Say Anything Blog

Ollie huh?

Well that should just about seal the deal.

“My heart and my best intentions still tell me that’s true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not.”

That Fawn Hall was a looker, huh?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

The endorsement of a gun-running serial liar?! I’m sure the McCain people are happy as a pig in shit!

Jack:

gun-running serial liar

And this astute comment came from where? Your personal copy of the Code Pink Manual? The Cindy Sheehan Memoires?

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

And this astute comment came from where?

Here.

I’m sure the McCain people are happy as a pig in shit!

Jack is a lib.  It’s the closest thing to happiness he could think of.

Poor liberals.

Given a choice, I believe most thinking individuals would choose Oliver North over a Democrat “military expert” like Jack Murtha who doesn’t know one side of the globe from the other, or John Kerry, whose brief exposure to military conflict lives on and on in the annals of his own, all too vivid imagination.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Wow, bat---is there a single rightwing lie you haven’t swallowed hook line and sinker?

BTW---why are so many conservatives criminals?

BTW---why are so many conservatives criminals?

I wonder how Jack would define criminal?  Would driving one’s girlfriend off a bridge in a drunken state then leaving her till the next day qualify one as a criminal in Jack’s liberal mind? 

Please elaborate.

Jack:

Here

Geez, Jack, somehow you overlooked:

United States Court of Appeals set aside North’s conviction

and this one: 

On May 28, 1991, the Supreme Court denied Independent Counsel’s petiton for certiorari

So, Col. North was found not guilty.  Oh well, back to your Pink Code manual.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

BTW---why are so many conservatives criminals?

Because they believe the ends justify the means.  They are willing to do anything to get the outcome they desire, including breaking the law. 

You should read the order overturning his conviction.

Because they believe the ends justify the means.

You mean like lying about our troops in Iraq in order to end a war?  You mean like stuffing top secret documnets down your pants to cover up a President’s pathetic record on terrorism?  You mean leaking Plame’s name to the press and sitting idly by why another innocent individual takes the wrap in an effort to discredit the Bush administration?

So, Col. North was found not guilty.

No he wasn’t.  His conviction was overturned because the court found that the prosecution used parts of his congressional testimony for which he had been granted limited immunity.  If you read the order, the panel makes it very clear that they did not decide his case on the merits.  All he had was a get out of jail free card.

You know it’s a shame that so many liberals just fell off the turnip truck! Otherwise, they might remember the Boland Amendment, which was the House of Representative’s Pelosi-like attempt to (unconstitutionally) hijack foreign policy by holding federal appropriation bills hostage to their support of Communist dictators.

(I suppose they all flunked eighth grade US civics!)

Before you condemn Col. North for carrying out the American foreign policy that was set by the President, and helping to free the people of Nicaragua, you might want to educate yourself beyond what you learn from The Puffington Host and the Daily Kos!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

They are willing to do anything to get the outcome they desire, including breaking the law.

Does your theory of civil disobedience include anything about the breaking of unjust laws? Just wondering…

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

why are so many conservatives criminals?

For the same reason so many liberals are. Duh!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

BTW---why are so many conservatives criminals?

Republican “Paragons of Virtue”

Republican sex offenders

Republican Corruption

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

You know it’s a shame that so many liberals just fell off the turnip truck! Otherwise, they might remember the Boland Amendment, which was the House of Representative’s Pelosi-like attempt to (unconstitutionally) hijack foreign policy by holding federal appropriation bills hostage to their support of Communist dictators.

Do you really not understand the “power of the purse”?  The House can certainly limit how funds can be spent.  They don’t have to write blank checks.  It was signed into law and as somebody pointed out earlier, the Supreme Court denied cert in the only case that could of challenged it.  Therefore, it was the law.

Hawk:

No, he wasn’t

well, actually he was!

QUESTION? What does “Set Aside” mean?

Sec 2.(1) The applicant, for purpose of law, shall be considered not to have been convicted.

http://courts.com.calhoun.mi.us/quest449.html

Dang, Hawk, back to that little Code Pink manual of yours.  But, nice ry!

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

Therefore, it was the law

So was Dred Scott. Tell me how you would have prosecuted all those “Underground Railroad” folks?

Do you really not understand the “power of the purse”

Do you really not know how to make an argument without sounding like a condescending snot nose? Just wondering…

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Hawk:
No, he wasn’t
well, actually he was!
QUESTION? What does “Set Aside” mean?

Sec 2.(1) The applicant, for purpose of law, shall be considered not to have been convicted.
In other words, not guilty.
http://courts.com.calhoun.mi.us/quest449.html
Dang, Hawk, back to that little Code Pink manual of yours.  But, nice ry!

Not Guilty is a verdict.  In this case, no decision could be reached on the merits. 

But a jury of his peers still stood up after reviewing all the evidence and said “Guilty”. 

