... lame rhyme, I know.
We got the house, now Montana, Missouri and Virginia need to fall right so we can get the Senate.
Stick that in your pipe Bush and Cheney.
Well, the hateful cunt is back... I present excerpts from Yahoo!s publishing of Ann Coulter's latest opus:
*"At least liberals are finally exhibiting a moral compass about something. I am sure that they'd be equally outraged if Rep. Mark Foley (news, bio, voting record) were a Democrat."*
Yes, I would be.
*"The object lesson of Foley's inappropriate e-mails to male pages is that when a Republican congressman is caught in a sex scandal, he immediately resigns and crawls off into a hole in abject embarrassment. Democrats get snippy."*
Inappropriate emails... wow. Understatement city here. It wasn't so much the inappropriateness, rather the fact that he was using a position of power to try and get some ass... not the first to do it, in fact the last big one was Bill Clinton and I believe the right wanted him impeached and run out of office. Wasn't Monica 22 rather than 16?
*"Foley didn't claim he was the victim of a "witch-hunt." He didn't whine that he was a put-upon "gay American." He didn't stay in Congress and haughtily rebuke his critics. He didn't run for re-election. He certainly didn't claim he was "saving the Constitution." (Although his recent discovery that he has a drinking problem has a certain Democratic ring to it.)"*
I have two and a half words for ya... Tom DeLay. Check out some of his garbled ass statements about "The shenio, Shenior senator from texshas, kay bail...bailey hutchison" (hic).
*"In 1983, Democratic congressman Gerry Studds was found to have sexually propositioned House pages and actually buggered a 17-year-old male page whom he took on a trip to Portugal. The 46-year-old Studds indignantly attacked those who criticized him for what he called a "mutually voluntary, private relationship between adults." "*
Yep, do you know what the legal age in portugal is? 16. Therefore by flying him to portugal he got around the law of the US. Slimy and wrong, but also 23 years ago when I was safely at home in England with its consentual age of 16. *"When the House censured Studds for his sex romp with a male page, Studds
I truly, truly suck at keeping these things current. Life takes over, and I end up letting blogs atrophy and die. I'm not proud of it, I shouldn't do it, I'm no example to my kids ... :) Seriously though, I do feel bad when I see my blog in my favorites list and think "Hmm, when was the last time I updated that?"
Right now, I am drinking some wine and beating iTunes at its own game and randomly selecting music. Job is going better, I am busier now which means I don't feel bored. So that's a good thing.
Have you ever felt like all you want to do is stay home and be with your family? Work be damned? I've been there a couple times in the last week, fought through it but it was still there.
If you could watch any movie on the big screen right at this moment, what would it be?
Tron. That is all.
For the English - "And so I told 'im, I could make you disappear, just like that, so I went 'just like that' and he was still there"
"Gee Dad, can I fly Thunderbird 1?"
"I vant to drink your blood"
"Avada Kadavra"
"You will die"
What's your favorite way to keep in touch? Phone, snail mail, email, text message, Vox, _____ ?
Email. Definitely. I live in GMail most days.
Wow, Helen has been around for a lot of historical American events. This book is a very good insight into what the White House press corps. goes through, as well as insight into how the different Administrations treat the press, treat their press secretaries and how they treat the release of information to the public.
Helen's writing style is pretty straightforward, she rarely uses flowery prose to cover up lack of substance like so many of today's journalists do.
I would recommend this book to anyone who would like an insight into how the Bush 2 white house has rejected a lot of the established press handling techniques of previous administrations.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14570794/from/RS.1/
Donald Frickin' Rumsfeld. Some highlights:
In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration’s critics as suffering from “moral or intellectual confusion” about what threatens the nation’s security and accused them of lacking the courage to fight back.
Interesting... I know exactly what threatens the nation's security. The Bush administration's failed foreign policy. You see, I don't want to appease terrorists, I want to arrest and imprison them... you know, like we did with those who bombed the WTC the first time, or those who bombed the USS Cole... now in jail serving life sentences. You see, when you can point to that sort of reaction to terrorists, you can take the moral high ground away from them. You take away recruiting tools.
As far as suffering from "intellectual confusion"... have you heard your boss speak? Damn, have you heard yourself speak? Intellectually, I can understand that the terrorists harbor some sort of grudge against the USA and that there needs to be some way to find the root cause and address it to stop terrorism. You cannot, despite your insistence, wage war on a feeling. I cannot declare war on lust or on envy. Intellectually you could argue that I am being facetious, but as you and your masters are not interested having a reasoned, intellectual discussion with those people in this country who could understand and argue, you will break it down into soundbites and folksy sayings.
Rumsfeld recalled a string of recent terrorist attacks, from 9/11 to bombings in Bali, London and Madrid, and said it should be obvious to anyone that terrorists must be confronted, not appeased.
“But some seem not to have learned history’s lessons,” he said, adding that part of the problem is that the American news media have tended to emphasize the negative rather than the positive.
He said, for example, that more media attention was given to U.S. soldiers’ abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib than to the fact that Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith received the Medal of Honor.
“Can we truly afford to believe somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?” he asked.
“Those who know the truth need to speak out against these kinds of myths and lies and distortions being told about our troops and about our country,” he added
Hmm, another old chestnut... It's the media's fault. The media is reporting only negative news. Well guess what Don, when the choice is showing that there is a systematic removal of the USA standing as a world leader in human rights because of Torture tactics being sanctioned by those at the very top and reporting that someone got a medal for being a hero, the standing of the USA comes first. The hero should get his kudos, we should all thank him and people like him for his service. But the fact that his service is being denegrated by people like Rumsfeld and Cheney and Bush is far more newsworthy. I mean, it's not as if someone in the Bush administration laughed off the Abu Gharaib torturing by saying "I don't see being made to stand as torture, I have to stand a lot as part of my job." Oh, wait, you did. Asshole.
Rumsfeld made similar arguments in Reno about doubters of the administration’s approach to fighting terrorism, saying too many in this country want to “blame America first” and ignore the enemy.
No, I blame you and your masters first, and despite what you may try and convince people of, you and they are NOT AMERICA!!!!!
What is your browser's default home page set to?
Submitted by Kelev T. Cat.
about:blank
Blank startup pages rule.
What books are on your nightstand?
The scary part is I am actively reading 3 of them.
