Support the Anti-Cronyism and Public Safety Act

"Crony capitalism," Los Angeles Times columnist Robert Scheer writes this week, "is the name of the Republican game."

Scheer couldn't be more correct. The headline of the lead business story in September 28th's Washington Post is a good example: "Hurricanes Give Lobbyists Hope." The article reports that with Congress dangling as much as two hundred billion dollars in hurricane-related aid, lobbyists for oil companies, airlines and manufacturers are clamoring to get their cut as they work to get regulations waived so oil companies can build (dirty) new refineries which skirt EPA rules and so the airlines can go belly up on their pension obligations.

(For more on predatory profiteering in New Orleans and the Gulf region, read Naomi Klein's recent searing investigation for The Nation and check out recent Doonesbury strips where the ever-opportunistic Duke is characteristically in tune with the latest political currents.)

The devastating hurricane fallout is also proving to be a windfall for President Bush's supporters and handlers. GOP-connected companies like Fluor, Bechtel, and, of course, Halliburton, are quickly raking in tens of millions on no-bid contracts. (Presumably no one checked references for these companies' recent work in Iraq.)

And did you know that some of these corporations are clients of lobbyist Joe Allbaugh, who was Bush's campaign manager in 2000, then Bush's first appointee to head FEMA, then the man to recommend his now-infamous replacement, Michael Brown? Talk about crony appointees!

Allbaugh and Brown are just two of many good examples of why it's so important to support the Anti-Cronyism and Public Safety Act--introduced to the House on September 27 by Henry Waxman and Nancy Pelosi. "Bush has handed out some of the country's most difficult and important jobs--leadership positions in public safety and emergency response--to politically well-connected individuals with no experience or qualifications," Rep. Waxman said. "This common sense legislation will end this practice and ensure that public safety is back in the hands of those who are trained and experienced in protecting the public." (Click here to play the "Crony or Phony" game for more amusing examples of the president's crony appointees.)

The bill would require any presidential appointee for a public safety position to have proven, relevant credentials for that position. In addition, the legislation bars from appointment to an agency any individual who has been a lobbyist for an industry subject to the agency's authority during the preceding two years. Click here to write your elected reps, letting them know that you expect their support for this bill which would go a long way toward draining the crony cesspool in our capitol.

Comments (211)

1. ..and let us not forget Bush's suspension of prevailing wage laws thereby increasing the profits of these companies while decreasing the benefits to the disenfranchised attempting to rebuild their lives and cities.

   Posted by leftofcenter at 09/29/2005 @ 12:53pm

2. DeLay's dark designs demean democracy and disguise dishonesty.

   Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/29/2005 @ 1:38pm

3. A law requiring that qualified people be appointed to important positions would be a good start. But wouldn't it be nice if there were a rule that the PRESIDENT be qualified for his position?

   Posted by paulherman at 09/29/2005 @ 1:42pm

4. Republicans apparently love hog farming! All the corporate pigs come running after every crisis (war, hurricane, etc.) and the GOP ladles out the cash from their giant pork barrel. Of course, that cash was borrowed from your grandchildren, but what the hell...

   Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/29/2005 @ 2:00pm

5. Roberts was confirmed as Chief Justice by a vote of 78-22, even more lopsided than I expected. I was expecting 70 to 72 Yes votes

   Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/29/2005 @ 2:04pm

6. ILPhysics....here's the list...

   Baucus (D-MT), Yea Bingaman (D-NM), Yea Byrd (D-WV), Yea Carper (D-DE), Yea Conrad (D-ND), Yea Dorgan (D-ND), Yea Feingold (D-WI), Yea Johnson (D-SD), Yea Kohl (D-WI), Yea Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Leahy (D-VT), Yea Levin (D-MI), Yea Lieberman (D-CT), Yea Lincoln (D-AR), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Yea Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea

   Frankly, I don't know why Tom Delay is "so important"...and 21 Democrats voting "Yea" on a stealth candidate like Roberts is not worth a "Nation" article today???