He got off on a procedural issue, it had nothing to do with the merits of the case.

McCain/Feingold is law too. Is that Constitutional in your opinion?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

So he was found guilty and let off on a technicality…

No matter what, we all know OJ did it. We all know Ollie and ALL of his buddies are traitors.

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

McCain/Feingold is law too. Is that Constitutional in your opinion?

I think it is, but I don’t consider money to be speech.

Hawk! Before we get too far off the topic, what exactly is your problem with John McCain?  That he won’t invite Code Pink to the White House for tea?  That he won’t name Cindy Sheehan to the Supreme Court?  That he’ll be a big mean conservative?

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

what exactly is your problem with John McCain?

Actually I think he is the best of all the Republicans, but I wouldn’t vote for any of them.  I have a much bigger problem with Oliver North, who I think knowingly broke the law and was let off because Congress was trying to fry bigger fish.

Wow, bat---is there a single rightwing lie you haven’t swallowed hook line and sinker?

Jack,

Okay, kid, I’ll bite.  To which “rightwing lie” are you referring?

Here’s a hint:  You do NOT want to try and take me on over John Kerry’s lies.  Better folks than you have tried.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

So was Dred Scott. Tell me how you would have prosecuted all those “Underground Railroad” folks?

I wouldn’t have.  I was a defense attorney.  However, to compare slavery with Congress setting limits on how funds can be used is asinine and makes you sound foolish.

However, to compare slavery with Congress setting limits on how funds can be used is asinine and makes you sound foolish.

Therefore, it was the law

Said Moses Hawk, not sounding at all asinine or foolish! At least not as asinine or foolish as his objection to my comparing one law to another.

You ignored my reference to civil disobedience where many good men (even liberals!) ignore laws they believe are unjust.
Is it asinine to note that not all laws are good or created equal? So why is it asinine for me to compare one bad law with another?
Or are you saying that it is foolish for me to try to get you to think for yourself? The jury is still out on that!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

I wonder how Jack would define criminal?

Someone who was tried and convicted.

Would driving one’s girlfriend off a bridge in a drunken state then leaving her till the next day qualify one as a criminal in Jack’s liberal mind?

Yes...but what does that have to do with anything?

Yes...but what does that have to do with anything?

Nothing if you think such behavior doesn’t make Kennedy a criminal simply because he got away with it. 

Is OJ a criminal?

There are criminals on both sides of the political isle.  “With a few more billion in social programs, we could have saved them” right? 

No matter the personal failures of liberals or republicans, liberalism (ie, socialism) is and always will be a gross injustice on any society inflicted by it.

So you’re saying that since Kennedy got away with it, it’s OK for anyone else to do so.

Wow...that’s one hell of a moral compass you got there.

Jack,

What are you smokin”? 

The point is the best you liberals can hope for is to discredit the other side by highlighting the personal failures of a few even though your own liberal side boasts as many if not more personal failures among its followers. 

Liberalism cannot stand to be seen in light of individual liberty for the utter failure that it is.  Kind of ironic isn’t it.  You think that personal failures of conservatives make liberalism viable.  Liberalism is and alway will be a utter failure.

Said Moses Hawk, not sounding at all asinine or foolish! At least not as asinine or foolish as his objection to my comparing one law to another.
You ignored my reference to civil disobedience where many good men (even liberals!) ignore laws they believe are unjust.
Is it asinine to note that not all laws are good or created equal? So why is it asinine for me to compare one bad law with another?
Or are you saying that it is foolish for me to try to get you to think for yourself? The jury is still out on that!

You are comparing Slavery with Campaign Finance. 

It is foolish and you are a fool. 

Your ridiculous argument should be a corollary to Godwin’s Law.

Your ridiculous argument should be a corollary to Godwin’s Law.

I would like to officially invoke Godwin’s Law in the hopes of moving on to a discussion of merit . . . or a discussion done in a way that has merit. 

http://www.thenoseonyourface.com/2008/02/02/tnoyf-trademarks-mchitler/

You are comparing Slavery with Campaign Finance. 

It is foolish and you are a fool.

Lestat: Learn to read.
A) It wasn’t “Campaign Finance”. It didn’t have anything to do with a “campaign” at all! It had to do with the federal budget spending.

B) Hawk had said:

It was signed into law and as somebody pointed out earlier, the Supreme Court denied cert in the only case that could of challenged it.

If you are too big a fool to read and comprehend English, perhaps you should not insert yourself into serious discussions with adults.

I will let the good readers of SA and anyone with more intelligence than a gnat (that excludes you, Lestat!) decide who is the bigger fool here.

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Le Twit: That you are boorish enough not to offer an apology for your ignorant and unfounded rant doesn’t surprise me. My question to you is: Is there anything that embarrasses the Modern Liberal? Or is there an infinite number of times you can be wrong and not learn from your mistakes?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan