Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Kevin McCullough :: Townhall.com Columnist
Pathetic liberal sissies
by Kevin McCullough
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Unable to compete in the world of free debate with transparent facts, liberals behaved like children this week - proving that in the end national security and even national identity are always subservient to their own ego, reputation, and appearance.

It was pathetic, cowardly, and sickening.

It is also far too typical.

Liberals, who in large part are people devoid of true substance and belief, who also have great contempt for God, morality and truth, are often unable to deal with facts that reflect poorly upon them. And using pathetic, self-serving, cry-baby tactics is how they are commemorating this week - the fifth memorial of 9/11.

By now, you've no doubt read all about the ABC Mini-Series "The Path to 9/11" and some of what it will contain on Sunday and Monday evening. This no holds barred look at mistakes that were made in both the Clinton and Bush administrations will criticize decisions made and the decision makers in the run up to September 11. Beginning just before the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, based upon the 9/11 Commission’s Report, it will trace events that led up to the horrific event we commemorate this week.

Every insider that I spoke to who has seen it has referenced it, "amazing, historical, and important." Others have called it an "even-handed critique." It sounds to me to be very faithful to the original Report.

But then came word that Bill Clinton, and four of his top staffers, objected to the way they were portrayed. But they didn't just object. They belly-ached, they threatened, and in the end they were able to force ABC television to cave on some material that took a critical look at their role in the years between 1993-2000.

Something that particularly irked them was the implication that the Clinton administration allowed Osama bin-Laden to escape. But this was no implication - it is fact. On at least two occasions OBL was within our grasp but it was our lack of initiative that let him slip through our fingers. While Clinton was being serviced by an intern, and Hillary was busy letting him, he bombed an aspirin factory in response to terrorist actions taken against us.

The Clinton staffers who squealed like pigs over the ABC series do so for the same reason they did most things when they were in power. The central focus of the Clinton years was not, "what is best for the nation." It was always, "what is best for the Clintons and the people they liked." As long as the dot.com boom held up we as a nation were told that the State of the Union was strong - even as our enemies plotted, planned, and even attacked us - and no response came.

Now that the ugly truth is about to be seen by millions of Americans, and because it will embarrass those in powerful positions, Clinton and his staff demand the facts be changed to assuage the people's opinion of them.

And one of those making the demands... none other than Mr. "stuff the papers down my pants" Sandy Berger.

But in reigniting this debate over the image of liberals in America, they have exposed themselves as something worse. Not only are they unable to deal with criticism - something that all leaders must do in order to be effective leaders - but they are a true danger to America.

The great sin of 9/11 was that we as a nation did not dare to imagine the destruction that our enemies could cook up for us.

In Clinton's time, his administration refused to!

And this holds true for us today. Where are the great voices from the Democratic Party ready to lead the charge to make America safe from the dangers of open borders? Where are the vibrant leaders in liberal America who are ready to deal justice to those who seek to kill Americans? Where are those on the ideological left who have any clue as to how to aggressively stop terror threats from re-emerging?

The few that used to exist have been run out of the party.

Because liberals are under the misguided notions that 1.) there is no such thing as moral absolutes, good and evil, right vs. wrong and 2.) if we just take the time to talk to them we can get them to like us, they are not even aware that the "infidels" the enemy seeks to kill first - would be their immoral, self-serving, hedonistic, wicked selves. And in that ignorance they are also blinded to the direct overtures that the enemy continues to make - recently even Mr. Ahmadinejhad saying directly, "bow down to Islam, or you will be forced to."

Liberals are pathetic because they serve selfish immoral purposes. That is also what makes them weak. In their twisted thinking they believe with all their hearts that such weakness is actually strength. And that perversion of reality is sealing their doom.

Their doom does not have to be America's end.

And whether they realize it or not, by preventing them from regaining power, we are saving them from themselves!

Kevin McCullough's first hardback title "The MuscleHead Revolution" is now available - everywhere! Kevin McCullough is heard daily in New York City, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware on WMCA 570 at 2pm. He also provides PodCASTS and blogs daily at Amazon.com.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "'Xtreme' Radio and columnist based in New York. He blogs at www.muscleheadrevolution.com. His second book "The Kind Of MAN Every Man SHOULD Be" is in stores now.

Be the first to read Kevin McCullough's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Re: Osama's helper.
ajhil writes: "Thanks to our clueless Commander in Chief, Osama has accomplished nearly everything he could have wished. So here's what I want to know: has Osama thanked George W. Bush properly for his services?"

Question really is: have YOU thanked him? Because it's pretty obvious where YOUR loyalties are.

Like it or not...
Here is the thing you should take away about liberals and the Democrats.

Because liberals are under the misguided notions that 1.) there is no such thing as moral absolutes, good and evil, right vs. wrong and 2.) if we just take the time to talk to them we can get them to like us, they are not even aware that the "infidels" the enemy seeks to kill first - would be their immoral, self-serving, hedonistic, wicked selves. And in that ignorance they are also blinded to the direct overtures that the enemy continues to make - recently even Mr. Ahmadinejhad saying directly, "bow down to Islam, or you will be forced to."

Enough said...

Clinton
Yeah! That darned Clinton!

and, Kali..you are just stoopid
Sorry...but that is just fact.

here' a thought for your leftie traitors
Osama is in hiding...afraid to show his smelly face..same for his 'commanders'...always on video from some unkown spot...taped at an unknown time.
George Bush, on the other hand, is able to fly around the globe freely to spend a holiday with his brave soldiers and to thank them personally..the sign and measure of a true and brave leader. One more thought...if this country falls...it will do so from within...thanks to the democrat party and it's finge nutjobs..just read the above statements...it's a repeat of the fall of the Russian empire and the rise of a Socialist/Communist state. Just one thought on that....their leaders all met a dreaful end....Careful there, Bill and Hill, wouldn't want anything to happen to ya'll.

Osama's helper.
Is Osama bin Laden alive or dead?
Who knows?
However, one thing is certain.
Thanks to our clueless Commander in Chief, Osama has accomplished nearly everything he could have wished.
1 - Bin Laden stated clearly and repeatedly that he wanted the United States to invade an arab country in order to alienate the rest of the arab world.
GW promptly obliged.
2 - Bin Laden hated Saddam Hussein and his secular government, but didn't have the power to do anything about him.
GW took Saddam out.
3 - Osama wanted to unite muslims against the west, especially the U.S.
Mission accomplished. Bush has turned virtually the entire muslim world - and much of the non-muslim world too! - against us.
4 - Did Osama dream of incapacitating the world's finest military? I'd guess even he didn't aim for something so unlikely, but ...
GW came through for him anyway. Two thirds of our National Guard units are reporting unfit for deployment. Recruitment is so low that the Army has been forced to raise age limits, to accept skinheads and other extremists, and to institute "stop loss" measures, forcing soldiers who should have been discharged to serve additional deployments to Iraq.
Nearly 2700 brave American kids are dead, tens of thousands are maimed for life, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have died, more than a quarter of a trillion dollars has been sqaundered, and the grand result:
Afghanistan is falling back under the control of the Taliban.
Iraq is turning into a failed state with civil war either in progress or imminent.

So here's what I want to know: has Osama thanked George W. Bush properly for his services?

Well, it worked....
Here we are discussing some stupid made for TV movie and debating who is worse... Clinton or Bush. It's a fact that Osama was offered up to Clinton and he chose to do nothing. Not a big surprise to me, since I firmly believe Clinton is a commie and a traitor. However, according to the FBI, Osama is not wanted for 9-11. Something about lack of evidence.

Wait a minute. Wasn't this the reason we were told we needed to go to war?

The future
Will Hillary Clinton run for the Presidency of the United States in 2008? Absolutely !

When Hillary is President, Will Bill Clinton eventually then be head of the United Nations? Absolutely !

Who could possibly be a better candidate for the AntiChrist?

President Hillary Clinton will cease the United States support of Israel.

Will Christ then abandon the United States?

Can Armageddon be just around the corner?

The future
Will Hillary Clinton run for the Presidency of the United States in 2008? Absolutely !

When Hillary is President, Will Bill Clinton eventually then be head of the United Nations? Absolutely !

Who could possibly be a better candidate for the AntiChrist?

President Hillary Clinton will cease the United States support of Israel.

Will Christ then abandon the United States?

Can Armageddon be just around the corner?

Kevin McCullough...
....is obviously one pathetic creature himself. Let's hear it for one more over the top column from this deranged individual.

Um, and why is it I don't hear from cons in here about Ronald Reagan and Oliver North selling arms to Iran? Hello? Freaking traitors then, freaking traitors now. Will it be comforting to know (if we go to war with Iran) that some of our troops will be shot at with arms North sold them so he could sell more crack cocaine in America?

C'mon, just one of you tell me I'm a liar. C'mon, "bring it on".

A Confusion of Bodily Fluids
Just wanted to inject one salient comment into this raucous discussion:
All the editing in the world won't change the fact that had Clinton been less concerned with saliva on his knob back then he wouldn't need to be so concerned with bloood on his hands now.

RE: Liberal Patriot???
To Ralph:
Liberal and conservative are different approaches to viewing and resolving issues, and hence different means of governing. (no I haven't looked it up in Websters, no it won't stand endless partisan scrutiny - sue me)

Patriotism relates to one's love of their country.

Now, ignoring hyperbole and liberal-hating comments, is there a reason that either liberal or conservative leaning people have a sole claim on patriotism? Why can there not be patriots on both sides, and even soulless traitors on both?

Painting an enemy as being unpatriotic is the first step on the way to some very nasty places. I'm quite sure that this kind of argument was one method used by Hitler to brainwash the populous into his clutches. It was also the root of McCarthyism, which could be seen as a witch-hunt that served many people's private, political and hateful agendas - but I don't know your stance on that.

To Eon - and many others
hat a dull world you must live in. So very black and
white. So very right and wrong. So very good guys and
bad guys. One or the other.

Let me guess, you believe the world was actually created
in six days too. It all goes together, along with a great
deal of smugness and self-righteousness.

To NYCRepBro - Re: Still Waiting...
In anticipation of LP's response I can guess at some of the answers..

1. No, at the time this discussion started apparently only the conservative media and some government reps had seen the movie.
2. He is qualified to comment because he like all the other liberals had heard relatively vague allegations of spurious scenes and events in the movie via the more liberal media channels. The conservative elements here appear to have been even more in the dark as to the focus of these accusations because the conservative media channels have been too busy laughing at Clinton and his depiction and trying to portray the democrat's demands for corrections and threats as some kind of assault on the constitution.
3. LP and -all- other people were only in a position to comment based on what they had heard through the media - so on the liberal side this was reduced to general accusations of fictional scenes, and on the conservative side to accusations of sissiness and/or first-amendment contraventions on the part of the democrat politicians.

The reasons that the accusations are vague is because that is what the available information was - vague. I don't think he is trying to avoid the issue.

On a side point - the only important point I gleaned from McCullough's article was that, from a conservative view point, this TV show would be regarded as a vital, historical and seminal element in US history - which definitely points out the need for it to be absent of hyperbole and fictional dramatisations.

McCullough's name calling and misrepresentation of what was truly at issue in the democrat protests indicates to me that he would like all readers of this website to remain ignorant of the show's inaccuracies and see the entire piece as moment-for-moment truth.

Is it truly impossible for anyone in the US to make something non-partisan and for people to remain objective in their perspective - rather than trying to push agendas and blindly fight with people they see as the 'doom' of their civilization?

Jacob
Where in my original post did I say or insinuate that Clinton had Foster killed? I simply stated that the Clinton team would not let the FBI or the Park Police into Foster's office until they were able to get in there.

If you want to know what I think, I beleive that there was some Whitewater info in his office that they carted out. It is common knowledge that Foster was doing the Clinton's personal legal work on the Whitewater matter on government time. I personally think that the Clintonistas cleaned any evidence pertaining to the case out of the ofice so that it could not be used against the President and First Lady.

And Brian is right, you are a typical troll liar. You accused me of something that was not true and instead of simply admitting you were wrong, you went off on an urrelevant rant aabout anything you could think of. I won't ask for an apology though, because I knoe being a liberal means never having to say you're sorry!

Liberal Patriot???!!!!!
That name is an oxymoron

Still Waiting ...
I note, Liberal Patriot, that I have not as yet heard from you in response to my questions about the ABC drama "The Path to 9/11." I'm sure you've just been very busy responding to the other comments you've received. Or perhaps you've moved on to another issue. I'm certain it couldn't be that you're "unable to compete in the world of free ideas with transparent facts," as Mr McCullough so "pathetically" (that was your word, no?) put it.

