• commentary
  • FRIDAY SEPTEMBER 21 2007 9:00 AM

Time To Take The Dems Behind The Barn And Shoot Them



It happens all the time in movies. Really Bad Man talks Sort Of Bad Guy into fucking over his own friends. Sort Of Bad Guy does it because Really Bad Man is convincing and a little scary. So, Sort Of Bad Guy delivers his friends to Really Bad Man. Then Really Bad Man kills them and turns the gun on Sort Of Bad Guy.


    Sort Of Bad Guy
    But…but I helped you. I…I got you what you wanted.

    Really Bad Man
    You think I’d trust a guy who fucks over his friends?


Then Really Bad Man shoots Sort Of Bad Guy in the face. In this case, the Democrats are Sort Of Bad Guy and shooting them in the face seems like an okay idea.

I do not recall seeing, in my lifetime, a party so relentlessly pathetic as the current Democratic Party. Yesterday, I wrote about the Republican’s record-breaking filibuster festival. That sort of bullshit is to be expected from the Republicans, who have no concern about destroying America to get what they want. And the Democrats could do nothing to stop it. Yet, the Democrats don’t seem to realize that they should not actually help Republicans further their agenda. Yesterday, the Senate voted to condemn a MoveOn.org ad that criticized General Patreaus. In doing so, they spit in the faces of many who voted them into office.

Let me see if I can explain this to the Democrats: The Republicans have been trying to demonize MoveOn, but America just thinks it’s the usual partisan, left-right bullshit and doesn’t pay attention. Then you guys in the Senate vote to condemn MoveOn, which legitimizes the Republicans accusations. This is what’s known as a retarded move because, YOU DON’T VOTE AGAINST YOUR OWN BASE. It’s just at tip, you fucking idiots.

Voting to condemn the ad is voting to support the Republican agenda. It helps to justify Republican claims that MoveOn is a lunatic fringe group, which is an incredible exaggeration. Republicans fear MoveOn, because the group can quickly gather funds and attack Republican candidates anywhere in the nation. The right hates MoveOn because it is effective, not because it is a fringe group. Thankfully, Democrats just took a dump on the hand that feeds them. Nice work.

Harry Reid is a fucking idiot for allowing this vote onto the Senate floor. Yesterday the GOP stopped three important bills that the Democrats had put forward. Today, Dems should have told the GOP and their petty bill to go fuck themselves. Reid should have stopped the bill, then introduced several bills condemning Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh for their repeated hate speech. Or how about finally condemning the Swift Boat organization for making far worse allegations against John Kerry than MoveOn ever did against Patraeus? If Reid can allow himself to be manipulated and bullied by the minority party, he should step down. Immediately. Or at the very least, he should replace his picture on his Senate website with a douchebag.

The vote completely betrays the principle of the 1st amendment. We don’t give the Senate authority, salary, security, privilege and power so they can vote on what American citizens should and should not be saying. The ad said that if the General was not honest it would be a betrayal of the troops. How the fuck is that worthy of the Senate’s time? It’s called freedom, maybe these idiots should try to get an understanding of what it means.

In the end, what did the Democrats achieve by voting for this resolution? They insulted the people who worked so hard to get them into office in 2006. The let the left know that they are not entitled to the same free speech as the right wing and that if the Republicans pick on the Democratic base, their Senators will help to stick the knife in their gut.

See, the Democrats would rather go along with the bullshit than actually put up a fight. Better to fuck over the people who put you in office than show a little courage. And that is not just this vote, but everything. They rolled over when they were the minority party and now they are rolling over when they are the majority party. What was needed today was for one Democrat to stand up and say:


Hey, that ad was right. Patreaus’ report was a bucket load of bullshit and the lies need to stop.


But it won’t happen. Obama ran out the back door, like a coward. Hillary voted no.* All together, 25 Democrats voted to condemn a group that worked to get them elected. Could you envision the Republicans doing the same thing if the tables were turned? Yeah, me neither.

FearTheReaper just donated $100 to MoveOn. He's never given them money before, but it's the only way to appropriately respond to this idiocy.

*correction

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6

Next

Comments
Noctua

Noctua

San Francisco, CA
February 2004

SEP 27, 2007 07:07 PM

Posted to the wrong place. Whoops!

substitute

substitute

New Lenox, IL
August 2004

SEP 27, 2007 08:05 PM

If you all were wondering if the Democratic candidates were going to pull the troops out when they came into office. Think again.

