 |
||||
|
|
 |
|
||
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
||
Bill Clinton - Destroyer of families
Bill Clinton destroyed families every
time he deployed troops. It was very hard on families.
-- Tony Snow, never one to exaggerate, today's third hour
Tony, I have some questions:
1. Were those people drafted? Or did they volunteer, for the
benefits, I mean?
What happened to personal responsibility?
Is Clinton's primary objective to prevent
those men and women from serving?
Why have a military if temporarily leave
will destroy his family ?
2. Since Clinton never sent a man into battle who didn't come
home,
do you think he destroyed more or fewer families
than Saint Reagan?
(Hint: Saint Reagan lost
220 Marines in Lebanon in one day, Tony.
That's a LOT of destroyed families
in the real sense,
not destroyed as in "Daddy's
not here for Christmas."
3. Since Clinton never sent a man into battle who didn't come
home,
do you think he destroyed more or fewer families
than Smirk's Daddy?
(Hint: Over 100 dead just from
Desert Storm.)
4. And if the subject is "destroyed families," should we talk
about the 10,000
veterans from Desert Storm afflicted with
Gulf War Syndrome?
Those veteran' s offspring with birth defects,
do you think that is more
devastating to military families than Daddy
missing Christmas?
5. Vietnam destroyed 55,000 families, and you bastards never miss
a chance
to ridicule Clinton for trying to stop that
war when he was in college.
To this day, you guys love Vietnam, as long
as YOU didn't have to go.
By the way, Tony:
I haven't heard what YOU did in the war.
If you're going to criticize the best Commander-in-Chief
we've ever had,
shouldn't we be made aware of your heroic wartime
exploits?
I've said this many times - if David Hackworth or even Ollie
North (R-Traitor) want to
criticize Commander-in-Chief Clinton it's OK with me. When you've
been under fire,
I think you have the right to criticize the military or the
president all you want.
6. Just curious, Tony, is it OK with you that Smirk is a wartime deserter?
So, just to review, Saint Reagan's personal bungling in 1983 got
220 Marines killed.
And Smirk's Daddy's personal bungling in 1990 put 550,000 Americans
in the desert
because the idiot sent Iraq a Telex saying "We won't interfere
in your military matters."
...but you say Clinton "destroyed families?"
Tony, you're a ditto-monkey and a whore.
From: RWIREMAN@peoplepc.com
Subject: Dennis Miller
BC:
Dennis Miller is the same as all whores in todays
world.
Believe me, anyone will sell out to the repubs
if the money's right.
Look at Horowitz and all the other baby boomers
that got their rocks off on free sex
and drugs in the 60's, that are now right wingers
cause that's where the money is.
Dennis must please his Nazi buddy Al Michaels,
or he might loose his job.
Michaels is to the right of Rush and the horse
fucker, Paul Harvey.
It's enough to make a person want to give up.
Is there anyone out there who is not a whore
or a potential whore?
I think if JC came back today he would whore
for the repukicans.
Richard---Frankfort, Ky
Richard, good point.
The reason I'm angry with Miller is that he's already rich and
famous.
Miller's family and future were quiet secure - then he turns
into a fascist pig.
And lets not forget what a cowardly bastard he's become.
He won't call the Democrats names when a Democrat is on his show.
Koresh, that's sad to see...
I just wanted you to see what America looks like at night,
before Smirk's friends in BIG OIL turn the damn lights
out.
From: (please don't use my name if you use this. This isn't America, anymore)
Subject: Dennis Miller
Dear Bartcop,
Love your site, hate Denny boy. Close your
eyes and listen.
He's channeling Sammy Davis. I always thought
he was an arrogant, giggling
piece of crap and it's no mystery why he's come
out of the whore closet.
He does football for ABC, for God's sake.
Old Denny isn't fit to lick Chris Rock's urinal
and never was.
Hell, he isn't fit to lick yours either.
Damn, a compliment.
I can't agree, but thanks.
Sen. Kerry (the good one) Vows To Filibuster Arctic Drilling
Whore City - Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts threatened to block
any legislative plan from Smirk
for opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil drilling,
saying such activity in the pristine
wilderness was wrongheaded.