   THIS is why I voted for Kerry in 2004....not "The Hammer" or even Bush "croneyism".

   Posted by Mask at 09/29/2005 @ 2:14pm

7. Mask--DeLay is just such a big sleaze that it's nice to see him taken down a peg and I did think Waxman's bill was worth a plug. I also knew that my colleague John Nichols would be writing today on the Roberts for us. So check his piece out in his Online Beat weblog.

   Zero--I think you have it right abour Pelosi. My undertstanding is that Waxman is indeed doing the heavy lifting on this bill. Also, I think it says that our govt is in truly pathetic shape and I think while not being able to filter out all unqualified nominees, it could help ensure a greater degree of quality control.

   Posted by Peter Rothberg at 09/29/2005 @ 3:32pm

8. Frankgrits writes;"Peter, sorry for going off topic so soon but I heard something really disturbing on ethe O'Reilly Radio Factor today. Now mind you I don't agree with much of what O'Reilly says but today is a different story. It seems the ACLU won a victory in a Manhatten courtroom on the release of the rest of the Abu Ghraib abuse pictures. A judge named Hellenstein orderd them released pending appeal. I agree totally with O'Reilly that the pictures should not be released. They serve no useful purpose other than to place our troops, especially those around the prisons at greater danger. I'm sorry to say but this is a liberal judge appointed by Bill Clinton in 1998. Don't know what the rest of his rulings look like but this one is totally wrong. The people who abused the guards have been punished and releasing more photos for purient interest in just plain wrong for obvious reasons. Our troops already have their hands full. Bill is right on this one and I hope those at the Nation will condemn this decision. "

   Wow O'Rielly really wrapped you around his finger with his usual appeals to emotion over intellect. The people that abused the guards have been punished? (I think you meant prisoners). Last I checked not a single commisioned officer has been convicted of Abu Ghraib abuses. Not a single military intelligence officer or CIA operative has been seriously investigated. About all that has happened is nailing the low level personel caught in the photos to a wall in attempt to avoid any serious attempt to investigate systemic abuse problems. Do you know for a fact that the photos being withheld don't implicate anyone not already convicted? Do you believe in transparent government and freedom of information, or do you cut and run on these important principles when it becomes painful? O'Reilly even has you parroting the typical right wing attack on "liberal" judges. Why don't you put your emotions in check and examine intellectually what the consequences would be if we allowed judges to determine whether information was "useful" or not before allowing the public access to it. Following the law can be painful at times, but making it up as you go along and allowing your emotions to rule your intellect is more damaging in the long run.

   Posted by Guiles at 09/29/2005 @ 4:11pm

9. FRANKGRITS:

   I have to admit that I heard O'Reilly on tv the other day, I think it was a morning show of some sort. And he actually had some interesting things to say. I found myself agreeing with him on a couple of issues myself. I honestly can't remember what issues they were, because I think i tried to block out that part of my week. It scared me too much. hehehe...

   Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 5:21pm

10. JORCHEIM: At least you admit to being closed minded.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 5:28pm

11. USAPRIDE:

    Again, let me get a hit of that. In case you forgot, I used to be a Republican, then started actually READING, instead of listening to the bilge getting spewed by the corporately dominated media. It's amazing what you learn when you consider other sources besides Rush Limbaugh, et al.

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 5:30pm

12. Frankgrits:

    Here is the judge's reasoning behing his decision.

    'U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein said that terrorists "do not need pretexts for their barbarism" and that suppressing the pictures would amount to submitting to blackmail.

    "Our nation does not surrender to blackmail, and fear of blackmail is not a legally sufficient argument to prevent us from performing a statutory command. Indeed, the freedoms that we champion are as important to our success in Iraq and Afghanistan as the guns and missiles with which our troops are armed," he said.'

    Sorry, but I find his reasoning much more compelling than yours.

