|
|
|---|
|
American Politics Journal Atrios Barry Crimmins Betty Bowers Buzzflash Consortium News Daily Howler Daily Kos Democatic Underground Disinfotainment Today Evil GOP Bastards Faux News Channel Greg Palast The Hollywood Liberal Internet Weekly Jesus General Joe Conason Josh Marshall Liberal Oasis Make Them Accountable Mark Morford Mike Malloy Political Humor - About.com Political Wire Randi Rhodes Rude Pundit Smirking Chimp Take Back the Media Whitehouse.org More Links |
Subject: DieHard launches on Bartcop
When did Bartcop become a
tool of bullshit bloggers?
So, you want to start off that way?
No chance of having an adult conversation?
Greenwald is a
publicity-hound faggot reichwing lawyer who would blog that he was
having
bareback sex with Stalin's ghost if it would sell the ads on his
blathering. John Cole is a
nothing-nobody cartoonist in Scranton for a nothing-nobody paper that
robo-spams its scams.
...and you are the greatest political
writer of our times by comparison?
I think you're the first person I've seen go after Greenwald - I thought he was one of the good guys.
Cole's good for quotes but I don't know
much about him.
What are their crimes - disagreeing with you?
Anwar al Awlaki is not being "assassinated," and his rich-shit daddy's
lawsuit was dismissed because it's bullshit.
You can't SUE to keep from being arrested and brought to trial, for
shitsake! Awlaki is hiding out in Yemen after
having been linked to at least two bombings. His rich-shit daddy
is claiming that any attempt to FIND him is "assassination."
Now I believe you're just making shit up.
Your position is Obama did NOT go to court to preserve the
president's right to murder anyone he sees fit?
You can't have it both ways - there's no
middle ground here.
Obama either went to court with that claim or he didn't.
Do you want to join me on the side with
facts?
Or would you rather throw a tantrum and fling your feces around?
Rich-shit daddy's LAWSUIT
is what claims he's on a "kill list."
Rich-shit daddy's LAWSUIT is what claims that it's "secretive."
Rich-shit daddy is the one who paid the likes of Greenwald to write
this dog vomit.
Expect Murdoch's whores to start screaming about Obama "violating
rights" any minute now
-- while proclaiming that Obama is "soft on terrorism" without
taking a breath.
Should the father wait until after his son is murdered to protest?
Awlaki is a spoiled vicious psychotic turd,
Wait, you KNOW this Awlaki character?
Or his he scum because his name is Awlaki?
...and his rich-shit daddy is crying crocodile tears so that he can get on Faux and CNN.
If Anwar gets mugged in a back alley in Yemen, rich-shit daddy is going to blame it on Obama.
You can't have it both ways - there's no middle ground here.
Obama either went to court with that claim or he didn't.
Screaming insults at those people isn't making you look any smarter.
<>
Cops can come beat down your door any time they want, for no reason, throw you in the tank
over the weekend, for no reason, deny you necessary medical treatment, put you in a cell with
screaming drunks coughing their lungs out, and set your bail at whatever they feel like, and you'd
better have the cash with you. President Obama has nothing to do with that.
Have you gone completely crazy?
In what American cities are cops beating down doors and arresting people for no reason?
If memory serves, you did time for faking an anthrax scare by mailing some white powder to "the man."
When the cops came for you, THAT'S your example of Amerikka the police state?
You went over the line, you broke the law by mailing that white powder.
Shouldn't people who break the law be arrested?
And why do you keep avoiding the subject, which is what Obama filed in court.
You seem to think screaming "rich-shit Daddy" somehow adds to your debate point total.
No, it just makes you look like some out-of-control loon who hates people with money.
Can we please get back to being outraged over real problems instead of one spoiled rich shit
who very likely did kill innocent people, or he wouldn't be hiding in Yemen?
A Democratic president claiming the right to murder on a whim is "not a real problem?"
That's one reason why people are angry with Obama - he promised he was going to clean that shit up.
We just spent eight years yelling, "Outrage" when they did it,
and now it's OK if our side does it?
Do you even understand the consequences of your wild rhetoric?
Phony whiny liberals are going to stay home with their noses in the air come the mid-terms,
and that will be the absolute end of any progress Obama has tried to make. Have fun trying to get food stamps.
TheDieHard
A. I never said people should stay home on election day.
B. Even if I said that, nobody is going to follow me and my bad idea.
C. If they stay home by the millions, the blame will laregly fall on one man.
Next time, I suggest you write a calm e-mail<> like an adult might write.
Think about the words you choose and lower your cliched sarcasms by 2/3.
...and maybe some pot would help those temper spikes.
Civil Rights Quotes
"At this point, I didn’t believe it was possible, but Obama has just reached an all-new low in his
abysmal civil liberties record. In response to the lawsuit filed by Anwar Awlaki’s father asking
a court to enjoin the President from assassinating his son, a U.S. citizen, without any due process,
Obama filed a brief asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit without hearing the merits of the claims.
That’s not surprising: both Bush and Obama have repeatedly insisted that their secret conduct is legal
but nonetheless urge courts not to even rule on its legality. But what’s most notable here is that one of
the arguments Obama raises to demand dismissal of this lawsuit is "state secrets": in other words,
not only does the President have the right to sentence Americans to death with no due process or
charges of any kind, but his decisions as to who will be killed and why he wants them dead are
“state secrets,” and thus no court may adjudicate their legality."
-- Glenn Greenwald, Link
"This is a horrifying development, and there simply is no way to excuse it. This smacks of the Stalin
or the Ton Ton Macoute- targeting someone for death, and then refusing to offer any evidence why.
Even if something is technically legal, it can still be evil and wrong. Just a horrible precedent...
We’ve lost our way as a nation, and Obama really is trying to be worse than Bush in some areas."
-- John Cole, Link
I don't remember voting for this in 2008.
I remember voting for change - why didn't we get that?