"Most senators agree that drilling in A.N.W.R. is not just environmentally
unsound, it gives false hopes
to citizens suffering energy problems today," said Mr. Kerry, a Democrat.
"We need to make it clear to Smirk that this approach to energy policy
is unacceptable, and that is why I will,
if necessary, filibuster any attempt to open A.N.W.R. to this kind
of exploitation," he said.
Mr. Kerry called President Bush's effort to link Alaskan oil exploration
to the California mess
"muddled at best and cynical at worst."
Tons more mail and Toons
A Public Service Announcement by bartcop.com
THE "ANNA KOURNIKOVA"
VIRUS tempts potential victims
by posing as a picture of Kournikova, an Internet heartthrob.
It arrives with the Subject line: "Here you
have, ;o)".
The message body reads "Hi: Check this!"
Iit arrives with an attachment named "AnnaKournikova.jpg.vbs."
However, it is safe to click here
From: leica666@infoscience.otago.ac.nz
Subject: Are you as cowardly as Limbaugh?
Why won't you put this on your site?
Are you afraid to print a thoughtful defence
of the Nader campaign?
You must be one of those bad first-impression people.
In three short sentences, without even specifying the topic, you call
me a coward,
you berate me for not putting "this" on the site when you haven't established
what "this" is,
then you go for a second personal slur - all while never having mentioned
the subject.
I've seen a great deal of of Nader bashing based
on W's cabinet appointments.
The Nader bashers tell us that If Gore had won,
these clowns would not have been nominated.
True enough...but so what?
ha ha
So what?
So, I shot and killed your mother - so what?
If there was such a huge difference between the
Dems and the Repugs,
why did HALF the Dems vote FOR Norton's confirmation?
Why didn't the Dems filibuster Ashcroft?
(And why did Gore vote FOR Clarence Thomas's
confirmation)?
Because they are scared weenies.
Is that the part I don't have the balls to publish?
Remember when the Congressional Black caucus challenged
the certification of the vote from Florida?
Not a SINGLE Senate DEMOCRAT supported the challenge.
Yeah, I know...
Clinton/Gore supported a host of buy-partisan
policies: "Free" Trade, the War on (some) Drugs,
increased defence spending, Star Wars research,
the federal death penalty and Welfare "reform".
Clinton/Gore also fought against medical marijuana
and did little to pursue alternative
energy and energy conservation strategies.
You must've been very happy with President Dukakis and President Mondale.
Yes, Clinton got a little more centrist than I'd like, because that's
where the votes are.
What did your spoiler boy get, 3 percent?
The evidence shows that the "New Democrats" are
really "Republican Lites".
I wanted to vote for a REAL Democrat, so I voted
for Nader.
Cheers,
XYNZ
No, you voted for Bush.
Why did you do that?
We told you before you fucked up that you were fucking up, but you did
it anyway.
Now you're whining about your bad decision?
If Nader wants to run for something, he should run for Congress so he
has a record.
All I'm sure he stands for is getting Smirk elected.
Check out Bush's Dayly Diary
http://www.madkane.com/bush.html
Bush: Air Force One Trashing
Lies "simply not true"
by Tom Raum, Associated Press Writer
Whore City - President Smirk said Tuesday
that reports that members of Clinton's party
took items off Air Force One on Clinton's
last flight were "simply not true."
"All the allegations that they took stuff on Air
Force One are simply not true,'' Bush added.
He referred to published accounts suggesting
that members of Clinton's party removed glasses
and other souvenirs from the presidential
plane January 20th.
That son of a bitch...
After letting all those juicy rumors circulate on Fox News and
Pigboy and Hannity
and O'Reilly and Fox Whore Sunday and Tim Russert and Sam &
Cokiewhore,
he finally gets a question from the press and answers it.
Hey, President Asshole, that was 23 days ago.
Why did you let those stupid lies go on
for 23 days?
Is this the "new tone" you promised?
And where is our whore press?
They knew it wasn't true, they were
on the goddamn airplane when Clinton got off.
They knew the plane wasn't trashed,
but they all kept quiet to fuck Clinton.
The same way they're keeping quiet about Smirk and AWOL, the
cocaine, the fourth arrest et al.