In any case, allow me to remind you of my original questions, for your reference:

1. Have you seen the program?
2. If you have not, what, exactly, qualifies you to comment on its content?
3. If you have, why have you not responded to specific claims or points made in the program? Why have you resorted only to ad hominem argument against those whose views differ from your own? Can you see how this could smack of refusal to engage in honest intellectual debate - which, I believe, is exactly the point Mr. McCullough's article was making?

As before, looking forward to reading your comments ...

The Road to 9/11 ...
The Clinton Democrats' attempt to keep America from watching ABC's very factual account of Al Qaeda's long war against the United States is not surprising. Their entire history is one of suppression of the truth - whether it be "I don't recall" as spoken by Mrs. Clinton on the witness stand or the intimidation of Mr. Clinton's one-night stands and possible rape victims (bimbo eruptions and trailer trash). Yet just as shameful is the cheering on of our enemies by the Left, which apparently believes that a Muslim victory will NOT spell trouble for homosexuals, women, Bhuddists, Hindus, Christians (their real enemies), and secularists (note that Iran is now "cleansing" its universities of all secular teachers). The Left (which includes most elected Democrats anywhere these days thanks to George Soros and his hirelings) demands the destruction of Israel, the elimination of any reference to the Christian God from public society, the destruction of the two-parent family, and the legitimization of class warfare that pits white against black, Hispanic against Asian, and so forth - rather than "e pluribus unum".

The ABC Movie is a harsh reminder that the US has far too long make a "game" of criminal justice and even included war criminals in the game -- if they can beat the system, then they too should go scot free to murder over and over again. I anticipate the Monday night airing to scourge the Bush Administration just as Sunday's scourged the Clinton Administration. Both are guilty of major missteps -- Bush's biggest being giving the Clinton holdovers any role at all in public policy (such as allowing Jamie Gorelick, who has 9/11 blood all over her hands, to sit on the 9/11 Commission and not making sure that Sandy Berger spent at least five years in prison for his theft and destruction of critical US government documents).

Clinton's watch
Just watched 9/11. I remember thinking it was 'wag the dog' when Clinton bombed the aspirin factory, turned out I was wrong--didn't know what was going on, altho I was upset about all the bombings and planes and no one did anything. But they got the blind shiek, it wasn't all bad. We hamstring ourselves--still do it today. This law and that law and wait for this and wait for that--but our enemies just act. People are killing us and we have conferences about what we should do and it's just politics as usual. I think Clinton blew his presidency big time, not just w/Monica, and anyone who gets kicked out of the Rhodes Scholar program isn't all that bright. Liberals may think that getting rid of conservatives will help neutralize the jihadists, but they had no problems in the movie shooting Clinton's image and hating us. And, now, goodnight.

Amoral Left
Same problem, same left. Berger has no moral right to comment, but as true leftest, his feelings are his god...his nation be damned.

Nemo good retort to that gnat jacob
Bet he'll bring up some surveys and polls to try to debunk you though.

Nemo
I too, loved your scientific explanation of the liberal animals. It was hilarious! Keep up the good work.

On Jacob and Homosexuals...
Jacob writes: I love it when conservatives deny what they really mean. Just say what you mean and stop pussyfooting about it."

In that case, Jake, please say what YOU mean. Actually, you don't love it, you hate it and what you HATE is not that conservatives deny what they really mean (everyone does that from time to time)) but that conservatives deny what you THINK they meant to say.

Jacob: "So, tell me, conservatives, do you support locking up homosexuals in prisons OR NOT. Yes, or no. None of that, "we love the sinner hate the sin" spin, just say what you mean. You either support locking up homosexuals for "sodomy", or you don't. Chances are, the majority of you do, as polls have OVERWHELMINGLY shown that Republican voters favor mandatory prison sentences for homosexuals and keeping homosexuality illegal by margins of 70%."

Oh, piffle. What homosexuals do in private is THEIR sordid business, not mine. I only object when it involves minors, male Golden Retrievers or permanenet lubricant stains on the bedsheets. in which case I recommend that the offender serve a life sentence in a 10 foot x 10 foot cell with a large-breasted bimbo named Candy.

On the other hand, they have gown awfully vocal about their particular disorder as of late, have they not? From the love that dared not speak its name it has, in the space of one or two generations, become the love that just won't shut the heck up.

Yes, it IS a disorder; yes, it IS abnormal. No doubt you will quickly retort, "So what, then, IS normal?" (I can almost hear the sniveling whine in your voice as you nervously hold your glass of chardonnay or whatever the heck it is you Moonbats drink on social occasions).

The answer, of course, is elementary: NORMAL is what heterosexual vertebrates are and homosexual vertebrates are not.

Does this mean we imprison or persecute them? Not unless they have been convicted of a crime that merits incarceration. Otherwise, society will always require the talented services of male dancers, interior decorators, fashion designers, airline flight attendants and Hollywood freak shows named Andy Dlck.

Should we allow them to teach our children? Only if they are good teachers and if the curriculum strictly adheres to reading, writing, geography, history, biology or arithmetic and does not involve leather chaps or listening to the latest club remix of "Frankie Goes to Hollywood."

Do we legalize "gay marriages?" Tough call. In asmuch as I'd love to saddle them with the same misery that befalls all of us heteros who get hitched, the fact remains that all societies since the dawn of recorded history have regarded marriage as the legal and/or religious union of a man and a woman.

Do we let them become priests? (This one is for Catholics only). Absolutely not. The overhwelming percentage of priests who molest children are homosexuals who molest little boys and confused adolescents. Defrock them and then toss them into a cell with the voluptuous Candy.

As much as I personally do not approve of what they do amonst themselves, I have no problem with fudge-packers who keep the workings of their personal chocolate factory a secret, Jake.

As long as they keep their perversion to themselves and stop trying to force society to place them on the same level as us normal folk, I say we should just leave them alone.

Setting aside for the moment the key role they played in spreading AIDS - the 20th century's answer to the Black Death that ravaged Medeival Europe - the Gay commmunity otherwise harms no one if it minds its plac and, in the case of Andy D1ck, Rip Taylor, Mr. Blackwell, Boy George and Elton John among many others, they actually entertain and occasionally amuse us. Without them we'd habe no snotty waiters or prissy flight attendants to snicker at and liffe would be that much more boring and bereft of cheer.

After all, there are only so many witty observatons and knee-slapping bon mots that can be made at the expense of aging hippies such yourself. True, there is the yet untapped vein of jihadist humor out there that makes the Comstock Lode look like the disccovery of a lost charm bracelet.

On the other hand Islamic jihadists, like most liberals, have no sense of humor. At least the gay community does not often resort to torture and beheading with dull Ginsu knives when some overworked and uderpaid comic begins his set with "two gay flight attendants walk into a Dearborne, Michigan mosque..."

The jihadists, on the other hand, are a different story and if you think American political conservatives are hostile to homosexuals, wait till you see what happens when Jihad Jamal offers his own rendition of "Muslim Eye for the Gay Guy."

Het BrianR
Just came back from your blog, nice piece concerning the 2nd A.

Would apreciate your comments concerning my previous post about the libs sneaking in the back door after we've left the house.

Uh, Kimberly, that wasn't Pearliegirl
You caught yourself in the wall mirror.

Kimberly:
Been hanging around Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, have we?

Oh, hey, let me help you out:

HALIBURTON!

Jacob & Liberal Patriot
I ran out of american flags to burn at the last demonstration we attended together. That was a riot. What was the web site for that discount flag company? I believe it was in Berkley.

Oh, Jacob! Thanks for the poster you sent me. Such artistic stokes of genius. Where oh where did you pick that print up at. Better than Mistlethorpe's crucifix in urine. Who would have thought that c*m and rosarys would go so well together.

Liberal Parriot! I've got my tickets to the Peace Conference in Vancouver. Have you heard from Kimberly? She said as long as we bring our own stash, we could pad down with her while the conference was going on.

Well, gotta go. The BBC special about Pearl Harbor and Bush's role just started.

Bush lied, people died,

Toomuchsense

Nemo...
...more people read your post than you know.

Celtic-dragon...a new post anytime soon?

Mr. McCullough
It was pathetic, cowardly, and sickening

Liberals, who in large part are people devoid of true substance and belief, who also have great contempt for God, morality and truth, are often unable to deal with facts that reflect poorly upon them. And using pathetic, self-serving, cry-baby tactics is how they are commemorating this week - the fifth memorial of 9/11.

Liberals are pathetic because they serve selfish immoral purposes. That is also what makes them weak. In their twisted thinking they believe with all their hearts that such weakness is actually strength. And that perversion of reality is sealing their doom.

proving that in the end national security and even national identity are always subservient to their own ego, reputation, and appearance.

*********************************************************
Mr. McCullough - when you re-read the paragraphs above that you have written, do you feel good about yourself? Do you think that you have done a service
to the people of the US? Do you think that we are now
a more enlightened people? Do you think that you are
a credit to those who raised you, taught you, preached
to you, cared for you?

Have you ever considered that maybe it is time to grow
up, use whatever god-given intelligence that you may have
to write something that is useful and true, rather than
continuing to sound so much like an 5th grader on the
playground, without supervision.

You write as though you are terrified of the future -
that your side may not win in the next election, and
to ward off that evil day you are spewing forth incredible invective as if you can make it all not happen
if you can just scream loud enough, be outrageous enough,
lie enough.

You KNOW that Bush has botched it big time. And you
would like all of us - Conservative and Liberal - to
forget that. (Maybe if I mention one more time what
a horny toad Clinton was everyone will forget that
where we should have gone is Afghanistan, not Iraq;
that maybe we should have been a little nicer to our
allies rather than flipping them off because, yes, we
really could use and do in fact need their help. Maybe
if I try once again to make every liberal into the mold
of George Maher, people will really believe me & they
will forget about Bush).

And you know what. Some will. But they are already
reading and responding on these websites. They are
already on your side and sounding pathetically like
you. So all you are really doing is embarrassing
yourself in a very public way.


To all Conservatives Re: left wing-dings
Just for a lark, I went back and pulled up a few of the last 3 or 4 days posts. Did you ever notice that the libs wait until they are sure you have moved on, then they try to insult and berrate? Is that just so they can get the last word in? Is this a pretty common occurence?

I can certainly see why gunny and some of the rest of my fellow conservatives are so brash with them. Time for the kid gloves to come off.

continued...
Madeleine Albrite is showed to defend and possibly have initiated informing the Pakistanis of the Tomahawk missile strike. The scene is not cut, as far as I can tell

wow
Sandy Berger is really looking like an @sshole. Utterly disengaged and disconnected

OK, the scene with
Masood on the CIA team on the ground was edited a liitle bit to conform to real events, but lays the blame for inaction on Sandy Berger and Clinton, who was avoiding responsibility for anytthing at all.

Nemo: I read your posts
Rest assured. They're good, and need no amplification from me (for what THAT'S worth -- LOL).

Better vote guys!
For any Republicans, conservatives or libertarians who have read the idiocy of the leftists who have invaded this blog and you STILL choose not to vote then, my friend, you are to blame when Pelosi, Murtha, Clinton and Kerry assume power.
Not to mention - the commissions and committees who will have Dem chair "persons" leading them and the issues to be decided upon in this nation.
You can count on an impeachment hearing and more Dem face time in the media. You can count on more liberal activists appointments to the Supreme Court.
Like the looks and sound of Shumer and Dean? That oughta scare you enough to drag grandma and any disenchanteds to the polls to vote Republican

Re: Nemo Particularis
clyde writes: "Nemo: Great post LOL."

Which one? I suspect you are referring to my post about Moonbats. I appreciate your appreciation. For a second I was beginning to think that nobody reads what I write. I realize I am verbose and oftentimes didactic, but it was getting to the point where i started to feel even WORSE than Rodney Dangerfield (not only no respect, but not even noticed).

clyde: "An open question,if I may? Do any of these people who are trying to defend our enemy think just because they disagree with this admin. on the WoT think for one NY second that their lives would be spared by these terrorists? Methinks not."

You thinks correctly. However, keep in mind that these people are, for the most part, Moonbats. And Moonbats consider Evangelical Christians to be a greater threat - not only to humanity, but to the solar system itself - than the entire so-called Islamo-fascist world.

