.net> wrote in
news:Xns940791B4CC6E9timsomecallme@216.168.3.44:
MR. McCLELLAN: I will look back at that time. Some of it was before I
became the press secretary, but I will look back at some of this
time."
hooooo.... "is not my yob...." "before my time...."
sounds like someone is working very hard to get out of the way of a freight
train....
boy this guy signed on to the AWOL Caravan at the wrong time
Ari must be sitting back laughing
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 05:53:46 PM |
|
|
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it be the
scent of desperation, coming from those lovaeable paleo-libs? It smells
like a political party, directionaless, clueless, in search of a leader and
possibly even a message has found a crumb to snatch at. What fun, watching
an entire school of sharks swarming, backbiting, doing all they can to make
a meal of this minnow!
It's too bad that silly season will be over in just a little more than a
year from now. But then again, I've no doubt that the paleo-libs will
furnish us with some novel, self-destuctive slapstick after losing again in
'04. The show must go on!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Nash" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 06:31:10 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in
news:_VIeb.17180$r25.5647@twister.southeast.rr.com:
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it
be the scent of desperation, coming from those lovaeable paleo-libs?
No, actually I think it's the smell of Bush's ***** getting lit up like a
bonfire.
--
Michael Nash - aa # 1651
*******************
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
--Teddy Roosevelt (Kansas City Star, 7 May 1918)
"But all in all, it's been a fabulous year for Laura and me."
--George W. Bush (12/21/01, three months after 9/11)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Will" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 10:18:20 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<_VIeb.17180$r25.5647@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it be the
scent of desperation, coming from those lovaeable paleo-libs? It smells
like a political party, directionaless, clueless, in search of a leader and
possibly even a message has found a crumb to snatch at. What fun, watching
an entire school of sharks swarming, backbiting, doing all they can to make
a meal of this minnow!
It's too bad that silly season will be over in just a little more than a
year from now. But then again, I've no doubt that the paleo-libs will
furnish us with some novel, self-destuctive slapstick
No, no, never. As a lib I admit we'd never be able to upstage the
farce that the Republicans played during the eight years of the
Clinton administration -- Whitewater, Travelgate, Tripp, the stupid
impeachment -- those were the times when the clowns in Congress
reigned supreme. Tell me, what's worse, lying about sex or outing a
CIA operative? Diddling an intern or lying about WMDs, 9/11
connections and the "threat" posed by a miserably poor 3rd world
nation? As for '04, I wouldn't count those chickens yet. There's a way
to go and the Bushies keep slipping in the polls. Maybe you can run
Arnold . . . Oh, but then you can't, he's an Austrian by birth. Too
bad for you.
I love the sound of conservatives whining. It's so... soporific.
Will
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kermit" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 11:36:46 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<_VIeb.17180$r25.5647@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it be the
scent of desperation, coming from those lovaeable paleo-libs? It smells
like a political party, directionaless, clueless, in search of a leader and
possibly even a message has found a crumb to snatch at. What fun, watching
an entire school of sharks swarming, backbiting, doing all they can to make
a meal of this minnow!
It's too bad that silly season will be over in just a little more than a
year from now. But then again, I've no doubt that the paleo-libs will
furnish us with some novel, self-destuctive slapstick after losing again in
'04. The show must go on!
Right. Not like the serious treachery of Clinton, when he lied about a
private and legal affair. All the slobbering neocons could talk about
for two years was Monica's thong bikini undies. This isn't in that
class; it's only what Dubya's Dad once called high treason. But that
was before his boy's people did it.
He may yet regret not setting up Jeb as president.
So betraying American agents working in the field is a "minnow", huh?
What other acts of treason will be allowed in this new regime?
President Bush says it's not acceptable. Maybe he's a better man than
you think; maybe someone acted on his own, without orders from high
up. I predict that's how it will turn out. Whether it's true or not.
--- Kermit
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
02 Oct 2003 09:00:49 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:53:46 +0000, Fester wrote:
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it be the
scent of desperation
No, that would have been the party that impeached a president over his
weenie.
Not to mention the party that took an entire country to war by lying their
asses off and are beginning to realize the country is asking questions.
Not to mention a president who has members of his own party starting to
distance themselves as he sinks ever lower in the polls...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
From alt.atheism only
.
|
|
|
| User: "RCMan" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
03 Oct 2003 06:36:05 AM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <iskanipa-y@hoo.com> wrote in message news:<pan.2003.10.03.02.00.49.149198@eac.org>...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:53:46 +0000, Fester wrote:
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it be the
scent of desperation
No, that would have been the party that impeached a president over his
weenie.