...and Smirky, my dislike of you has gone up a full ball park.
You're an unprincipled, smirking fuck.
What they said in 1993
This administration gave up on deficit
reduction even before it started. Its 'plan'
consists almost entirely of tax hikes.
It would certainly be an upset of historic
proportions if higher taxes actually
led to lower deficits.
-- The Whore Street Journal
"The income tax rate hike aimed at the
nation's most productive citizens will
damage investment, reduce national
savings, slow business and job creation
and most importantly, fail to add a
penny of revenue to the federal treasury.
-- William F. Buckley's National Review
The Clinton plan was designed to punish
success through this witch's brew of
taxes and mandates, which is poison
for the economy.
-- The Whore Street Journal
These are the same losers who say Smirk's gift to the billionaires will help.
What do the smart people say?
It took us 20 years to dig ourselves
and our nation out of the hole we dug in 1981.
The Bush tax cut constitutes a windfall
for the best off.
Fiscal responsibility will be a casualty.
This tax bill is going to escalate with
every interest making sure its own special
tax break is included.
-- Leon Panetta
From: dumb_blonde_red@hotmail.com
Subject: Clinton troubles
Dear Mr Bartcop:
Now that Mr Clinton is no longer president, it
seems just about every Republican,
and their buddies in the media, are attacking
him. They don't want to assume that
he mistakenly took a few items when he moved
out of the White House.
If you have ever moved out from a rented home
before, you know how easy it can be
to inadvertently take something that doesn't
belong to you.
Then he was smeared for exercising his Constitutionally
guaranteed right to pardon people.
And now they are after Sen Clinton, for not listing
any of the gifts giver to HER during the last 8 years.
But what really makes me see red is that many
Democrats are either going along with these smears,
or doing nothing to defend the Clintons.
I don't get to your web site every day, and I
never know when you update your site.
I wrote you previously about putting a search
feature back on your site.
Now my two questions for you are:
1. What is your opinion about these attacks on
President and Senator Clinton?
2. Why don't you bring back your search feature?
Keri
Keri, it's so much worse that what you've described.
The first thing you always have to do is assume the story is totally
false.
I wasn't there (nobody was but the Clintons) but here's how it looks
to me:
The GOP can't even breathe without screaming a personal slur at the
Clintons.
The media hates Clinton's guts and they are in love with the idiot
Smirk.
The spineless Democrats are running away from the only winner we've
had since JFK.
The spineless Democrats COULD stand up for Clinton, but they're too
afraid.
Clinton can't even get the benefit of the doubt from his own party.
Even the Demcrats who hate the Clintons with all their heart could be
saying,
"The pardon is the president's perogative. He knows more about the
pardons than anybody.
If he made a decision, we must assume he made a good one unless
evidence shows otherwise."
One guy told me Paul Begala let it slip that Marc Rich might be an agent
for the Massad
and he got this pardon as a favor to Barak and the people of Israel.
But the spineless Democrats (like Chuck Schumer) think it's better
to attack Clinton.
You have to remember that EVERY story is like the "trashing of the White
House."
The whore press is just making shit up and the spineless Democrats
just stand there.
I don't mean to attack you, Keri, but what makes you think the Clinton's
"inadvertantly"
took anything? Why do you assume they have done something wrong, even
accidentally?
The way I read it, if Speilburg bought Bill a La-Z-Boy recliner, and
Clinton likes it
and wants to take it to New York, it's his goddamn chair!
Remember, "they say" Reagan left with over a million in gifts, but Clinton
is a crook
for trying to leave with a golf club Jack Nicholson gave him ($350)
and some china
that Mary Steenburgen gave to Hillary?
The whole story is horseshit.
It's too bad the whore press won't give us the facts.
Until they do, assume they're lying about Clinton and Smirk.
As far as that search engine, it stopped working when we switched servers.
Anybody know where I can get another one?
In The New Yorker, Karl Rove confirms that you have to be stupid and rich to vote Republican:
"Our education plan allows us to make further
gains in the suburbs. It will also allow us to
make gains with Hispanics and African-Americans.
The tax cuts will make the economy grow.