In their minds, "Islamo-fascism" is a neocon buzzword for one or two dozen disenfranchised Muslims who have likely suffered persecution at the hands of evil Zionists and are just fighting for the freedom of poor persecuted Palestinians everywhere.

In the macadamia-nut-sized brain of the average Moonbat, we (read: George W. Bush and all the evil neo-cons) are the cause of 9-11 and the root of all Muslim hatred of the West, although those awful, baby-killing Zionists also play a part in the scheme.

Celt
The .45-70 is my favorite. But have used the the "ol 94" 30-30 for years.

Marxist Troll?
Hmm. I am a Marxist troll because I am a Constitutional Fundamentalist. I believe that only Congress can get us into a war by declaring it. I believe that the Fourth Amendment means what it says. No searches without warrants. I even believe in the Second Amendment, as written? Am I a marxist because I am a patriot, rather than a bushbot?

Furthermore, I do not look anything like Hilary Clinton or Madeleine Albright!

Kevin...
Are you competing with Doc Adams for the most posts by marxist trolls?

Right On About Liberals!
The only problem is that Jorge Bush, V.P Cheney, and the Republican Congressional and Senatorial Leadership are all liberals.

AWOL or deserter
First the allegation is that the president was AWOL, now it is that he was a deserter.

Where is the proof of either? It isn't up to the president or his people to prove he wasn't AWOL or a deserter, it is up to those making the charge to prove he was AWOL or deserted.

The papers used by CBS and listed on their web site have absolutely no bearing on the allegation of W being AWOL. They also do not even substantiate the allegation by CBS that he received preferential treatment to get into the Guard.

As far as desertion Kimberly, do you have any idea of what the grounds for a charge, let alone conviction of desertion are?

Clyde9


Good point, Clyde
Case in point: remember that Lear that went down with that golfer in it after everyone on board died from probably anoxia? The fighters formed up on it, saw no one was conscious inside, and yet just flew with it until it went down on its own.

As I recall, that was post-9/11, too.

Aircraft Interceptions
Did the flight crews on any of the hijacked airliners have time to switch their IFF to the setting that indicates they were being hijacked before the hijackers turned off the IFF?

If they did, there would have only been a very brief period for any FAA controllers to see indications on radar screens that one or more aircraft had been hijacked. Why, before nine-eleven, would they be intercepted by fighter aircraft because they were hijacked?

How would an interpretation by the FAA that airliners had been hijacked lead to the conclusion that these aircraft were going to intentionally crash into the WTC, Pentagon, and some other target?

When the first plane hit the WTC, the indication or belief, certainly among the media was that it was an accident. It would seem to be extremely unlikely that a trained pilot would accidentally hit a building that large on a extemely severe VFR day.

When should the decision to launch interceptors have been made, and on what criteria? IIRC the one that hit the Pentagon or crashed in a field in Pennsylvania were perhaps the only ones where there may have been time to intercept the aircraft. But, without the IFF, it isn't that easy to see aircraft on a radar screen. Plus, how many FAA controllers at that time were sufficiently trained to direct a fighter intercept? The air defense concept of the United States Air Force has always been to defend against attacks from outside the country.

If fighter aircraft had intercepted the airliners, what would they do except fly formation with that airliner and try to make radio contact? If that fails do they shoot down the airliner? What authority did the military then have, or now have, to shoot down civilian airliners?

I know of one instance when a hijacked airliner was intercepted, mid 1970, by FB-111's. The only purpose of that interception was for those aircraft to fly formation behind the airliner and watch for someone, ala D.B. Cooper, to bail out of the airliner, in which case the crew would relay the coordinates of that point on their INS to federal authorities to designate a point to search for the hijacker.

Clyde9

As to the TV show (ahem)
I just don't see the big fuss. It's a dramatization.

Inherit the Wind - the Scopes Trial

Compulsion - Leopold and Loeb

The Longest Day - D-Day

A Bridge Too Far - Remagen

JFK - an Oliver Stone fantasy

All the King's Men - Huey Long

Alexander the Great - Stone again

All the President's Men - Watergate

Big deal. Hollyweird does dramatizations of real events and people all the time. They take dramatic license.

I think it's a hoot that the libs got their knickers in such a knot over the whole thing. Makes them look even more foolish than usual (if that's at all possible).

The movie has just come on
so let's see whatn the fuss is all about!

Goshawk: I really liked the lever action .45/70 I have shot. My favorite brush gun is still the good old Winchester 30-30

Yeah, I'm an iron sight guy
Sometimes I'll pop a scope on my M1A, just to bang those 600 yd targets. Other than that, I can hit as well with open sights as a scope out to about 300 yards.

Gosh: That's funny
Because I've been looking at the Marlin Trapper in .45-70.

I gotta say, I love the Sharp's (or "Old Thumper", as I call it). Talk about reaching out and touching someone!

cat-trapper
A friend of mine has a .444 marlin that he swears by.
Both my .45-70 and the Win 94 30-30 have open sights. I only use a scope on my .308 Ruger/77 sweet shooting rifle!

Goshawk, BrianR
I kinda like the .444 marlin with 240gr. noslers. When you use iron sights you know you just missed when the buck shakes his head.
The Quigley 45/70 is sweeeet piece of craftsmanship though.

BrianR
Mines a Marlin lever action. How do you like the Quigley Sharps?
I've been looking at the same model only in .45-100 for a bit more range. Haven't decided yet. But it sure feels nice.

Path to 9/11
Interestingly enough, I have NOT seen the drama yet. ALl have forgotten that it airs Sunday nite and Monday nite. What I do find repulsive and personally offensive and most illegal, breeching the first amendment is the following... A letter was written and delivered by the ranking Democrats in the senate. It was an overt and open threat to ABC to censor this program or have their liscense pulled or at the very least have much much difficulty in the future with the renewal of broadcast liscense. Is no aware of the implications of this letter and its open threat to CENSOR a broadcast company? I will support free speech for everyone. This also applies to Michael Moore and his group. However I am outraged to see a group of PUBLICLY elected officials acting as my conscience and decide for me what I want to see. They have NO RIGHT whatsoever to change anything that a company would broadcast. If they censor ABC where are they when the New York Times exposes national secrets in the name of free speech. Contrary to popular belief, we live in a FREE country and No ONE makes a decision for me on what I watch or see or believe. This is the greatest assault on civil liberties I have ever seen in my 53 years as an american. All the politicians sendingthis letter should be indicted for collusion and conspiraecy. This is personally insulting to any american.

Dave Allen

Goshawk: Huh? What?
LOL. Yeah, actually went up a couple days ago.

What's your .45-70? I've got one, too; replica Sharp's 1874 - Quigley Down Under!

svlad jelly:
We haven't found Jimmy Hoffa's body yet, either. So what?

Hey BrianR
A ringing in your ears? Been out target shooting eh? Ha ha ha.
I have a .45/70 that does that.

cat trapper:
It's amazing to discover how much parents have learned since you've gotten older. eh wot? :-)

*Cough* Tora Bora *cough*
Um, excuse me, sorry to interupt the wingnut whine-fest here, but all this "clinton had eight years to kill osama" crap is giving me a headache. As Mr. too-insane-for-primetime has pointed out, the fifth anneversary of 9-11 is tomorrow, and BUSH STILL HASN'T CAUGHT OSAMA!!! FIVE YEARS. Ten thousand American troops in Afghanistan. We toppled their government. We've lavished the Pakistanis. Do you remember Tora Bora? So, where's Osama? Well, as Bush and Rice and Cheney have said: Who cares?

And to refute ABC and McCollough on the "Clinton had the chance to kill Osama" meme, here's Richard Clarke, counterterrorism czar for Clinton and both Bushes, and currently counterterrorism advisor to ABC:

"1. Contrary to the movie, no US military or CIA personnel were on the ground in Afghanistan and saw bin Laden.

"2. Contrary to the movie, the head of the Northern Alliance, Masood, was no where near the alleged bin Laden camp and did not see UBL.

"3. Contrary to the movie, the CIA Director actually said that he could not recommend a strike on the camp because the information was single sourced and we would have no way to know if bin Laden was in the target area by the time a cruise missile hit it."

Even Thomas Kean, the only 9-11 commissioner that supports this movie (because he's paid to,) has admitted that the scene Clarke is refering to was FICTIONALIZED. FAKE. A LIE. McCollough didn't get that memo, apparently.

So, come on, drop the Conspiracy Theories, take off the tinfoil hats and join the reality-based community.

That's SO Nancy!
This is our new battle-cry after every public utterance by the liberals and Democrats:"That's SO Nancy!"

Cat trapper: LOL
Fortunately for me, I was raised as a conservative in a conservative home.

I also thank God, my daughter's conservative, too.

Brian PS
Just called my father and all 6 of my uncles to apologise for all the times I must have been an arrogant twit a quarter century or so ago.

cat trapper: did you just hear...
... something? It kinda sounded like Jacob the Liar.

Naw, musta just been a ringing in my ears.

cat trapper, a translation
"I lost the argument because Jacob brought out surveys, polls, facts and noted several expert opinions (of conservatives such as Fred Barnes and Diick Morris, no less)."

You losers are on the run in your own little web blogs now, aren't you? You've got nowhere to hide from the LIBERAL GESTAPO MUWAHAHAHAHA.

BrianR concerning jacob
You are correct in your observation. I am personally done swatting at this pesky little gnat.

BrianR: Not really
I didn't stop acknowledging you, you just continue to claim that I "lied", when clearly his post indicates that the Clintons were involved in a "conspiracy" involving Foster, i.e. they had the poor sap killed and removed vital papers from his office to cover up whatever motive they might have had. It's obvious that that is exactly what he believes, and even a couple of others in this thread suggested the same thing.

I love it when conservatives deny what they really mean. Just say what you mean and stop pussyfooting about it. It's like the multiple posters in this thread that agreed that "society should deal with" homosexuals because their behavior is "dangerous", and then attempted to claim I was exaggerating or I was being outrgaeous when I suggested that you support sodomy laws, i.e. mandatory imprisonment sentences.

So, tell me, conservatives, do you support locking up homosexuals in prisons OR NOT. Yes, or no. None of that, "we love the sinner hate the sin" spin, just say what you mean. You either support locking up homosexuals for "sodomy", or you don't. Chances are, the majority of you do, as polls have OVERWHELMINGLY shown that Republican voters favor mandatory prison sentences for homosexuals and keeping homosexuality illegal by margins of 70%.

I don't know why any of you
are still addressing this Jacob doofus anyway. In his first post he started right out with an outright lying accusation against Flagwaver and went downhill from there.

He still won't even acknowledge his lie. He's stopped responding to me since I pinned his ears back.

Ignore him. Maybe he'll crawl back under his rock.

Also, forgot to add Black/Hispanic vote
ALso, I would note that black voters and Hispanic voters are less likely to vote than white men, something that is going to change dramatically this fall because of Katrina, which dropped Bush's approval to 2% among African-Americans, and of course all of the political scapegoating over illegal immigrants that hasn't even produced anything other than hissyfits by Tom Tancredo on the floor of the House.

Cattrapper, incorrect, facts show that
"I would wager with you that there are probabbly 5 to 10 million more americans, who due to apathy with the whole system, are still not registerd. More and more of us are becomming concerned with the "America" of the left."

No offense, but that basically shows how little you know about demographic voting patterns. Studies by independent groups have shown that Democratic voters are more interested in voting this NOvember than Republicans, and additionally, you should have listened to Diick Morris making the rounds on Fox News. Morris postulates that the GOP will never get a better turnout than it did in 2004, because Bush got just about every white male in the country that was going to vote Republican, to vote Republican.

It's true there is voter apathy, and THAT's the reason that Dems do better in polls, because polls often include "all adults", instead of "registered voters". Thus, you have no hope if you're going to rely on non-registered right-wingers to join in. It won't happen because there virtually are none. Apathy is stronger generally among liberals, and hence less of them vote. That's why Diick Morris also concludes that Hillary Clinton can easily win in 2008, regardless of a deficit in the polls, because Clinton will attract demographics that are left-wing to the polls who generally do not show up.

For example, white men vote in record numbers of around 90%, and are about 2/3 Republican.

Single women, however, are even more overwhelmingly Democratic, about 70-75%, but only turn out to vote by about 30%. Thus, Morris correctly believes that Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton would get more unregistered Democrats to the polls to vote.