    Posted by Guiles at 09/29/2005 @ 6:27pm

13. JORCHEIM: I must say, this is the first time I've ever heard of anyone going from R to D. But, I have heard of numurous cases of the the opposite taking place.

    The person always explains that after they started to read and watch news and particapate, their eyes and minds opened up to the BS of the left and they sit in amazement at how they could have ever voted for any demo.

    Here's some advice. Stop with the Rush, Hannity, O'Riley mantra. Information comes from everywhere. It's up to us to determine what's credible.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 7:17pm

14. The WAR is an abuse. The war is an abuse of the autonomy of the Iraqi people. When are you all going to get it? You carry on, have the audacity to support a government that goes over there, destroys the fucking infrastructure, disrupts what little those folks have, eviscerates and makes impossible the sort of organizing the secular opposition to a pig like Hussein was pulling together, and then have the audacity to claim that the country will descend into chaos when you leave. It's in chaos now. It's in chaos NOW. You've made it worse, you're making it even worse with your further support of this criminal war, and you're SURPRISED the grunts are acting like thugs? As above, so below. The apple never falls far from the tree, etcetera. This is just Calley all over again. First the government napalms children, then you want to know why a kid from the sticks goes out and shoots them, or tortures them. Your partyline syndrome defies credulity.

    Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/29/2005 @ 7:42pm

15. jWHA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!! Ahem. I'm insane. This is fun!!! YEEEEHAWWWW!!! No, they didn't change my medication.

    Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/29/2005 @ 7:45pm

16. USAPRIDE:

    Allow me to give YOU some advice. First off, if you had actually read these posts recently, you would know that I am certainly not the only person who made the shift AWAY from the Republican party once I started understanding the world as an adult. Second, I'm not a Democrat, never have been. To me, they are literally the two-bit whores of the political environment (whereas the Republicans generally are the high-class hookers... they are more expensive, but if you give them something a little extra, they'll get you everything you could want). Third, you're right, information does indeed come from everywhere. As I said, as soon as I started fact-checking many of Rush's claims (back when I was in college, mind you), I started realizing just how much he was lying. Now, you may wish to paint him as nothing but an "entertainer", but I think you know better. And if you don't, then you really should start waking up.

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 8:23pm

17. Yeah, well, we all need to wake up. This crap is running away without us, and the two parties are playing us all for saps. I'm amazed at how it stays an "either or" question. "Vote for Kerry, or you'll get Bush the fascist". Bush is a turd for sure, but fascism requires some ground support he really hasn't consolidated yet, less so even in the wake of Katrina. He had better chances beforehand. Kerry played the so-called left all last year, and the old rule applied: when people have a choice between a guy with bad ideas and a guy with no ideas, they'll go for the guy with bad ideas every time. Bush won, or so it would appear. And even if he really didn't, as some are claiming, that battle was lost back in the November of 2000 in Florida. The democrats consistently shoot themselves in the foot. When the "left" wants to fight for independent voice, instead of settling for what we can get, we'll find we have a lot more support in the so-called "red states", which, from what I'm hearing down at the local tavern, has a lot more to do with the inability of "liberals" to sit and be a real neighbor than it does the backwardness of the country. Oh, it's complex and we have our work cut out for us.

    Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/29/2005 @ 8:33pm

18. JORCHEIM: Okay, I accept what you are saying. Here's where I'm coming from. It appears that many of you who are so concerned about the rotation habits of the earth have just unplugged and said, I disagree with everything.

    I'm sorry folks, but you become a cop-out, you just don't rate anymore. I hate demos, I hate repubs, I hate the military, I hate the USA, I hate the war, I hate the oil companies, I hate hurricanes, I hate religion, I hate SUV's, I hate myself.....

    Where does it end? To sit back and criticize everything is moronic. One Michael Moore in the world is one too many. It's like you are envious of anyone who does good. The other end of that spectrum is a bleeding heart. Who cares what you think.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 8:52pm

19. USAPRIDE:

    Apparently you care what we think, otherwise you wouldn't be here trying to convince us to believe otherwise.