As people do better, they start voting
like Republicans--unless they have too much education
and vote Democratic, which proves there
can be too much of a good thing."
Thanks to Steve at airbeagle.com
From: jbolf38@yahoo.com
Subject: Bush Quote
Hey Bartcop,
Can you verify the quote "attributed to gwh bush"
about atheists being non-patriotic
and shouldn't be allowed to have citizenship?
If you can't then remove the statement.
I have a hard enough time with these bloody rednecks
that I live amongst without having sites like
yours guilty of the things that we blame the republicans for.
Christ almighty, I have to listen to these stupid
bastards talking about what an honest guy bush is.
And they went wild with praise about reagan,
on his birthday.
Don't give them more ammunition.
Thanks
Jim
Jim,
Gee, I was kinda hoping I could be the guy who decides what gets posted
and what gets pulled.
That particular phrasing was used because the quote was sent to me
and I can't verify it.
If I'm guilty of anything, it's going easy on people who write with
demands and accusations.
Too often, I leave the hammer in the holster.
Ton o' mail and Toons
Ediotr's Note: This is a good example of why your
should NEVER believe
any criticism about the Clinton from anybody at Fox News.
New York Post on Clinton gift
story: Oops
Paper tries to clean up Dick Morris' mess.
Feb. 12, 2001 | On Sunday, the New York Post splashed
Dick Morris' column on its
cover, trumpeting yet another turn in the Clintons'
gift caper. Morris, the former advisor to
Bill and Hillary Clinton who in recent years
has become a knee-jerk critic, reported that
Hillary had failed to disclose thousands of dollars
worth of gifts she received as first lady.
Based on what he assured readers was a "careful
analysis" of the Clintons' disclosure forms,
Morris cataloged scores of gifts the first lady
had received (or so he thought) but never owned up to.
"The choice is simple," wrote the Fox News commentator.
"Either you believe that Hillary did not receive
any personal gifts or you believe that she did but isn't telling."
If life were only so simple. For while Morris
often enjoyed access at the highest levels of the White House,
it seems he never took the time to learn about
more mundane matters, such as gift-giving procedures for first families.
If he had -- or if he had bothered to check with
Sen. Clinton's office -- Morris would have realized that just because
he was able to find an old newspaper clipping
that mentioned a gift given to Hillary but was unable to find it listed
on any Clinton gift disclosure forms, it doesn't
mean anything was out of the ordinary.
First families, particularly those of two-term
presidents, receive hundreds of thousands of gifts. But only those
gifts that are officially accepted -- and are
worth more than $250 -- need be disclosed. The rest are either
returned to the giver or sent to the National
Archives. Additionally, any gifts given to the president and his family
during the transition period before the inauguration
do not have to be disclosed.
Turns out every single gift Morris held up in
his story as an example of Hillary skirting ethics laws fell into those
three easily understood categories. Those "five
beautiful dresses publicly reported to have been given to Hillary
by the king of Morocco on the occasion of his
state visit" that were never disclosed?
Four were returned and the other was given to
the National Archives.
The Post had to send out two reporters to clean
up the mess for MondayÆs paper;
they dutifully quoted Hillary Clinton's spokesman,
who explained the simple gift-giving guidelines.
The paper offered up no response from Morris.
-- Eric Boehlert [1:15 p.m., Feb. 12, 2001]
Yet, the story goes around the world that Hillary stole everything.
Laura, Pigboy, Harvey, Hannity, O'Reilly, Fox Whore Sunday, Tim Russert,
Sam & his Whore
will all do a dozen shows each on this non-crime because it sorta involves
Clinton's cock.
I did my first-ever interview last night.
It was a phone interview-for-print, later in LA
Weekly.
It was weird - this guy, John, asking me questions.
I'd never done an interview before.
Who Me?
...you talking to me?
I guess anyone who's ever read some magazine interview mindlessly
wondered
how they'd answer questions if the press came to their door.
One of the questions he asked was about the BartCop name.
I asked him if he wanted the truth or the funny story.
He said, "I want the truth."
ha ha
There was a couple of times I almost had to go Bobby Knight
on him
but it was mostly a friendly, relaxed conversation.