Actually, he was impeached because he LIED under oath, Baggins.
Get used to it.
Not to mention the party that took an entire country to war by lying their
asses off and are beginning to realize the country is asking questions.
No lies were told, Baggins, except in your own cobweb-filled knoggin.
Not to mention a president who has members of his own party starting to
distance themselves as he sinks ever lower in the polls...
So he'll only win 48 states next year instead of 49.
You're a joke, Baggins.
=====
RC
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
03 Oct 2003 10:14:57 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 04:36:05 -0700, RCMan wrote:
"Mark K. Bilbo" <iskanipa-y@hoo.com> wrote in message news:<pan.2003.10.03.02.00.49.149198@eac.org>...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:53:46 +0000, Fester wrote:
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it be the
scent of desperation
No, that would have been the party that impeached a president over his
weenie.
Actually, he was impeached because he LIED under oath, Baggins.
Get used to it.
Notice he wasn't removed from office.
I'm not defending the man. His first impulse was to lie even when it was
politically stupid. The public *never thought much of the ranting of the
Republicans. If Clinton had handled the situation better, gone on TV and
been contrite and apologetic, this public would have adored him for it,
undercutting the entire impeachment effort. Instead, he couldn't resist
lying. It obviously was instinctive.
That still doesn't excuse the abuse of the process by the Republicans.
Not to mention the party that took an entire country to war by lying their
asses off and are beginning to realize the country is asking questions.
No lies were told, Baggins, except in your own cobweb-filled knoggin.
<snort>
Yeah, right.
Wonder what people like you are going to do when Bush is slaughtered at
the polls next year?
Not to mention a president who has members of his own party starting to
distance themselves as he sinks ever lower in the polls...
So he'll only win 48 states next year instead of 49.
You're a joke, Baggins.
If you think he's going to win a landslide with numbers like he has which
are *steadily falling, you're the joke.
The election is the Democrat's to lose (of course, they are good at that).
Anyway... how'd you get out of the killfile?
--
Mark K. Bilbo
From alt.atheism only
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
02 Oct 2003 07:05:13 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:53:46 +0000, Fester wrote:
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it be the
scent of desperation, coming from those lovaeable paleo-libs? It smells
like a political party, directionaless, clueless, in search of a leader and
possibly even a message has found a crumb to snatch at. What fun, watching
an entire school of sharks swarming, backbiting, doing all they can to make
a meal of this minnow!
It's too bad that silly season will be over in just a little more than a
year from now. But then again, I've no doubt that the paleo-libs will
furnish us with some novel, self-destuctive slapstick after losing again in
'04. The show must go on!
Yes. And let us ignore that somebody in the administration broke the law.
Ignore the man behind the curtain!!!!
--
Mark K. Bilbo
From alt.atheism only
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Where's the outrage? |
01 Oct 2003 06:12:50 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:53:46 GMT, "Fester" <not@home.com> wrote:
Sniff .. sniff. What's that acrid, tangy smell in the air? Could it be the
scent of desperation, coming from those lovaeable paleo-libs? It smells
like a political party, directionaless, clueless, in search of a leader and
possibly even a message has found a crumb to snatch at. What fun, watching
an entire school of sharks swarming, backbiting, doing all they can to make
a meal of this minnow!
It's too bad that silly season will be over in just a little more than a
year from now. But then again, I've no doubt that the paleo-libs will
furnish us with some novel, self-destuctive slapstick after losing again in
'04.
The Democrats didn't "lose" last time. The presidency was stolen from
them.
The show must go on!
Once a thief, always a thief.
Red Celt
aa#883
--
Boy, I've never seen an issue so divisive. It's like a civil war,
isn't it? Even amongst my friends, who are all very intelligent
people, they are totally divided on abortion. Some of my friends, for
instance, think these pro-life people are annoying idiots. Others of
my friends think these pro-life people are evil fucks.
How are we going to come to a consensus?
You want to hear the arguments around my house.
"They're annoying!"
"They're idiots!"
"They're evil!"
"They're fucks!"
Brothers, sisters come together! Can't we once just join hands and
think of them as evil annoying idiot fucks?
-- the late great Bill Hicks
"There are bits of banana peel floating up Belfast Lough that know
more about Irish politics than our JTEM." -- Chesney Christ
.
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|