0
   

The Coming Ugliness

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 May, 2006 09:49 am
They certainly did.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 May, 2006 11:36 am
Slick Willy comes to mind. <smile>
0 Replies
 
Vietnamnurse
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 06:55 am
This morning from Digby...I hope this trackback comes through, if not go to Google and look up Digby at Hullabaloo.

http://haloscan.com/tb/digby/114731018715364743
0 Replies
 
Vietnamnurse
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 06:56 am
Didn't work, so do as I stated above and go to the posting titled "Oh NO!" Just what we are discussing.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 08:06 am
VN, the haloscan is a link to the comment section at Digby.

Here's the right one

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_05_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114731018715364743

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 08:11 am
VNN, the thing with Rove is he'll be resigning shortly. I believe.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jul, 2006 02:06 pm
Gingrich, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest of crowd are now insisting that we are in WW III and owe it to our brave men and women fighting overseas (and to the citizens back home) to face up to this reality.

Is that an ugly enough electoral strategy for all of us?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jul, 2006 02:13 pm
I wonder if the republicans are ready to reinstate the draft?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jul, 2006 02:53 pm
ci

Actually, that's a hell of a good return question when these war-mongering turkeys make that claim or analogy.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jul, 2006 02:54 pm
Why would Israel being in a war require a draft in the US?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jul, 2006 02:57 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Why would Israel being in a war require a draft in the US?


It wouldn't. But a war isolated to Israel and not concerning the US isn't what these boys are suggesting. World War 3, they say.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 05:34 am
Yesterday, Gonzales argued that (paraphrased) one couldn't be certain of the motives of future political leaders (domestic or international, I assume) who might inappropriately bring war crimes charges against Americans. We know from various memos that the JD and legal counsels in Cheney's office were concerned with finding legal strategies to avoid this consequence even while establishing treatment rules which quite possibly do constitute war crimes.

Note though how he tries to direct attention away from everyone at the top (think Nuremburg) such as himself (in red). Of course, this is also another very typical and repeated rhetorical move...instill sympathy for "the troops" in order to make political headway for some quite different motive than suggested.

Note also the final paragraph, a justice proposition which in its violation by the JD and White House legal staff seems almost incomprehensible...how could they NOT fashion policy in such a manner? Perhaps because none of them ever fought in war nor have had any real connection to it other than via big cheques from stock holdings in various military/logistics corporations. It seems a pretty typical oligarchical mindset.

Quote:
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales pressed Congress on Wednesday to refine the definition of war crimes prohibited under the Geneva Conventions, as the Bush administration and lawmakers continued to debate the rules for treatment and trials of terror suspects...

Mr. Gonzales argued that the language of the provision was too vague. And because the federal War Crimes Act passed a decade ago makes it a felony to violate that provision, he said that troops could be prosecuted for interrogation tactics considered too harsh. Congress, he said, could "help by defining our obligations" under the provision, known as Common Article Three...

But senators said Congress should not endorse any treatment it would not want used on American soldiers..

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/03/washington/03detain.html

How serious do you think these folks are about holding onto political power?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 02:44 pm
Ain't we got fun...
Quote:
Echoing Lyndon LaRouche, Horowitz and Poe smear 14-year-old George Soros as Nazi "collaborator"; new book features doctored quotes, factual errors
Summary: Echoing the rantings of political extremist Lyndon LaRouche and his followers, David Horowitz and Richard Poe charge in their new book that George Soros was a Nazi "collaborator in fascist Hungary" and "survived [the Holocaust] by assimilating to Nazism" as a 14-year-old boy. Horowitz and Poe further smear Soros and other progressives by doctoring or distorting quotes and falsely or misleadingly portraying events and statements.
In a book to be released August 8 that otherwise recycles the authors' old attacks from the discredited, Richard Mellon Scaife-backed right-wing website FrontpageMag.com, David Horowitz and Richard Poe newly charge that progressive financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros was a Nazi "collaborator in fascist Hungary" and "survived [the Holocaust] by assimilating to Nazism" as a 14-year-old boy.

Soros is a Hungarian-born Jew who survived the Nazi occupation of Budapest. The unsourced smearing of Soros as a Nazi collaborator echoes the obscure anti-Semitic rantings of political extremist Lyndon LaRouche and his followers, who have referred to Soros as a "Nazi beast-man" and a "small cog in Adolf Eichmann's killing machine," aiding "the Holocaust against 500,000 Hungarian Jews." (See, for example, the article "Dope Czar Bids to Buy Up The Democratic Party," from the 2004 LaRouche pamphlet Children of Satan II: The Beast Men).

In echoing the LaRouchite Nazi collaborator smear in their new book The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party -- published by Nelson Current, an imprint of religious book publisher Thomas Nelson Inc. that started as a partnership with conservative website WorldNetDaily -- Horowitz and Poe mark a new low in the long-running Republican Party and conservative movement campaign of scurrilous personal attacks against Soros, a major supporter of progressive causes in the U.S. and abroad.

There was stiff competition for the prior low. Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-IL) smeared Soros on the August 29, 2004, edition of Fox News Sunday, insinuating to an apparently incredulous Chris Wallace that Soros received money from drug cartels. As Jack Shafer, editor-at-large for the website Slate, noted in his September 1, 2004, column, Hastert's attack on Soros appeared inspired by LaRouche, who distributed campaign literature in 2004 claiming that Soros receives money "from impoverishment of the poor countries against whose currencies he speculates, and from deadly mind-destroying, terrorism-funding drugs."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200608020003
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 03:29 pm
UN report a 'moral indictment' of US http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/UN_report_moral_indictment_of_US_0803.html
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 10:21 pm
ebrown_p wrote:
I don't know about you all, but to me political ugliness can be completely delicious! I hope the Dems come out swinging and I know the Republicans aren't going to just take it lying down.

It looks to be a good fight. I can't wait!


Here here!
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 10:22 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
The repubicans have been extreme for the past six years, and the dems have been unextreme for the past six years.


What an utter crock.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 10:27 pm
I share C.I.'s impression of the last six years.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 10:30 pm
blatham ole pal - you clearly have an aversion to ugliness.

Killing the individuals who would kill the multitude --- Ugly!

Allowing the Israelis to wipe out or seriously degrade the organized group of miscreants dedicated to wiping Jews off of the face of the earth --- Ugly!

Poking (blood letting) fun at the high and mighty among the Democratic elite ----Ugly!

Doing something to stop Hezbollah from firing thousands of rockets into Israel --- Ugly!

Disagreeing with blatham---Ugly!
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 10:33 pm
Ok, ok. I registered today, as a voter in New Mexico. as an Independent.


Very odd to me personally. Lookng around for fluorescent zebra and stiped gelatinous friends.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Aug, 2006 10:38 pm
Finn wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
The repubicans have been extreme for the past six years, and the dems have been unextreme for the past six years.


What an utter crock

You talking to me? Exactly when did I make that gem of a statement?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 03:32:36