And anyway, regarding your person analogy, that is irrelevant. There is simply no denying that the next generation is strongly pro-gay rights. I could easily provide similar analogies. My own father, who voted for Bush in 04, is voting for Bob Menendez for the senate in the fall because he's tired of the "abortion abortion abortion gays gays gays!" drumbeat in the GOP. Libertarians are replacing conservatives, which will inherently move the country socially toward the left, while the fiscal balance remains the same.

Polls have also shown that the majority of the country thinks the religious right is pushing its agenda too far on our nation.

AF_retiree_2001
Your absolutely right! This is far more important than a movie that will shine the light of truth on so-called political leaders. It has become a base where all Americans can watch as the Demo/Libs try and use the power of the government against it's own people and the Constitution itself.

Even now it doesn't matter if ABC caves or not. The very fact that the Demo/Libs are trying to use the government to force censorship so openly and blatantly, should make any sane person drop their support for these socialist pigs!

BTW, Bush and his administration are well aware that their mistakes are shown in the mini-series. And not a word do they utter in protest.

AF_retiree_2001
After the 1st amendment they will come after the one that was meant to ensure we could have the 1st, which of course is the 2nd.

Pempy, Movwater
It was an honor for me to be included by jacob with you. Pempy, I am new here too. Found a home with like-minded people who speak the truth.

Jacob
Once again someone (read you) from the open minded left has resorted to lumping all conservatives together and commence with the name calling. I simply asked you a valid question. Polls can, and have represented many things whish are indeed erroneous. It is never a scientific poll when people are asked to log on and express their opinion.

I have just taken a survey myself of the 3 children I have in that age bracket.
The results...

1. My eldest, age 24 "Dad, you know I was in Iraq and could not respond to the survey.

2. Next child, age 22, "I was on doing missionary work in Eastern Europe helping to feed the hungry. I could not respond as well."

3. Third child, age 18, "You know with school work and basketball and youth group and everything I never watch the news. It is depressing, has too much of a liberal slant to evrything and no way would I waste my time answering a poll that was answered in November a couple years ago by a majority in 16 states."

As for beginning to fight...
A mjor part of this battle began when some 2 to 4 million americans, who had abstained from voting since The Carter era, registerd and voted to "flush the Johns". I would wager with you that there are probabbly 5 to 10 million more americans, who due to apathy with the whole system, are still not registerd. More and more of us are becomming concerned with the "America" of the left. I do not pretend to know the outcomming of the November elections. I do feel confident, however, that I do know my neighbors who live in the heartland of this nation.

The Dems response to ABC
The Clinton years were a prelude to coming attractions based on this past weeks events.
He spent part of his eight years in office trying to uproot the great "Vast Right wing Conspiracy" by trying to take out Randy Weaver, taking out David Korash, and
missing Bin Laden along the way.
There was a special paid legal staffer to handle the "Bimbo Eruptions."
The Democratic Party expells Joseph Lieberman for (gasp) expressing support for George Bush and the war in Iraq despite his nearly perfect liberal voting record.
A story comes out about an editor for one of the "Newspapers of Record" asking a Cuban expatriate writer for his opinion of other Cuban Expatriates' dancing in the streets of "little Havana" after the news of Fidel Castro's sudden severe illness. When told that the requested op-ed piece would be less than flattering to the Castro boys, the editor replies that wasn't exactly what they were looking for, so thanks but no thanks. All the news that's fit to print only if it fits what they think is fit. That's been the tone of MSM for the last six years though.
This week has seen the censorship of ABC's docu drama by the party that proclaims itself the champion of freedom of speech.
What's on the menu the next time the free speech champs are in the majority? Book burnings and re-education camps?

RE: ABC 9-11 Special
Let's face it...if we don't see it in "Bubbavision", Slick just don't want us to see it.

The Death of Freedom of Speech
This is more than an economic boycotting of the Dixie Chicks or Madonna, this is a portion of our elected Government telling a Journalistic enity "you can't show that, I don't like it! It shows me in an unflattering light."

Some will argue that "the other party started it with the Reagan movie on CBS..." Or with Mike Moore's Editorial... Both the forces at play were consumer not governmental.

ABC ought to thumb their noses at the hoopla and let US all decide for ourselves.

In the end, looks like they might wimp out entirely and another Consitutional Freedom will be dust... what's next after free speech?

Re Jerubaal: Actually, you're losing it
Fred Barnes has even admitted that it looks like Republicans are about to lose electoral control of Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado, Ohio, Tennessee and Iowa. And no, Kerry won 19 states. All that matters is which states are big and which states are small. So, in addition to the 19, if Dems take the populous Ohio, Virginia and Tennessee, games up for the GOP permanently. You simply can't win with the low populations of the Midwest and Deep South. The Southwest is trending Democratic because of Hispanic immigration. Iowa, Colorado and Ohio are all electing Democratic governors this fall. Ken Blackwell is losing by a landslide, and both Republicans are losing in the other two states as well. Colorado, in Barnes' words, is a "disaster Zone" for the GOP because of changing demographics. We took away a house seat, a senate seat and both state legislatures from you in 04 when Bush won by a narrow 51% in the state, and now Colorado has about a 35% approval rating for him, like Ohio. The state disapproves of the Republican senator and approves of the Democratic senator, according to SurveyUSA. So talk tough all you want, the map isn't being painted "red", it's being painted blue.

Sorry to ruin your party. Facts have a tendency of doing that to conservatives.

Goshawk
You're right, man, we're painting the whole map red. The liberals have like what, 14 states? Let's finish them - drive them into the sea.

Just a suggestion
Let's all stay home
Watch the 'Path to 9/11'
Make up our own minds

See you when it's all done.


vinny48
ROFL!

gil
You give off the impression of a man that is always interested in knowing whether every guy you see or hear about, wherever you go, has had some kind of gay sex.

Celtic
"My kingdom for a can of RAID!"

ROFLMBO!

Kevin & Monica
Kevin McCullogh. Another of the He-Man Mucho Macho Civilian name calling Republican Right winger that forgot to enlist and serve.

I don't recognise Clinton as a sissi, but maibe you know something we dont.... Did you give him a you know what Kevin? Maibe it was not only Monica at the Oval office.... Where were you back in Clinton's days Kevin? Not at a Marine Recruitment Office that's for shure. I say you were buying cigars for Clinton Kevin.

By the way Kevin, the documentary talks bad about Bush also. Bush has such focus on terrorism pre- 9-11, that when he was informed of the first plane hit at the towers his remark was " Boy, that is one bad pilot".



Re: Pempy, Cat trapper, movwater
Re Pempy:
"In your dreams you socialist punk! We conservators have just begun to fight! You had better watch your six!"

Uh huh, that's great kid. Oh, by the way, the latest polls show the following things:

1.) 52% of Americans support gay adoption
2.) 60% of Americans support scrapping "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" and allowing gays to serve openly
3.) 70% of 18-24 year olds support gay marriage
4.) Fox News Poll: 48% Dem, 32% Reps for the fall, Bush approval 38%

Looks like you're losing pretty fast. Can't wait till you actually "have begun to fight". You nutjobs always do such a great job of destroying your own campaigns in the process. Can anyone say KATHERINE HARRIS? LOL.

Poll (Strategic Vision Republican Polling Firm).

"Does your vote go to Bill Nelson, the Democrat, or Katherine Harris, the Republican?"
"63% Nelson"
"20% Harris"

Dominated. Also, Pempy, you conservative idiots lose all credibility about "LIBERALS COMPARE BUSH TO HITLER!" when you refer to liberals as the "Gestapo". That would be another pathetic incident of Republicans reversing their positions, just like McCullough crybabying about CBS's outrageous Reagan docudrama.


Re movwater:
"No, but he did receive his daily "DNC Talking Points" FAX."

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Your posts, along with the rest of the right-wing crackpots here, largely consist of the following right-wing talking points:

"Liberal elitist"
"Liberals are socialists/communists/traitors"
"Bill Clinton took advantage of his intern!"

Re movwater:
"Self, why didn't he just give the UN Inspection Team "carte blanche", unlimited access"

Why not? Well, let's think about this one for a second, maybe because he was a DICTATOR.

Re DavidMac:
I'm not actually an "aging hippie", I'm in my twenties, that was merely a joke, like when a conservative says "I'm a part of the vast right-wing conspiracy". Liberals have a sense of humor, unlike most conservatives who walk around all day with a stick up their rears because they think white conservative Christians are oppressed and Jesus could come back to get them at any moment.

Libral Ideas For National Secutity
Did you hear it????? I didn't......Listen again....did you hear it...........False alarm.... No Ideas again, sorry America

Pempy
Your not alone. My admiration for the conservative insistence has risen dramatically in the last few months. As more and more conservatives stop trying to understand or find some reason to justify American Liberals who betray the very country that gives them the right of freedom of speech.

We are finally realizing the truth of what we're up against. Pure Socialist/Communistic advancement by the Left. There is no amount of arguing or debate that will alter their thinking. We now know that the Liberals must not be just stopped. They must be completely extinguished!

Ha ha ha I have to laugh when Gestapo bot Jacob writes..

"Shhhh, don't tell anyone. Conservatives lost the culture war."

In your dreams you socialist punk! We conservators have just begun to fight! You had better watch your six!

Jacob
concerning the polling of 18-24 year olds....hmmm now that is a demographic group from which to base intelligent decisions. What with all their vast knowledge and life experience and such. Where was this poll taken? How many were polled? Was it limited to Mass. just after the controversial high court ruling?

Celt: LOL
Good coffee, too!

Re: Nemo Particularis
Nemo: Great post LOL. An open question,if I may? Do any of these people who are trying to defend our enemy think just because they disagree with this admin. on the WoT think for one NY second that their lives would be spared by these terrorists? Methinks not.

Pathetic ending to the USA
Too bad civility has gone the way of the dodo.

If Jacob and Kimberly and Liberal Patriot et al. are right, the conservatives are evil and deserve to die, along with the Republican Party.

If their conservative counterparts are right, the leftists are evil and deserve to die, along with the Democrat Party.

What if we're all evil and deserve to die--and Islam is the Sword of Justice intended to destroy all of us in our evil?

(That's a rhetorical question, folks.)

As I've said several times before on other threads, check out http://www.teaforterrorists.com if you want to see what life would be like under a Hillary clone.

After you've checked that out, you might want to investigate the link to Yada Yahweh. That's just a suggestion. I make no judgments one way or the other as to the value of what you will learn there, should you go.

Speaking of judgments of each others' worldviews, I think Catattack has a point. Everyone should chill (and remember that Kevin's whole point is to stir up emotional responses rather than logical ones).

Jacob the Hippie
To denigrate BrianR's post is one thing, but to postulate that "polls showing 70% of 18-24 year olds believe in gay marriage, gay adoption, universal healthcare, and liberal ideas" proves your point is hardly substantive evidence.

You claim to be an aging hippie. If you still hold values and ideas that you had when you were 18 - 24 years old, and haven't had any new thoughts except hatred for the right, then your thinking is seriously flawed.

BrianR is not only correct, he's not verbose, something you can't claim.

Commission Report v. television program
Notice Cinton didn't object to the content or publiction of the 9-11 Commission Report. But dramatize its content and distribute it, and they seek to suppress. Why? Many people don't read much anymore, but they do *watch* television and movies. Dramatization will have a lasting impact.

Their objection that the TV version is not 'true' is touching coming from one that quibbled over the definition of "is", and sex. While a gunman may not have had OBL in his gunsight, the 9-11 Commission Report does say they had opportunities to kill OBL and they were deliberately missed. So while the 'gunsight' video may not be 'true,' it is representative of the truth and the Report. Clinton now substitutes 'truth' for 'is' in his famous quote.

and another thing
To Republicans who are considering staying home for the election I have this to say:

Those who are unwilling to vote for the lesser of two evils risks electing the greater of two evils.

Christmas Goose

I have NEVER read a thoughtful, well reasoned, cogent article or posting from a "liberal." Today has provided no exception. Instead what you get is name calling, insult, lying - or its converse - the refusal to acknowledge facts. Some idiot earlier on even went to the trouble to document the conservative credentials of the docu-DRAMA's makers as if that should condemn its credibility. See how they think? If the Bible were composed by a hundred monkeys, it would not detract from the potency of the book (whether one believes in it or not.)

The Truth shall bear witness to itself.