Tim Russert: "Senator Obama, will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term, more than five years from now, that there will be no troops, US troops in Iraq?"

Obama: " I think it's hard to project four years from now. I think it would be irresponsible. We don't know what contingencies will be out there."

Russert: "Senator Clinton, you have said that you will not pledge to have all troops out by the end of your first term, 2013. Why not?"

Clinton: "It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting. You know, we do not know, walking into the White House in January 2009, what we're going to find."

Russert: "Senator Edwards, will you commit that at the end of your first term, 2013, that all US troops will be out of Iraq?"

Edwards: "I cannot make that commitment."

No Guarantee

formerviking

formerviking

Denver, PA
May 2006

SEP 27, 2007 11:56 PM



Say what you will about this guy , at least he has the balls to tell the truth about things from time to time .

_kungfoo_

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA
April 2005

SEP 28, 2007 10:08 AM

But here is where you will find all the outraged Republicans fall silent:

During the September 26 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "phony soldiers."

He made the comment while discussing with a caller a conversation he had with a previous caller, "Mike from Chicago," who said he "used to be military," and "believe[s] that we should pull out of Iraq." Limbaugh told the second caller, whom he identified as "Mike, this one from Olympia, Washington," that "[t]here's a lot" that people who favor U.S. withdrawal "don't understand" and that when asked why the United States should pull out, their only answer is, " 'Well, we just gotta bring the troops home.' ... 'Save the -- keeps the troops safe' or whatever," adding, "t's not possible, intellectually, to follow these people." "Mike" from Olympia replied, "No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media." Limbaugh interjected, "The phony soldiers." The caller, who had earlier said, "I am a serving American military, in the Army," agreed, replying, "The phony soldiers."



That's right, according to Rush Limbaugh who still commands a good amount of influence in right wing circles, has made the assertion that those military members in Iraq who believe we should withdraw are "phony".

Only so long until we start seeing "Support Our Right-Wing Troops" or "Support Our Christian Troops" magnets on the back of cars.

TheRedBaron

TheRedBaron

Cambridge, MA
November 2003

SEP 28, 2007 02:43 PM

substitute said:
If you all were wondering if the Democratic candidates were going to pull the troops out when they came into office. Think again.

Tim Russert: "Senator Obama, will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term, more than five years from now, that there will be no troops, US troops in Iraq?"

Obama: " I think it's hard to project four years from now. I think it would be irresponsible. We don't know what contingencies will be out there."

Russert: "Senator Clinton, you have said that you will not pledge to have all troops out by the end of your first term, 2013. Why not?"

Clinton: "It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting. You know, we do not know, walking into the White House in January 2009, what we're going to find."

Russert: "Senator Edwards, will you commit that at the end of your first term, 2013, that all US troops will be out of Iraq?"

Edwards: "I cannot make that commitment."

No Guarantee



Nor should they. Asking for deadlines from democrats, then when they refuse to commit screaming "SEE THEY ARE FOR THE WAR LIKE BUSH".. I mean, it's a total red herring. If you listen to any of these people talk you know they are not neo-cons. They're not going to go invading new countries to spread democracy. But they're also intelligent politicians who know that if they make a pledge to leave iraq they may be put in the position of either breaking their promise or leaving the country their predecessor tore to shreds to collapse in upon itself-- neither of which are acceptable to a reasonable person.

substitute

substitute

New Lenox, IL
August 2004

SEP 28, 2007 02:52 PM

KUNGFOO said:
But here is where you will find all the outraged Republicans fall silent:

During the September 26 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "phony soldiers."

He made the comment while discussing with a caller a conversation he had with a previous caller, "Mike from Chicago," who said he "used to be military," and "believe[s] that we should pull out of Iraq." Limbaugh told the second caller, whom he identified as "Mike, this one from Olympia, Washington," that "[t]here's a lot" that people who favor U.S. withdrawal "don't understand" and that when asked why the United States should pull out, their only answer is, " 'Well, we just gotta bring the troops home.' ... 'Save the -- keeps the troops safe' or whatever," adding, "t's not possible, intellectually, to follow these people." "Mike" from Olympia replied, "No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media." Limbaugh interjected, "The phony soldiers." The caller, who had earlier said, "I am a serving American military, in the Army," agreed, replying, "The phony soldiers."



