Subject: credibility
Bart, you wrote:
> "I blame every democratic senator but Hillary."
dude, you just lost whatever credibility you
had left with me.
you can't be serious.
<big Al Gore sigh...>
Is "democratic loyalty" an oxymoron?
After 1560 issues, I lose you on seven words
you misunderstood?
You can't make room for the possibility that I'm
right?
You can't make room for the possibility that you misunderstood?
You can't make room for the possibility that
you missed the dozen times
where I explained why I believe Hillary isn't
like any other Demo senator?
she has a free pass to speak her mind;
No, she is the only senator who, as a novice
freshman who needs to be seen
as listening and learning more than grabbing
the spotlight and barking orders.
She is the only Democratic senator who
CAN'T speak her mind - yet.
perhaps the only senator in the nation with as
much incentive to do so,
and she chooses to lead by triangulating with
the platform from hell.
You think she can win the presidency by running
as a left-wing dove?
Are you new to politics?
good luck.
she's not Shirley Manson, Bart.
Duh, ...really?
I confuse the two all the time.
Which one has the red hair, the long legs and
the sexy voice?
wake up before we run her for president.
think about it.
Chris from Boca
You know, it is possible to make a point or state your
opinion
without begging the host to smack you for needlessly getting snippy.
Subject: Levin's tutu
Bart,
As a Michigan resident, I too am upset that
you have put the good Senator in a pink tutu.
I believe that during the British MP Galloway's
thrashing of Senator Coleman, Levin served
as Coleman's poodle.
So, Senator, if the tutu fits, wear it.
Keep swinging the hammer, Bart
Phil in Three Oaks, Michigan
Subject: Levin's tutu
When Carl Levin went after George Galloway
and undermined him,
that proved he deserves a pink tutu like
Kerry, Looneyman and Joe Bidet.
BTW--Bart, remember that John Kerry said
he was going to do something about the
Downing Street Memo last Monday. What did
the Bonesman do besides use it as toilet paper?
Joe B
Subject: Levin's tutu
Hey Bc ,
Levin sat at the hearings a couple weeks
ago, with Norm Coleman,
and tried to castigate Mr. Galloway after
he promptly handed their asses to them.
MoBud
Subject: Levin's tutu
I live in Michigan also. Carl Levin used to have
my respect - until the day he sat next to that
steamin' pile o'crap Norm Coleman and tried to
smear the magnificent George Galloway, MP
for *having the balls to tell the truth*. Levin
then sat back as Galloway's testimony was redacted
from the official senate record.
Your reader claims that Levin is not wearing the
infamous pink-tutu - then why the F*** has he
not raised a stink about the disgraceful removal
of Galloway's testimony? Because it is too hard
on poor, innocent George W. Bush?
Give me a break. Levin's had that tutu hiding
in his closet for a while,
only now he's whipped it out and slipped it on.
MCd
The next time someone is subpoened by Congress, they should reply,
"Screw you - if I tell the truth, you'll just
erase my words so why should I f-ing bother?"
"We're
in the important senate club and you're not!
Subject: Obama
I have never been able to grasp why everyone
is so taken with Obama.
How the hell can he say that Dean in using
religion to divide the nation with a straight face?
The Rethugs are the Masters of that ruse.
I wouldn't vote for Obama for dog-catcher,
after that stupid remark!
Dot
Obama needs to start stopping that..
Subject: Obama
Bart,
Dean's solution is obvious: instead of wasting
his breath attacking Republicans,
he should train his sights on his own party.
If he does, he'll have the complete
support of the media and the Republicans,
which means the Democrats will
just have to suck it up and take it.
Peter
If we could get Democrats to attack the Giggling Murder Monkey
with
the same enthusiasm they go after Dean, we'd have a two-party
system.
Subject: you lost that debate
Bart,
I read your website three or four times
a week, I love what you do.
But you lost that "support the troops"
debate this week.
That's what the readers tell me...
It wasn't a case of being unable to answer
your opponent's questions to HIS satisfaction,
it was a case of you being unable to present
a coherent reason for supporting the troops
that could stand close scrutiny.
Ty
Close scrutiny?
He wanted me to say our troops are just like Al Qaeda.
Subject: debate with Karash
Bart;
From what I read on that transcript, Karash was
engaging in a "Moving the Goalposts" fallacy.
No matter how you would have answered the question,
he'd have changed the terms and
demanded an answer while accusing you of not
answering the question.
Dude, thanks, but you and I see things all "funny."