"It's not that our liberal friends are ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronaldus Maximus

Oh yeah!
Jacob,
Oh yeah, you guys are a shoo in. What with stunning platforms like: Conservatives say "gays are evil and should be jailed" and Conservatives are "pathetic vermin" along with "Bush is a washed up failure" you can't possibly lose. By the way, when will you be inserting your raise taxes until everybody makes the same amount of money just like socialism platform and the let's open the borders wider so that we can have more victims, er, voters platform and the let's negotiate with people who have the death of Americans as part of their ideology platform and the lets let the government run healthcare so it'll be just as inefficient as social security and welfare platform...oh that's right, you gotta keep harping on Bush because that's the only thing you've got going for you.

Jacob and GOP demise
Do you really think the DEMs will take it all in the next 2 years? Maybe so. Do you really think everything will be instantly AOK? Now ihave an opinion. I think our whole ball of wax, national and international will tank. High taxes, high minimum wage, amnesty for illegls will tank the economy, the islamists will be heartened and pull off some grevious attack, and the left will be blamed and finished for at least the next 20 years. Prediction takes guts and willingness to handle being wrong. I haven't seen much in the way of prediction from any of the left wingers i read.

Hey Brian
Boring Sunday, eh? We all came here, lol!

jacob: everything
else you wrote is pure diversionary drivel from that point on, as far as I'm concerned.

You made a flat-out false accusation, and then when you couldn't back it up, you've tried to change the subject.

The Dan Rather School of Ethics and Intergrity.

What a dolt.


jacob, you really ARE a knucklehead
Of course I refuted your post, right in the first comment I wrote. I refuted your assertion that Flagwaver wrote anything in his post asserting that Vince Foster was murdered by Clinton.

How the f+ck stupid are you, anyway?

Fiddlin
I guess it was inevitable on this thread....*sigh* So, why do you make the misleading and reprehensible comparison between Gays and criminals????? GLBT people are no more criminals by nature then staight people. You can believe what you want, but your comparison has no validity and is damaging to millions of decent (Yes! Decent!) and law abiding neigbors of yours.

To nutjob "Fiddlin"
"Do Christians hate Gay folk? Absolutely not....neither gays, nor bank robbers, nor murderers, nor pedophiles, etc. Rather we pity them, and realize what they do is WRONG! What they do damages society, and they have to be dealt with under the law,"

Translation: Gays are evil, my Bible told me so, we shoud lock them all up in jail because that's what Jesus wants.

Talk about a pathethic choir boy. McCullough wants to talk about sissies? The entire Republican party is comprised of a bunch of little choir boy sissies that spend all day praying for forgiveness for cursing or accidentally seeing a picture of a naked woman. Bunch of pathetic, outdated vermin, no wonder the younger generations look at you as a joke and your party is doomed both in the short and long run, and the only candidate that could possibly defeat Clinton in 08' is pro-choice, pro-gay rights Rudy Guiliani, in which case it wouldn't be a victory for the conservatives but for the left. Ouch. In other words, you can't win anymore, only Republicans who run as liberals can win, because we've got you losers on the run. November is when Congress returns to the Democratic party, and 08 is when the White House returns. George W. Bush is a washed up failure and a joke to the American people, a broken record who mumbles the same incoherent babbles about "FREEDOM, HURR, TERRORISTS, GOOD EVIL GAY MARRIAGE, HURR".

Geez, talk about a pathetic ending to the Republican Party.

to kimberly
Go take a chill pill and also give some to all your liberal friends.

Islamofascism was coined BY A MUSLIM
But please, Jacob, bc et al, never be bothered by facts or truth.

The rest, please google Khalid Duran. The oldest reference to islamic fascism comes from this life-long islamic scholar, and dates back to 1990.

Enough of fools. I have to get back to unpacking.

Right on baseball doc!
A simple question. If the Dems feel they are so right about the issues of the day why must they evade the people by way of vote and go directly to activist judges to achieve their goals?
I'm just saying...

Right & Wrong
Folks that were raised instilled with the knowledge of what is right or wrong, usually under the influence of their religion, never have to worry about the grey areas. Do Christians hate Gay folk? Absolutely not....neither gays, nor bank robbers, nor murderers, nor pedophiles, etc. Rather we pity them, and realize what they do is WRONG! What they do damages society, and they have to be dealt with under the law, if applicable. When Man is in control and sets himself up as the supreme intelligence, Right & Wrong becomes what HE decides, and as HE is the supreme being, there are no limits. HE has become the god of his world, and what he decides what is right & what is wrong is HIS gospel. This is called Hubris. The product of this ridiculous ideology is societal disintigration. It has polluted & destroyed the once great Democratic Party, sired the garbage from Hollywood, declared homosexuality not a deviant behavior, made acceptable shacking up, illigitimate birth, etc., etc., & produced Clinton, whose hedonistic, indecisive personality traits made him one of the most inept presidents we ever had. And if you disagree with or disobey them, they become angry & vengeful gods, as ABC now realizes.

Speaking of Pure Drivel…
bc writes: “Oh, the twisted mind of the conservative: shoot the messenger (like Michael Moore or Richard Clark) when the facts conflct with their still-naive view that "we are always the good guys".

I guess bc never got the memo stating that “Michael Moore” and “facts” should never appear together in the same sentence. When it comes to Islamic jihadism, we ARE the good guys.

bc: “Read about your Republican President, Dwight Eisenhower- who warned us all this was going to happen. You'd have thought that war criminals/profiteers Cheney, Rumsfeld and Perle would have gotten the message from a WWII war hero.”

Sounds like the familiar squeaking of a familiar creature…

bc: “If you think we're in Iraq to "fight for freedom", think again. Shame on all of you.”
Uh oh, it IS the familiar squeaking sound made by a familiar creature.

bc: “Innocent Iraqis (if you can grasp that notion- or has the corp. media brainwashing done its job?) are dying by our hands.”

Yup. It’s confirmed. Folks, that squeaking you hear is the defensive call of none other than the American Liberal Moonbat (Politicus ignoramus-americanis), a close relative of the European Liberal Moonbat (Politicus ignoramus-euroweasalis).

Vast numbers of them can be located on most university campuses or in heavily populated urban centers and have been known to congregate in great numbers at Democrat conventions or any public gathering at which America, Israel, God or traditional morality are scorned or railed against.

American Moonbats are easily identified by their deep blue color, accentuated by a bright yellow belly. They are remarkably nearsighted, with eyes of dark green in a shade known to interior decorators as “class envy.”

Were he still with us, our good friend Steve Irwin would tell you that these extraordinary – if incredibly ugly – creatures dwell in darkness, are easily frightened, flee in terror at the first sign of danger, travel in tightly knit flocks that share the same alpha waves and routinely cannibalize any Moonbat that exhibits a behavioral pattern different than that of the flock.

Although they are protected by law, Moonbats are becoming an endangered species because they are not reproducing at a replacement level rate. According to political zoologists who have studied these creatures, Moonbats promote homosexual behavior, routinely avoid producing multiple offspring and actively practice abortion – all of which are believed to factor strongly in the steady decline of their population.

As they may one day become extinct, it is strongly recommended that several of them be captured and bred in captivity in order to further study their unusual and aberrant behavior.

Who can trust a sissy in time of war
What good is a sissy. They won't fight. All they do is yell and scream. Sissies love to protest about everything. The liberal sissies do nothing but complain. They attack President Bush more then they attack what the terrorist do. Look how they express themselves, they'll find every excuse in the book to overlook what the terrorist does and condemn President Bush as the worst terrorist since Adolf Hitler. Even that sissy Murtha called our troops at Gitmo Nazi's. Why is so important for sissies to show that they don't stand side by side with President Bush on the war in Iraq. It's not the patriotic Americans they're trying to impress. It has to be that sissies are so afraid 24/7 that they are willing to jump sides openly in the faces of the American people and front their fears with slogans like Bush lied to us when we voted on the war in Iraq. We were misled, and the best one sissies do best. Call for cutting and running in Iraq. Can you trust a sissy with national security and the lives of the American people. Why would you. The liberal sissies have contributed nothing to this war on terrorism, yet you will hear them shout it out loud and clear, we can do it better, we need a change, and troop redeployment. As if we don't know troop redeployment is the same as cutting and running. Sissy terminologies are used to show the American people their right to protest, yell and scream and show dissent about the war in Iraq is a patriotic thing to do. Bush is the real terrorist. The sissy way is to condemn President Bush as the terrorist and just ignore what the terrorist are doing and maybe they'll go away. If they happen to attack us again, it'll be handle as a police action and not as an act of war like President Bush has conducted because he's a war monger. A liberal sissy will not only turn on you in a conservation about the war in Iraq, but defend the terrorist, defend President Ahmadinejad of Iran who wants to wipe the Israelis off the face of the earth, and then claim President Bush has made a lot of mistakes and we need a change. Where's the patriotism in how a liberal sissy feels and thinks about this country and it's people. You have to really detest this country so much and hold this country responsible for all the wrongs in the world to understand how a liberal sissy thinks. If it means standing up for this country, fighting for this country, taking up arms for this country, standing side by side Americans who loves this country, and supporting this country against any acts of terrorism, then you won't make it as a liberal sissy. Liberal sissies have their requirements also, look what happen to Joe Lieberman

For Kimberly
Five paragraphs and four are meaningless name calling. I would like information on GB's performance in the NG. Did he not attend enough meetings to learn to fly and put many hours in a delta wing jet known as one of the more dangerous and difficult planes to fly? Was his unit called up, but he didn't go? So far as i heard/read all the "proof" of misdeeds was forged. How do you see the facts of his actions?

what libel?
bc,liberal partriot, et al...
What part, specifically, about the docu-drama is libelous? Is it just the Clinton part or is the Bush part libelous as well? Having seen it and dispassionately verified all aspects of it through a rigorous regimen of research, as I'm sure you would for any historical drama, I'm certain that your conclusions are entirely justified. I'm sure you wouldn't take someone else's word for it, would you? Many of us on the right forget that Clinton is infallible, kind of like superman. My guess is that the guys in the field lied about having Bin Laden in their sights. Probably trying to make Clinton look bad. Must've been Republicans. Democrats would never do anything for purely political purposes. Yeah, that 9-11 report, from which the mini-series is based, leaned so far right that it's hard to believe it was written by Democrats and Centrist (leftist) Republicans. I guess Richard Clarke was just too conservative to be a consultant on the project. Maybe they shold've asked Howard Dean. I'm sure he would've been more objective.

Flagwaver,Brian R
and the others of the more conservative bent, it is a joy to lisen to you. I have not posted here but I love to read your posts. It raises my hopes.

Islamic facists
Call it what you will, and Facisiam is not a bad tag for the current crop of religious extreamists, it is time to put an end to their power. Of course not all religious nut-cakes are in the Mid-East by a long shot. We have our own group that are just as misguided and perhaps just as dangerous. I speak of those who would set back education with biblical ferver over the subject of "creationism" or equally dim-witted "Intelligent Design." to be placed on an equal footing with factual science. Those who would cut off all stem cell research in the belief that God has forbidden use of embryos. They can't even read the bible and note that "life begins with the Blood" (note that the embryo does not get blood for some time after creation.)

They would insist, just like their Islamic enemies that all toe the line of their particular form of religios extremism, and wink and nod if an abortion clinic operating under the law of the land is bombed or Doctors or nurses murdered just like in the Mid-East. For me? My feeling is the right to move your fist ends where my nose begins.

Re: BrianR "Jacob you knucklehead..."
Notice how none of your post actually refutes anything I've said, just as nothing in this article refutes factual evidence presented by one side, and is merely name-calling without the facts? Interesting, studying how a liberal argues and how a conservative argues:

Liberal: "According to the intelligence findings there were no..."
Conservative: "SHUT UP MOONBAT YOU HATE AMERICA, WE NEED MORE RELIGION, STOP THE GAYS OR THEY'LL DESTROY US ALL!"

I also love the snide little, Is it any wonder no one pays much attention to idiots like you?". I guess you haven't been paying much attention to the polls lately, eh? You know, like the one put out by Fox News, your favorite little propaganda outlet, which outline Dems leading Reps 48%-32% for the fall. Looks like it's the American people who don't care what idiots like you or the GOP have to say anymore.