As we were about to hang up, he said a "fact checker" from LA
Weekly
would call and double check what I'd said in the interview.
Fact checker?
ha ha
Didn't you say you were with the press?
ha ha
Now, I'm not going to heap praise on these guys just for including
me
as one of many people who have a cyber complaint with Smirk the
Wonder Dog.
But a fact checker?
It was like going back in time.
Back, when the press didn't stand for horseshit.
A fact-checker?
I was a witness in a murder trial
and the K-Drag Blue Line never bothered with a fact-checker
...for a goddamn murder trail,
...but LA Weekly wants to get their facts straight?
BartCop impressed.
Even if he was lying,
it felt good that he had the brains to pretend that he
had a fact checker.
You might enjoy Going Here
It's an electronic card site.
From: johnde@va.prestige.net
Subject: The Question Tim Russert Should Have Asked Bill Thomas
I saw House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-CA) on
Meet the Press
this past Sunday. Tim Russert asked Thomas several questions
regarding the Bush tax cut;
after spending the first half of the show bashing Clinton for the Rich
pardon. (Of course, there
was little mention of Poppy's Christmas Eve pardons of Cap Weinberger
and five others, as
Lawrence Walsh was getting perilously close to revealing Reagan and
Bush's direct involvement
in SELLING TWO PLANELOADS OF STINGER MISSILES TO THE AYATOLLAH).
Anyway, the question Russert DID NOT ask Rep. Thomas was:
"Congressman Thomas, it has been reported that you carried on an
adulterous affair with Deborah Steelman, a healthcare industry lobbyist
who in 2000, was paid $900,000 in lobbying fees by drug companies.
This
occurred while you were the chairman of the House Ways and Means
subcommittee on health. Considering that you were the chief architect
of a proposal to provide a prescription drug benefit as part of
Medicare, while at the same time, being intimately involved with a
major
drug company lobbyist who had directed $56,800 in drug company
contributions to your re-election campaign, which, by the way, was
the
most of any member of Congress, would you consider it prudent to exclude
yourself from any legislation involving medicare and the prescription
drug benefit? And considering your obvious poor judgment in continuing
such a relationship, how can the American people have faith in your
judgment regarding the cornerstone the the Bush administration's,
legislative agenda, the questionable $2.5 trillion tax cut plan, a
plan
put forth even before the administration has submitted its first budget,
a highly unusual move?". Additionally, how do you square your
call for
the President's impeachment for personal behavior, while you were
involved in what some would say was a blatant act of sexual corruption
and vaginal influence peddling?"
From: wapple@wapple.org
Subject: Tina the "Pay Pal girl"
Bart, we love you in Washington state.
One thing, ...Tina, your Pay Pal girl isn't
very good at fundraising.
She was our Pay Pal girl in 1999 and our
revenue went down.
There's something about her - men just
don't like her.
ha ha
Swear to Koresh?
For the commercial she did for our "It's
not the apple's fault" promotion,
the director had her looking down, to minimize
her negative impact.
She's poison.
Stay away from Tina the dot.com
killer!
You might want to reconsider your association
with her.
Wapplemaster
Wapple, thanks for the warning, but I'll stick with Tina.
Granted, we haven't needed to hire people to help process
all the donations that are flooding bartcop.com
but unless she turns into some kind of whore/apologist for Smirk,
...and yes, Dennis, I'm talking to you,
Sidebar:
I think Miller will err and then come back.
I think he'll catch his reflection in the
mirror and he'll say,
"What the fuck was I thinking?" and beg
our forgiveness.
If he had a ...what's that Catholic word,
...uh, ...epiphany
and said he was sorry for selling us out
to help the alien Smirk takeover,
at that point we'll assess the damage
he's done and pronounce sentence.
Hey - Miller!
I got a thunderbolt for you and your career.
The farther you go, the farther you'll
have to come back.
Nobody likes a turncoat.
As far as Tina the Pay Pal fundraiser?
She may not be Terry McAullife, but I think I'll keep her.
The new Church of Reality page
Read the Previous
Issue
It had everything - horseshit,
accusations, impeachment, more horseshit
and Republicans.
Copyright © 2001, bartcop.com
Thanks for the fumble,
Dude.