I was "too stupid" to answer his always-changing
question.
I was "afraid" to answer his always-changing
question.
I was "unable" to answer his always-changing
question.
Even worse, I'm "not man enough" to admit when
I've been beaten..
Creationists use that little dodge all the time
in evolution debates so they can avoid the evidence
which defeats their absurd proposition: they
demand evidence of transitional forms, you provide it,
and simply drop it back to the next level and
demand proof for a "transitional form" to that transitional form.
It's debate-by-exhaustion so that the question
is never answered and the opponnent can claim a "win".
Later,
Zontar
I could've used Karash's tactics against him to make a point.
- Do you eat hamburgers?
- Yes
- So why do you enjoy the sound a cow makes
when you slit his throat?
That's where Karash was going.
In dove eyes, he won that debate because I like hamburgers.
His refusal to move on tells me he was all smoke and no substance.
He put all his eggs in the
"impossible question" basket and counted on the dove contingent to
flood my mailbox with
"You're afraid to answer Karash"
e-mails.
Either the majority of Democrats hate American soldiers
OR
doves write more e-mails than practical Democrats.
I believe the latter, but I could be wrong.
Subject: war criminals?
Hi Bart,
I like your site, but I am too cheap to sign
up to support it!
ha ha
With that out of the way,
Its interesting that most of the rhetoric that
is being said against the troops on your site
sounds like it comes from someone that has never,
ever served in the military. As a veteran,
I would tend to agree with you , someone who
admittedly did not serve, that the ones who
are giving the orders are ultimately responsible
for what those young people do.
Do some of your readers actually believe that
these troops, most of them right out of High School,
actually enjoy wasting unarmed civilian men ,
women and children?
Yes, according to my mail, a majority believe
that.
They won't allow any opposing thoughts into their
heads.
How fucked up in the head are these 18-22 year
old kids going to be when they get back?
The very first thing that is drummed in to you
when you join the military is that you are to act
as a team, for the team and as one unit.
Individual thought and opinion has nothing to
do with whether or not you are to obey orders
because the survival of the team (that includes
yourself) depends on it. You are told that if you
disagree with a direct order, you do it and protest
afterwards. Anything less and the unit can not
fulfill its mission. These guys can be shot for
failure to obey. It is because of the strong camaraderie
for the team (your buddies) that soldiers that
have lost arms, legs and eyes want to go back to their
units in country. Its an "Us vs them" mentality.
The bastards in control, starting with the king
Chicken Hawk GWB, bear the responsibility for
what our troops do. It is they who send out
young men and women into harms way, with only
enough information to accomplish their mission.
Those that are over there most likely joined because
in this ‘great’ economy, the military was the
only alternative this side of living on the streets.
Excellent point, one that Michael Moore made in
his movie, but some people see the military
as blood-thirsty killers who can wait to frag
their first innocent family.
Your readers that are trying to pin the ‘Baby
Killer’label on our fine young men and women need to
walk in their shoes or keep their mouths shut.
In my opinion, what they say about our troops carries
about as much weight as what a Pro-War Right
Wing Chickenhawk has to say - nothing!
Keep swinging the hammer,
Ron
Navy Vet 76-82
Shot of Chinaco Anejo to you, Dude.
Subject: debate and the troops
Chris from Florida suggested some good questions for a future debate.
Alas, I think your opponent was more interested
in playing "High School Debate Team"
than an honest exchange of opinion.
Don't most people know intuitively exactly what you are saying?
No, they often
act as tho I'm speaking some other language.
I'm surprised that your support for the
troops is so controversial,
seems about the same as what Michael Moore
said in F911.
Best to you,
Marian
I'm damn surprised that so many lefties hate the military.
JFK, Gore, Kerry, McGovern, Clark, Kerrey, Cleland - were they
all saps?
Subject: Bart, Karash lost the debate in the first two minutes
When he equated soldiers who signed up to
defend their country
to suicide-bomber terrorists, he blew it
right there.
jmowreader
JM, lots of Democrats agree with that crazy theory.
About half my mail says Karash won that debate.
I have yet to read, "I support the troops,
but you lost that debate."
I read plenty of "Fuck
the troops, you lost that debate."
Subject: you lost that debate
Bart,
Wouldn't you agree that every Iraqi killed
by occupation forces is innocent?
Dave V
Dave, no.
The people beheading contractors aren't
innocent.
By the way - I wonder why they stopped doing
that?
Did Bush tell them,
"That's enough?"