Honestly though, it's hard to tell when they did. Was it before you little bloodsuckers stuck a camera in Terri Schiavo's face to exploit her (after the president signed a Texas law allowing euthanasia), was it Libby's indictment ("Perjury is just a technicality!" Rewind. "Burn Clinton, he committed perjury!"), was it the disastrous Katrina-FEMA response, was it after Cunningham, Bob Ney and Tom Delay were all forced down by corruption, was it after people got tired of the "War on Christmas" fraud and polls showed the public didn't believe you?

It's hard to tell. But those polls showing 70% of 18-24 year olds believe in gay marriage, gay adoption, universal healthcare, and liberal ideas. Those make an old liberal hippie like me smile :)

Shhhh, don't tell anyone. Conservatives lost the culture war.

Pseudopatriots
I'm going to make a careful distinction here, because not all conservatives are intellectually stunted, vicious, pathological liars … like Kevin McCollough and the witless right wing fools who applaud him. In the rare instances, when they actually include substantive issues in their posts, they get the facts wrong; but mostly they concentrate on vitriolic name-calling.

McCollough leads the way with a vacuous string of insults devoid of any semblance of objectivity. For example, he neglects to mention that the ABC miniseries has been severely criticized for its factual errors by prominent Republicans, as well as Democrats, including members of the 9-11 Commission, who point out that it contains scenes directly contradicted by the 9-11 Commission Report. Naturally this doesn’t bother right wingers on this website, who will grasp at any claim, no matter how mendacious, that attacks Bill Clinton.

Perhaps its appropriate at this point to discuss the reasons for conservative’s visceral hatred for “Slick Willie”, as they call him. The name itself is a clue. Throughout his presidency, Clinton deftly outsmarted Republicans, while the right’s rabid attempts to defeat him at any cost came repeatedly to naught. They spent more than sixty million dollars in this attempt, which was spearheaded by dishonest Republican judges, but eventually the best they could come up with was a ludicrous and transparently political impeachment based on sex. Not only did this desparate scheme fail, but Clinton’s popularity had grown to more than 70% during the impeachment hearings. What a richly deserved humiliation for the GOP!

Ever since that embarrassment right wing zealots have devoted tremendous amounts of time and energy trying to discredit Clinton in any way they can, a task made especially difficult by the abject and global failure of the current administration. In every aspect but one the country is worse off now than it was at the end of eight years under Clinton. That sole exception: the richest 1-2% of Americans are amassing wealth faster than ever at the expense of the rest of the country. Some achievement! No wonder Republicans are trailing by double digits in most current polls.

Here’s the situation. In November, Republicans are going to be run out office. At a minimum they’ll lose control of the House. With any luck they’ll forfeit control of both houses. Either way Democrats will finally gain subpoena power. They’ll be able to compel witnesses to testify under oath about 9-11, about White House involvement in the Enron schemes, about the administration’s manipulation of intelligence leading up to the invasion of Iraq, about the K-Street project, in short about the whole range of Republican criminality. Best of all, a number of organizations, including the staff of Representative Conyers, have documented multiple instances in which Bush and Cheney have violated their oaths of office, committing impeachable offenses.

So rant on, all you livid right wing pseudo-patriots. Chant your jingoistic slogans, while brave American kids continue to die for Bush’s lies in Iraq. Rejoice at the shredding of our Bill of Rights. Cheer for a Vice President who openly advocates violating the Geneva Conventions. Boast about a jobless economic “recovery” fueled by reckless tax cuts and three trillion dollars in added national debt. You think that true patriotism consists in mindless endorsement of this neo-fascist administration, but you’re wrong. Soon everyone will see just how wrong.

Here’s to January, 2007!

Liberal Patriot: Hello? Is there a brain
What utter nonsense! Face the facts and come to the only conclusion you can. The 9/11 commission members even agree (with two partisan exceptions)that Clinton and his ineffective people made a fool of themselves collectivly and individually. Worse, they missed several opportunities to destroy the still weak AlQueada leaving the door open for the disaster to come.

The saddest part is the focus of the Clintons on eye-wash and spin over substance. None of us who lived through the years of the Clinton presidency could fail to remember this bunch of dissembling fools playing at government. The only worse presidency in moddern times might have been the Carter administration. I am afraid even Liberal Patriots have to call a spade a spade sometimes, even when it hurts. I should note that I am no fan of President Bush's either, but that is a tale for another day!

Let's cut to the chase..
The main reason Bill Clinton doesn't want the Path to 911 aired is that he is deathly afraid Hilary will snatch him baldheaded if it ruins her chances to be President.
Hilary doesn't want the film aired because it really might ruin her chances to be President. Which would be sad because because she has a liberal judge all picked out and ready to declare the Constitution UNconstitutional so she can dispose with all that Bill Of Rights nonsense and appoint herself Czar.
I bet that if her nibs is not granted the opportunity to be the candidate for the Dems in '08, the Ugliest Divorce in History will ensue.

3 remarks
1) To those of you who insist on spelling the name Clinton with a K instead of a C - If you insist on doing so, (and it is of course your right to do so) - Please be careful with the spelling of the REST of the word - if you mistype and hit the G button instead of the T button we could all be in trouble. And they are closer together, so PLEASE be careful.

2) Tonight's show on ABC has a Paul Harveyish quality to it - 'And now you know - The REST of the story.'

3) There was a phrase coined about the Clintons just about the time they left the White House and took along some furniture - a little more than they were entitled to it seems. A bit of a furor erupted if you all recall, and from somewhere came the phrase ' Immune to embarrassment'.

It fit then, it fits now.

MOONBATS
MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBARS MOONBARS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS MOONBATS

I feel like I've wandered into a cloud of flapping, sanguinary pests. My kingdom for a can of RAID!

Stop with the Islam Fascists nonsense
Look up the definition of fascism. Our enemy is religious fundementalism; this time in the garb of Islam and we need to hunt them down and stop them.

Truth
Truth and Clinton in the same sentence? I don't think so.

Sheesh.....
The enemy, believe it or not, is Islam Fascists!!

This insane need, compulsion and time wasting proclivity, on BOTH sides, to place blame, credit and responsibility for what did or didn't happen on 9/11/01 is of no value whatsoever!

How are we to prevent another attack? And what are we to do about Islamic fundamentalists who believe that a living 'infidel' is nothing but a legitimate target?

Or spend your time, energy and intelligence on arguing about what the word "is" is.

Sheesh.....

Brace yourself for some disappointment
,Please, everyone, don't get your expectations up.
Remember one of the things the slavering press most admired about the Clintonistas: their ability to get out front of an issue or fact situation and overhype it, so that when the issue or fact was finally revealed, it didn't seem so bad.

Those who have actually seen this film say that Clinton and Bush II are both knocked in the film. I don't know why the Bushies aren't out screaming for a little "correction of the truth" so that ultimately they don't seem so bad. Maybe because they're not Democrats?

My memory isn't perfect but as I recall, the Democrats were still recounting the Florida chads (for the 1000th time), still searching for SOME KIND of election fraud, on 9/11, still screaming that Bush stole the election and wasn't really the president. If, as the lib apologists claim, Clinton was hampered by the right wing sniffing around his private parts, might Bush have been distracted by the constant bludgeoning by Dems, the NYTimes, the MSM, etc.?

As a side note, could that be one good reason to keep your hands (and/or cigars) off the interns in the Oval Office, just because you MIGHT find that if you're caught, it might just interfere with your carrying on the country's business in a responsible manner?

the BARON
sums it up quite well. Chuck Schumer, who, according the NYS Comptroller, Democrat Alan Hevesi, in his commencement speech last May at Queens Community College,"would love nothing better than to put a bullet between the eyes of President Bush" makes unabashed threats against ABC by attacking it's broadcasting license.
This in nothing new to Schumer. Look at the charade he orchestrated years back when stifling all evidence against Janet Reno's inept handling of the Branch Davidian siege at Waco. Another good example;just before confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Samuel Alito were to begin, Schumer bombastically announced that he was "going to war" to stop his nomination.
Free speech indeed.
As far as Alan Hevesi's remarks,at a college commencement speech it was all of front page news for a day and disappeared just like every other Democratic faux pas. Remember what happened to Trent Lott with his remarks at a private gathering?
Hypocrisy, pure and simple.

Incompetent plain and simple
I love the way right wing apologists like McCullough bait and switch. The facts are that this administration failed to capture or destroy Osama and his organization. You right-wingers have tied our military down in a third world nation not involved in 9/11. The Taliban now controls whole areas of Afghanistan and is resurgent even though Bush promised a rebuilding program outshining the Marshall Plan. As far as who is strongest on national security, thirty-five military veterans are running for national office; 34 are Democrats. Numerous generals refused promotion so that they could speak out against a failed national security policy – normally totally unheard of. And if you want to go into the history of the whole terrorism threat why do you ignore the fact that Reagan was the first to “cut and run” when terrorist blew up the marine barracks in Lebanon? No folks, there is plenty of blame to go around on both sides. Let’s not forget that this administration was in power for six months and downgraded counter terrorism as a priority. In September, Ashcroft was personally supervising the installation of $15,000 drapes to cover the bare breasts of lady justice in the Hall of Justice. The facts are this administration has completely bungled national security as it has so many other issues. If we want a strong defense and real national security, the Democrats are the only show in town.

Clinton played.....
...and 3000+ payed. I can fully understand Clinton's belly aching about ABC's program "The Path to 9/11. Slick Willie has a ego that is bigger than the Presidency he was elected too. On top of that, he wanted everyone to like him and pay homage to him. Thats why he based his decisions and policies on the polls and focus groups. He waited on many occasions to make a decision until the polls, or the media, showed him which way the wind was blowing. He never understood that a President many, many times has too make an unpopular decision because its the right one.
Added to that, he surrounded himself with people of lesser intelligence than him, to always give the impression of him being a genius, you have a decision maker that will always make the wrong decisions. The only positive thing that can be said about this, is that he never had a shortage of underlings willing to fall on the sword for his mistakes.
Clinton's ineptness in dealing with Bin Laden is the stuff how-not-too books are made of. The WTC is attacked---no response. Our embassies in Sudan are attacked---blow up an aspirin factory. The USS Cole is attacked---lob a Tomahawk missle into an empty terrorist attack that ends up sticking out of the south end of a north-bound camel. When the CIA calls and says they can get Bin Laden with your permission, call your intern, have some sex, and then tell them no. When the Sudanese offer to take Bin Laden and hand him over too you, decline their offer, fearing it might make American-Arabs mad and they wont vote Democratic.
It is a shame. Look at the world when Clinton was elected President. He was the first President since FDR not to have to deal with the Cold War and he came to office at a time of great economic growth. He could have been great, but his ego and his desire to be loved by all, left him impotent. To make matters worse, his inability to understand the politics of terror cost 3000+ their lives.

Goshawk: LOL
I folded my tin foil hat all wrong!

Pinned to the Shadow Box!
Mr. McCullough has pinned liberals as if putting them into a shadow box for display on his walls.

The wishy-washy moral relativism that permeates the philosophy is going to relegate liberalism to the ash-heap of history in much the same manner as is happening to the USSR and Communism, as we speak. It can't come too soon to suit me.

jacob, you knucklehead
Your bloviating non-response notwithstanding, you made the typical liberal Lefty mistake of accusing Flagwaver of writing something in his post that in fact wasn't there. Then, instead of standing up like a man and simply admitting your mistake, you go into some long-winded tirade trying to justify yourself.

Is it any wonder no one pays much attention to idiots like you? That may be the kind of thing that's okay on your home base at KOS or MoveOn, but as far as I'm concerned it's intellectual laziness coupled with childish irresponsibility.

Liberal Patriot makes no point,
but only spews opinion. Can you provide specific examples of what is not true in the ABC docudrama?

Also, your comparison between a piece aired on TV and a movie shown in a theater is not apt. Even though the choice to go to the theater and pay to see a movie is a more active choice than whether to hit the channel button on the remote, one still has that choice. Or does it bother you more that, because TV is more accessible, more people will see the ABC piece?

BTW, have you even seen it yet, or are you upset because of things you have heard in the news about it?

I am upset about one thing I heard in the news about it, and that is that Sens. Schumer and Clinton have made barely-veiled threats to ABC about attacking the broadcaster's license. There's free speech for you.

bc Comments
That's wonderful bc you are advocating the one thing I've been trying to shake Americans out of APATHY. "Instead of listening to Rush Limbaugh go read a book." Sure turn Rush off, because you don't want to hear the truth! The Clinton legacy, to hades with the Clinton Legacy, what about the American Legacy?
It just shows clearly that man does not give a dang about the American people and the state of the union, all he's worried about is his own dumb behind! HIS LEGACY! Bull hockey......his legacy, a presidency laced with abuses of power and abuses of the law and complete ingnoring of the constitution by sections of his government.
Yep, a great legacy, just another one that had the terrorists and our other enemies laughing their tails off at the spinless wimp we had as president.
Sure let's go back to being a laughing stock of the world! Why not, that way you can deny anything you want to that you don't like, whether its the truth or not!

Eon
Right on. When 'they' enact a policy and that policy does not work, they pass a law saying that policy has to work. If that does not work, they pass another law saying it is illegal not to obey the first law etc ad infinitum.
They remind me of the fanatics in the Boxer Rebellion. The boxers were told that if they had true faith that bullets could not harm them. They charged the Marines and were mowed down. The survivors returned and asked, "What happened? You said if we had faith, bullets could not harm us." They were asked, "Were you hurt by the bullets?" "No." "Then you had faith. Those who are dead had no faith. You cannot be harmed by the bullets if you have faith. Go. Kill the Marines." So the surviving Boxers again charged the Marine guns and were mowed down. This kept up until somewhere a lightbulb came on and they decided the 'Faith' thing was not working so well after all and they went and killed the Boxer Priests.

Uh...BC
It is not the conservatives that are screaming bloody murder about this movie, it's the Clintonistas. They are the ones trying to pressure ABC into a re-edit or pulling it from the air with threats being made by members of the US Senate. Can you say CENSORSHIP??

As for those that claim that I accused or believe that Clinton had Foster killed, I never said anything like that. While I think very little of Billy Drop-Trou (nod to BrianR), I do not believe that he is a murderer. Now, character assassination...that he is very capable of!

Slick Willie had Vince Foster doing his personal legal work on the governments dime, which is illegal. And there was something in those papers removed from his office that the Clinton's did not want to see the light of day! Now you deal with that!

Re: "Robyn"
"People who work to aid and abet an enemy are traitors and fools."

LoL, I didn't realize we were "aiding" and "abetting" the enemy by laughing at conservatives and calling Bush out for the worthless, incompetent crackpot he is. I guess that makes all of you conservatives traitors for aiding and abetting Milosevic and his genocidal cronies during the Kosovo conflict.

Try sticking to the argument and dropping the "HURR LIBERALS ARE TRAITORS", it makes you sound like a bit of a moron, that's why most Republican politicians don't have the balls to do it, because they would get laughed out of the public arena.

Robyn
You are right. Several of these posts only take up my time scrolling past. I am not sure why anyone takes the time and effort to try to create a dialogue with any of them. People who work to aid and abet an enemy are traitors and fools. And it is absolutely senseless to try to convince a fool he is wrong. Fools never change. They just remain fools. Ignore them. They probably won't go away but it will irritate the chidt out of them not to get any bites on their b/s posts.

Truth Will Out
I think the producers of the movie knew they were going to get slammed by the left for this movie. That is why they put out copies of it before the whining and complaining began. Within hours, the bloggers will have dissected the thing line by line, and we will know exactly what was changed if anything, and we will will know that the changes were done at the behest of the Clinton people and other lefties. The discussion will then focus on why they wanted the changes they wanted. I believe that will be more damning than if they had just left it alone. I'm going to watch the movie.

bc stands for
bullshi'it Clinton?

Goblue... how about this year's hurrican season, eh? Last year at this time, 14 storms, 5 of them hurricanes.

This year, One (Atlantic) hurricane in 6 storms, and most of those storms missed us. Pacific is even better. The oceans have _cooled_. Every 'global warming' weather forecast they've made up here in Ontario was a BUST.

global warming... wow.

The poor liberals . . .
like bc (afraid to use his real name). He supports propaganda that Michael Moore portrayed as "truth", then chastises conservatives about a fictional mini-series. All because it doesn't deify Bill Clinton.

That's really the problem. Their deity, Slick Willie, is shown with feet of clay.

Mcullough's article
Any time free speech is used to discuss or make a case for free speech is a good time. It's not drivel, as LibPat would like us to believe.

A little more free speech and sunshine on the topic, and we might have stopped McCain with his halt of free speech 90 days before an election. He has ridden along on his prisoner of war strengths long enough. It doesn't make him an all-time angel.

Moore vs ABC
To compare these because for one you buy a ticket, and for the other you (pay Cable, the utilities, etc.) just sit and view at home is pretty, pretty pathetic.

To continue to support ANY Clinton or Clintonista is pathetic.

To continue to read only the NYT for solid information is pathetic.

Some of these people will reach for anything.

Pure Drivel
This is what conservatives are now jumping on.. a 9/11 TV show! The last gasp, I see.

It's clear they have nothing left to argue with.

Pathetic, indeed.

Oh, the censorship is real- when the White House commands its lapdog corp. news media. not to show dead American soldiers coming home in coffins.

Imagine NOT being outaged at that fact (for starters), but instead harping on suggestions to correct a TV show that tried to air damaging, libelous, factual errors.

Oh, the twisted mind of the conservative: shoot the messenger (like Michael Moore or Richard Clark) when the facts conflct with their still-naive view that "we are always the good guys".

But when the facts need to be corrected, scream "censorship". It's not censorship when you are trying to correct clear mistakes.

Instead of listening to Rush Limbugh, try reading a book.

Read about your Republican President, Dwight Eisenhower- who warned us all this was going to happen. You'd have thought that war criminals/profiteers Cheney, Rumsfeld and Perle would have gotten the message from a WWII war hero.

If you think we're in Iraq to "fight for freedom", think again.

Shame on all of you.

Innocent Iraqis (if you can grasp that notion- or has the corp. media brainwashing done its job?) are dying by our hands.

An Inconvenient Truth
After I posted below I had another thought of a movie that would best represent the Clinton/Gore administration and a fittng title. The movie would outline all the environmental improvements that Al Gore accomplished during his 8 years as VP. After all nobody was buying gas guzzling SUVs, trucks and mini vans during the 90's. And you couldn't turn on your TV without hearing him preach. He wasn't afraid of the political consequences. It was like the anti tobacco speech he gave in the 80's about his sister's death. Everyone knows that tobacco is evil and he wouldn't continue to take tobacco money for years after her death. Being anti tobacco would not have hurt him running for office in Tennessee. He was speaking truth to power man. It's an--"Inconvenient Truth".

================================================


goblue writes: Sunday, September, 10, 2006 7:30 AM

How could anyone blame Bill Clinton
for things that happened while he was President? How is that gonna make his legacy look? What we really need is amovie that shows how his relationship with Yasser Arafat saved so many innocent Palestinian and Israeli lives and turned Yasser into a loving benevolent leader who got the Nobel Peace Prize. Or how about a movie that shows how his Agreed Framework kept North Korea from becoming a nuclear power? Or a movie that shows how good the economy was and how much Global Crossing and Enron and Adelphia and Worldcom and Tyco thought of him. And how that mean old George Bush ruined everything by prosecuting them. Or a movie about how he modernized fund raising through foreign sources since "There was no controlling legal authority."But a movie that tells about the attacks on America from 1992-2001 and the Clinton response. Well, what did he have to do with that?

Presidents
BTW, I decided GW is my all time favorite President when the MSM showed that clip of him walking down the hall, and over his shoulder he flipped the bird to annoying news people. I was watching the news conference. I know the same question was asked over and over, and answered over and over. I was angry at them also. I laughed out loud.

Sunshine . . .
is the best disinfectant.

The Clintonistas and their liberal minions can't stand the truth.

Their google bombs and political shrapnel may have some effect, but it won't stop the truth. Eventually, history books will show that Clinton, Begala, Reno, Hillary, etc. were the bad guys.

The Clintonistas want to Reuterize "The Path to 911", but like the faux photos, it isn't going to happen.

9-11 movie
I was listening to Michael Savage on talk radio and was surprised by a guest he had on the phone. Col. Buzz Patterson was in DC to attend some function and took time out to call the show. He said that the Clinton administration was so casual about the threat of OBL, that they missed no less than 8 opportunities to capture or kill him before 9-11 that he, personally, knew about. He had seen the film. He said it didn't go nearly far enough. He was there. He said that Clinton skipped one such opportunity (right in the middle of the Monica fiasco) because he didn't want to be accused of wagging the dog. And so, his well being is so much more important then the well being of our country.

Clueless Tannabear
Tannabear, I wasn't even going to waste my time but your posting was just too much. Were you in the NMCC or the pentagon on 9/11? No, didn't think so. I was and know those individuals you mentinoned and what really happened and it's obvious your clueless rantings bear no resemblence to reality. I was also there when the USS Cole was bombed and don't remember the former administration doing a dxxn thing about it either. Where's your argument for responsibility there or for every other attack on our country in the eight years prior to 9/11? Obviously I could go on and on but then again, maybe I should remember the old adage about arguing with a fool!

Jacob and 'libera' 'Patriot'
Stop Projecting.

Berger et al.
The judge who sentenced Sandy Berger made a mistake by accepting a slap-on-the-wrist deal. He should have spent time in jail, and he certainly should have as a condition of his sentence that he not object to characterizations of decisions made about mass murderers. We don't know what the handwritten notes said that he destroyed; you can safely bet the farm they were not flattering..... We are entitled to any belief we want since he went WAY out of his way to destroy the evidence.

Bill Clinton is all about his urges. The Democratic party is all about power. They voice lofty principles, but only for mass consumption. In truth, censorship, bigotry, intolerance, and religion, are things they only dislike when their opponents engage in them. For themselves, all these things are good.

Bill and Chuck et al. are really sweet to try to help their democratic colleagues by chilling the First Amendment they so pretend to love since this movie, just two months before the elections, cannot do the democrats one whit of good, and could inadvertently do them a mountain of harm. Yes, it's nice to see the children playing so nice together.....

JUST ANOTHER REASON
Why another Clinton in the White House would be doomsday for this country. There's no doubt that Bush and company have made a ton of mistakes both prior to invading Iraq and post invasion. But credit has to be given where credit is due, and that credit is the Presidents ability to absorb all the heat that this war has generated from within his own party, the dumbocrats and the public. Now we have Clinton and his party crying like a bunch of babies baby simply because the truth is about to be exposed that reveals all the failures of the Clinton Presidency and the ineptness of the Democratic party in general. Usually the only people who are afraid of the truth are those who have something to hide... What's the problem Slick Willy do you have some skeletons hiding in your closet that are about to jump out? Visit http://www.headsneedtoroll.org and post your views and opinions.

Censorship is a Socialist/Communist ploy
This is typical of the Bill/Hillary code of politics. Baffle them with BS, feed them lies and censor everything to make them look like the hero.
If we allow this to be taken off the air or censored in any way, what will we allow next? History is going to be rewritten by the Clinton goons...free speech will be a thing of the past and book burning will be common place. ABC has a responsibility here...lets hope they do not cave to these criminal thugs. There is more here than meet the eye....I believe this is the beginning of the Hillary run for office and Bills first swipe at becoming Secetary General of the UN...think is will not happen?....I believe it is alrealy in place...we are doomed if theses things take place...

Just one more example
I have found that the one infalliable test for whether or not you are dealing with a liberal/"progressive" is as follows;

1. Let them enact a policy based on their theories/agendas/philosophies;

2. When it fails (as it does roughly 97% of the time), watch the reaction.

When a moderate or conservative's policy fails a real-world test, their usual response is to say, "OK, it wasn't that great an idea to begin with. Let's try something else." And they continue trying other things until something actually works. This is in fact the "scientific method" in action, i.e. empiricism.
By comparison, when a liberal or progressive's plans fail to bear fruit, they immediately begin trying to assign blame- to someone other than themselves. "It's not our fault!" they cry. "We were sabotaged!" In their reality, their plans fail because;

A. They were underfunded;

B. People didn't cooperate;

C. If they did cooperate, they didn't try hard enough;

D. If they were trying, they didn't BELIEVE hard enough (as per the "faith can move mountain" hypothesis); or

E. If (A through D) cannot be held responsible, then they were sabotaged by those never-to-be-sufficiently- D***ED non-liberals. Not just conservatives, but anyone else who isn't a "true believer". All of whom, of course, are always spending all their time conspiring against the liberals. (Even if the people in question don't get along with each other.)