    And just for the record, douchebag, I don't hate the USA. I hate much of our behavior as a nation, and many actions done in our name. I don't hate religion, as I have said on numerous occasions, I happen to be a Christian. But I am the "My God is a loving God" kind of Christian, whereas you are the "My God can kick your God's ass" kind of Christian, which, really, isn't a Christian at all. I don't hate the military, as it is critical for our DEFENSE... not for waging aggressive war against a practically defenseless third world nation. We are guilty of precisely the crimes the Nuremburg tribunal found Nazi Germany guilty. Argue how you will, but it's true. If you'd actually go back and read them, you'd understand.

    And to criticize what we think is wrong, ESPECIALLY when it is done in our names as Americans isn't moronic. It's called being a responsible citizen...

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 9:02pm

20. JORCHEIM: That's the 2nd time you've clled me a douchebag.

    And this is the 2nd time I've said FUCK YOU!

    I ask you, is this the kind of people you are. Does this person represent your views? All I see is a weak minded person you was never included in life's circles. this is the person who got picked last when choosing teams. So sad to carry this over into adulthood.

    FRANKGRITS: The day I look to fat ass Moore for education is the day I put a bullet in my head.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 9:22pm

21. Sorry for the type-o's.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 9:23pm

22. FRANKGRITS: cheap & simple. You da man!

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 9:37pm

23. USAPRIDE:

    And for the second time, I won't fuck you. You may be gay and in the closet, but I am neither gay nor in the closet. As I said before, in case you missed it... try the White House Press Club. I hear there are gay internet porn stars there, hand-picked by the Bush administration. So you could have the best of both worlds. Guilt-free gay sex. You could denounce homosexuals at the same time you are being one.

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 9:39pm

24. USAPRIDE:

    And if you are referring to me with the following:

    I ask you, is this the kind of people you are. Does this person represent your views? All I see is a weak minded person you was never included in life's circles. this is the person who got picked last when choosing teams. So sad to carry this over into adulthood.

    My response:

    PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE come to Pittsburgh. I am BEGGING YOU!!! I won't try to convince you how good of an athlete I was in high school or college (or even which college I attended... seeing as your compadre LEN MOSSE wouldn't take me up on that bet... I even offered him 10 to 1 payout). Instead, all I ask of you is to step in the ring with me... just 1 round is ALL I am asking from you. I'll even let you wear 4 oz gloves like I usually fight with, and I will wear my 12 oz boxing gloves. I will even give you the address to my gym, so we would have a legitimate ring to do this.

    Otherwise, shut up. If you won't step in the ring, don't say anything about me or my life.

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 9:43pm

25. JORCHEIM: That's so... 3rd grade of you.

    You stagger me with intellect.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 9:46pm

26. USAPRIDE:

    You said: I ask you, is this the kind of people you are. Does this person represent your views? All I see is a weak minded person you was never included in life's circles. this is the person who got picked last when choosing teams. So sad to carry this over into adulthood.

    I simply decided to stoop to your level, since brute force is all you understand. I say again, put up, or shut up.

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 9:47pm

27. FRANKGRITS:

    You're kidding about Bennett, right?

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 9:57pm

28. FRANGRITS: Here! Here! Now that's a real man speaking up. And a grown man at that. Can you believe your friend JORCHEIM?

    PANTY-WASTE.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 10:00pm

29. Cronyism is a part of life. It's not what you know it's who you know. Heck, it was European cronyism that brought my ancestors here in the first place. Damn British social structure.

    Posted by Zeddmen at 09/29/2005 @ 10:01pm

30. FRANKGRITS:

    Not surprised he believes it, just can't believe he said it on the air.

    USAPRIDE:

    the term is PANTYWAIST... and since you aren't man enough to step in the ring with me, the term refers to yourself. Try looking up the big words befire trying to use them, especially if you have never used them before. Maybe you can try that vocabulary program that Rush is always hawking on his show.