That's right, according to Rush Limbaugh who still commands a good amount of influence in right wing circles, has made the assertion that those military members in Iraq who believe we should withdraw are "phony".

Only so long until we start seeing "Support Our Right-Wing Troops" or "Support Our Christian Troops" magnets on the back of cars.



Maybe you need to listen to exactly what was said, and see why no Republicans said anything, Media Matters took the entire thing out of context along with the media.



You might also want to read this as well.
Radio Equalizer

_kungfoo_

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA
April 2005

SEP 28, 2007 04:59 PM

substitute said:

KUNGFOO said:
But here is where you will find all the outraged Republicans fall silent:

During the September 26 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "phony soldiers."

He made the comment while discussing with a caller a conversation he had with a previous caller, "Mike from Chicago," who said he "used to be military," and "believe[s] that we should pull out of Iraq." Limbaugh told the second caller, whom he identified as "Mike, this one from Olympia, Washington," that "[t]here's a lot" that people who favor U.S. withdrawal "don't understand" and that when asked why the United States should pull out, their only answer is, " 'Well, we just gotta bring the troops home.' ... 'Save the -- keeps the troops safe' or whatever," adding, "t's not possible, intellectually, to follow these people." "Mike" from Olympia replied, "No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media." Limbaugh interjected, "The phony soldiers." The caller, who had earlier said, "I am a serving American military, in the Army," agreed, replying, "The phony soldiers."



That's right, according to Rush Limbaugh who still commands a good amount of influence in right wing circles, has made the assertion that those military members in Iraq who believe we should withdraw are "phony".

Only so long until we start seeing "Support Our Right-Wing Troops" or "Support Our Christian Troops" magnets on the back of cars.



Maybe you need to listen to exactly what was said, and see why no Republicans said anything, Media Matters took the entire thing out of context along with the media.

You might also want to read this as well.
Radio Equalizer



I watched that whole 8:15 minute video (painful) and Limbaugh is claiming his "phony soliders" comment was talking about actual fake soldiers like Jesse Macbeth? Fake anti-war soldiers are pretty fucking rare, that being the only case that I can think of. That's weaseling out the situation, isn't it? Isn't trying to exclaim that Jesse Macbeth is a hero of left and anti-war movement also taking the reality of the situation out of context? Then he brings up the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, funded by right-wing groups, whose single purpose was to smear John Kerry's military service during the election.

Limbaugh was clearly referring to the previous caller (who claimed he was a ex-military Republican who had turned against the war) when he made the "phony" soldiers statement.

He never did exclaim that he "supports" anti-war troops the same as any other military members. If I was being accused of something like Limbaugh and I knew it was being taken out of context, I would want to be very clear about what I meant. But Limbaugh simply excused himself by bringing up a obscure anti-war straw-man.

Also, thanks for posting somebody's opinion as fact. Both sides have their media watchdog groups; MediaMatters on the left, Accuracy in Media on the right. There is a difference between these groups and blogs; blogs being opinion. Opinion cannot be fact.

Another thing, MediaMatters simply cannot be accused of taking the situation out of context because they always post complete transcripts on their web page.

_kungfoo_

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA
April 2005

SEP 28, 2007 08:26 PM

And there appears to be some relatively minor criticism from the right-wing, but it deserves to be mentioned:

John McCain:

"Any American who risks his or her life to defend us has earned the respect and gratitude of every American citizen, irrespective of their views on this war. If Mr. Limbaugh made the remark he is reported to have made, it reflects very poorly on him."




Mitt Romney's spokesman Kevin Madden:

"Governor Romney would disagree with the negative characterization of those men and women who serve with honor and distinction in the United States Military. There may be disagreements with individual opinions, but no one would ever dispute the fact that those members of the military who disagree with the war have earned the right to express that opinion."




Now, my point here, is not because I think Congress should be passing legislating condemning political figures or organizations like Rush Limbaugh or MoveOn.org, which only seems to be based upon party affiliations. It's really pretty stupid and panders only to political idiots. I just want to point out the overall hypocrisy of the MoveOn.org/Gen. Petraeus controversy.

...and there is still a divide between the two cases.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6

Next