At no point will you ever hear a genuine, dyed-in-the-wool liberal admit, "OK, it was a dumb idea to begin with." Or ask anyone else, "Do you have an idea that might work better?" Because you see, they are the only ones smart enough, or good enough, to have ideas. And because they are so good and wonderful, and just generally better than everyone else, even when they're wrong, they should be treated as though they are right. Because they deserve it.
The liberal response to a TV docudrama that no one has even seen yet is yet another proof of their intellectual and moral bankruptcy. Whatever good liberalism may have done in this country (and it did some) was a generation or more ago. What's left now are a group of petulant children with a drug-induced pipe-dream of being gods. No wonder they act so much like those described in Greek and Roman mythology, who tended to smite anyone who didn't obey their arbitrary edicts, no matter how irrational. Or else just didn't genuflect fast enough.

Dang, i mean patriot. And after all the
care i took with my prepositions.

for liberal patriot
Just what is your definition of patriotism. To me, a patriotit is a person who evaluates some country and decides that, overall and warts and all, it is worth defending. During the 30's, most American communists were patriotic defenders of the USSR. By no means could they be considered patriotic Americans. Patriots consider dissent carefully to be certain they are not doing more harm than good. Patriots vote against a politician with whom they disagree, they do not make accusations which serve avowed enemies of their chosen state. Of which country do you consider yourself a patriot?

Censor this
When powerful people try to censor what we hear and see it’s usually because they are afraid their power will be eroded.
The ABC 9/11 special is a take on the events leading up to the events of that day. Of course there are some errors but it is the best accounting to date. Like the Michael More prefabrications we all have the choice to turn it off. There will be tons of other things you can do if you want.
The so called Liberal Patriot is a perfect case of left wing whining. While others will watch and judge he has judged beforehand. The press, right and left have had a chance to preview this production not just conservative talk show host, and what other kind of political talk show host are there?
My heart goes out to the pathetic Clintons and others who will be exposed for what they are. There is plenty of blame to go around but they refuse to take any of it. Like children they point and say it was them not me

Re-writing history is what the left does
It is a historical fact that the leftists in the world have always wanted to re-write history, and this ABC docudrama is getting in the way.

The Clintonistas want only THEIR version of the Clinton years to get out -- notice their books "My Life" and "A Living History" -- THESE are the only books we're supposed to read -- only favorable accounts of their political lives.

ANYTHING ELSE MUST BE CENSORED!!! JUST LIKE STALIN IN THE USSR! THEY EVEN GET SENATORS AND CONGRESSMEN TO WRITE A LETTER TO ABC, THREATENING ABC's LICENSE!

Will this film be "neutered"?
Or, has it already been? That is the question. If a few passages are "edited" so as not to portray Clinton administration officials making comments they in fact did not make, that is one thing, and I have no problem with it. If, however, the "editing" consists of a whitewash wherein the Clinton administration is largely absolved of any responsibility during the 1990s for events leading up to 9/11 , then that would be a national disgrace. And rank politicians making veiled threats to a network over its affiliate broadcast licenses is a new "low"...truly disgusting and revolting. Let the chips fall where they may. Frankly, neither Clinton nor Bush administration gave sufficient attention to the rising specter of Islamic radicalism.
I intend to watch it, and only hope it has not been neutered. If it has, it will only increase my already considerable cynicism.

They are not "liberals"
I love this guy's articles and this one is especially on target, but I wish everyone would stop calling these drecks what they are NOT. They are LEFTISTS and there is nothing further from "liberal" than that.

These LEFTISTS want nothing less than to continue to chip away at the Constitution- speech is only "free" when it comes from someone on the left, property rights are only for those who give the most money to the DNC and left wing groups, "life" is only what the left SAYS it is, religion is offensive and needs to be stamped out, you have NO right to defend yourself- criminals are just "victims", gays deserve special rights and illegals your hard earned money, assembly only at a Cindy Sheehan demonstration, and your right to know history only as re-written by the left.

I hate to clue in the clueless lefties in here, but we already KNEW Clinton's lack of engagement against America's enemies long before the 9/11 movie was made. We knew a bunch of OTHER stuff about him too- none of it approved of by the left.

It's the leadership on the left that concerns me- I believe they know exactly what they are doing. Remember- communism and fascism only failed elsewhere because THEY weren't running it. They absolutely think THEY are better people and can do it right. The useful idiots in HERE will never realize that THEY are included in the number that the left will oppress.

And, BTW, just as a heads-up...I believe I know what some of these- "tanabear", "jacob"- ARE. Left wing orgs and off-campus groups recruit students and little housewifey-work-at-home types to go onto conservative sites and political chat rooms to post leftist claptrap and attempt to undermine discussions. I have met a few of these and they ARE as stupid as you imagine. Most could care less and follow a script. If the money stops, so will their posting. Perhaps others have noted the curious lack of passion and faithful adherence to the talking points?

Lets wait and see what they say
This reminds me of the howling and yowling that happened before The Passion of the Christ was seen by anybody except a picked group of H&Yers. We were told that it was absolutely anti-semitic and evil and that it would cause a second Holocaust when it came out.

Instead it made a tidy fortune, although not for Hollywood, and is still being seen by millions of Christians and Jews around the world, and has made people think about things they might not have noticed except for the Howling and Yowling.

Perhaps this noise and racket will cause some people to watch and think about what they see (assuming it hasn't been censored out) or what they should have seen and didn't, if it has been, and will have the reverse effect on the whole thing from what the Clintons expected.

Lets wait and see.

How could anyone blame Bill Clinton
for things that happened while he was President? How is that gonna make his legacy look? What we really need is amovie that shows how his relationship with Yasser Arafat saved so many innocent Palestinian and Israeli lives and turned Yasser into a loving benevolent leader who got the Nobel Peace Prize. Or how about a movie that shows how his Agreed Framework kept North Korea from becoming a nuclear power? Or a movie that shows how good the economy was and how much Global Crossing and Enron and Adelphia and Worldcom and Tyco thought of him. And how that mean old George Bush ruined everything by prosecuting them. Or a movie about how he modernized fund raising through foreign sources since "There was no controlling legal authority."But a movie that tells about the attacks on America from 1992-2001 and the Clinton response. Well, what did he have to do with that?

To Jacob
Tsk, Tsk, You're comments are yours ,of course, but PLEASE why do you try to defend Bill Clinton?. I must agree with Brian R. ......We need our "Moon-bat kaleidoscope decrypton glasses" to understand that rant.

Flagwaver
Chutzpah is right! The Klinton's and their Demo comrades have built their entire careers on lies and corruption. And when truth begins to break through their facade, they send out their Liberal uni-bot Gestapo to seal the break by forced censorship.

As you can see now on this forum the Liberal Gestapo are already out in force as they try and convince posters how wrong they are about their hero and God, comrade Klinton and company.

BrianR
Bet I know why you were having trouble reading Jacobs post. You need to put on your Moon-bat kaleidoscope decryption glasses to unscramble their fractured thought pattern.

Jimmy Carter
Has it ever happened that you shine the light on the roaches, and they form an army, climb up your leg and arm and hand, and turn it off, before returning to their foul business?

Jacob - funny I used to think my name an honorable one, but I guess it does mean "deceiver" and "heal-grabber".

A Question ...
For Liberal Patriot:

You have made some very strong comments, expressing very strong opinions about the ABC "fakeumentary," as you described it.
My question is this - several questions, actually:

1. Have you seen the program?
2. If you have not, what, exactly, qualifies you to comment on its content?
3. If you have, why have you not responded to specific claims of points made in the program? Why have you resorted only to ad hominem argument against those whose views differ from your own? Can you see how this could smack of refusal to engage in honest intellectual debate - which, I believe, is exactly the point Mr. McCullough's article is making?

Looking forward to reading your comments ...

catattack
While the Republicans were sniffing around Clinton's private parts
The terrorists were given a running start.

a new mantra
While Clinton was screwing, the terrorists were brewing.

"Jacob: Typical lib BS"
Nice shell game Jacob, but no dice.

the poster in question was NOT suggesting that Clinton removed the papers because they would have revealed his alleged involvement in Foster's "murder."

The Clintons removed evidence that implicated them in some other shenanigans, evidence of which was in Foster's possession.

Most of us neocons have always believed Foster really did commit suicide. He did so because he was a weak person who was under tremendous pressure. This pressure was due to the fact that he had knowledge of Clinton crimes that sooner or later (probably sooner) would have come to light. He just couldn't take the heat.

His suicide was convienient for the Clintons, and allowed them to make the mess go away, but probably not premeditated by them.


Jacob
I don't believe any of the items in your post. But I do believe that Bill Clinton was a man without integrity, without moral purpose beyond himself, and was a true scoundrel.

He was impeached for lying under oath.
He was disbarred for purjuring himself.
He was prepared to feed his little intern into the media shredder until the blue dress with his DNA on it showed up.

Basically I don't believe a word out of Slick Willie's mouth. What I do believe is you have an impossible task ahead of you if you choose to defend this unworthy rogue.

Jacob: Typical lib BS
You wrote, regarding Flagfwaver's post: "It's also nice to see that the crackpot conspiracy theorists above (Flagwaver) think Bill Clinton had Vince Foster killed."

You know, no matter how many times I re-read Flag's post, I don't see that in it anywhere.

Let me try again; maybe it will magically appear.

Nope. Didn't happen.

Is being fact-challenged a requirement to thinking like a Lefty, or is that just a natural state of affairs for you?

Flagwaver: You misstated
Clinton's position. You wrote that he and his gang are "demanding the truth". Far from it; they're demanding, as usual, that the truth be hidden.

Nothing of value here, just rehashing
It amazes me that McCullough even bothered writing the column. Nothing really distinguishes it from the other dozen "WAH WAH WAH LIBERALS ARE MEAN TO ABC" columns at townhall and elsewhere that have been running in the last couple of days. He didn't really add anything of substance to the debate, actually. Jed Babbin might be an obnoxious, arrogant and condescending little weasel, but at least he at least tries to present some facts. McCullough's column was just one long juvenile rant full of "HURR LIBERALS ARE SISSIES/COWARDS".

Here's an idea: grow up, then come back and write a real argument. It's hard to distinguish this latest article from a rant on a 15 year old white suburban Republican's high school webblog.

It's also nice to see that the crackpot conspiracy theorists above (Flagwaver) think Bill Clinton had Vince Foster killed.

Honestly, that's priceless. I suppose 9/11 was the gays' fault too, right?

I gave up long ago
on the idea that Bill Clinton has any shame, or knowledge of guilt. He had eight years..YEARS!!...to deal with Al Quaida. His excuses and denials are obscene.

This Sissy Says "No"
The ABC fakeumentary was a craven attempt to pander to the conceits of people like McCullough. Unlike Michael Moore's film, it is foisted on the public airwaves. At least with Moore, people had to go to the theatre and buy a ticket. Free speech is great, but ABC has made the decision of moving into the same moral territory as Pravda or Foxnews. They are not a creditworthy organization. I'll give you that it is terrible form for Democrats to threaten ABC, although as usual, right-wingers are blowing it up into something larger than it was. When it comes to threats and intimidation, no one surpasses the right in this country. And Hugh was utterly disingenious to act as though distributing advanced copies to right-wing talk show hosts, but not to Democrats, is on the up-and-up. That in itself shows that ABC is trying to capitalize on the kook niche in American politics. Look, guys, I know ABC's disreputable program nicely fits your conceited narrative about how we got caught with our pants down on 9/11. But I'm concerned your "moral absolutes" have led you to the view that the facts are relative. You look at life through the filter of your opinions of what is good and what is evil, and when something comes through that does not fit, rather than re-examining your moral viewpoint, you fight like a cornered animal. That is pathetic--not taking a stand against a cartoonish moral narrative passing itself off as "history." As for being "sissies," manhood is like virtue and patriotism--it is its own reason, and we don't need to waste our breath defending it..

Right on!
But I don't find it ironic...shine the Light of Truth and watch the roaches go scurrying.

Right on!
Does it strike anyone else out there that it is richly ironic that the Clinton administration is suddenly demanding the truth? This form the gang that gave us these gems:

The posession of FBI raw files on political enemies by one Craig Livingston.

Whitewater.

Travelgate and the IRS investigation of Billy Dale.

The removal of materials from the office of Vince Foster before the FBI or Park Police could search the office.

The Marc Rich pardon.

"I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky!"

Indictment of Webb Hubbell.

Impeachment by the House.

The list is nearly endless. And now they appeal to honesty? Well...no one ever said that they lacked chutzpah!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.