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/29/2005 @ 10:03pm

31. USA

    My brother had been a staunch conservative and GOP supporter...until Bush2. Apparently voting for Dubya can be the cure! He is now sending ME liberal links. I think you guys misunderestimate the effect Dubya is having on average folk...

    Posted by leftofcenter at 09/29/2005 @ 10:04pm

32. L.O.C. I don't doubt it. I remember the first time I heard him say that he was a uniter, not a divider - I cringed.

    I knew it would be exploited to no end. But I do concur, his way does cut some the wrong way. But I think it's cool that it didn't really turn off 60,000,000 million of us.

    Did you know... The amount of votes "W" got on 2004 is roughly the entire population of England? This is like every man, woman and child voting for Bush.

    Watch out Google - here they come.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/29/2005 @ 10:16pm

33. All,

    America, you voted for Bush and his cronyistic agenda, not once, but twice!! Do ya think that this nation might be getting exactly what it deserves?

    Posted by POSEIDON at 09/29/2005 @ 10:29pm

34. USA,

    I hear that in your home state Kat Harris DID allow the votes of children in '00. I say we just dress 'em up in little khaki uniforms right now.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/29/2005 @ 10:55pm

35. Frank & TBJ

    re: all them 51% of the vote...

    Heck...I read about a couple towns where the votes tallied over 400x the population of the voting roles! Bush was a pretty heavy favorite there. Maybe a little tweak of that Diebold back-door? (Not to mention the OH Gov'nr is up on unrelated charges.)

    Funny...Homeland Security actually knows about the Diebold problem (its on their site)and isn't making them fix it. Apparently there is an interview out there with a Diebold engineer who claims the company is aware and doesn't seem to care. The hole allows people to externally access the tabulation program core. Sounds like a Wing-nut with some savvy, and a laptop mighta been kinda busy!

    btw: for some fun links check out: BUSH [linkcrusader.com]

    Posted by leftofcenter at 09/29/2005 @ 11:55pm

36. JORCHEIM: I must say, this is the first time I've ever heard of anyone going from R to D. But, I have heard of numurous cases of the the opposite taking place.

    The person always explains that after they started to read and watch news and particapate, their eyes and minds opened up to the BS of the left and they sit in amazement at how they could have ever voted for any demo.

    Posted by USAPRIDE 09/29/2005 @ 7:17pm

    Put me on your list in slot number 2! Started out Republican, switched to Green, now a Democrat. The change happened after I woke up to what is really going on in this world. I cannot understand how anyone with a conscience can vote GOP...

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 01:49am

37. Second, I'm not a Democrat, never have been. To me, they are literally the two-bit whores of the political environment

    Posted by JORCHEIM 09/29/2005 @ 8:23pm

    Hey, sailor! New in town? ;-)

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 01:53am

38. FRANKGRITS: The day I look to fat ass Moore for education is the day I put a bullet in my head.

    Posted by USAPRIDE 09/29/2005 @ 9:22pm

    We can dream, can't we?

    Just kidding, PRIDE, I don't really dream of you shooting yourself...

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 01:57am

39. Also Bill Bennet said on his radio show that if all black babies were aborted, there would be considerably less crime in this country.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/29/2005 @ 9:55pm

    People listen to Bill Bennett? Wow, I learn something new everyday. I guess they play his show in mental wards...

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 02:00am

40. JORCHEIM: That's so... 3rd grade of you.

    You stagger me with intellect.

    Posted by USAPRIDE 09/29/2005 @ 9:46pm

    Can you believe your friend JORCHEIM?

    PANTY-WASTE.

    Posted by USAPRIDE 09/29/2005 @ 10:00pm

    Hmmm, if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes I wouldn't have believed someone could discredit himself so badly...

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 02:03am

41. USAPRIDE, Also, why do you hate Michael Moore? What has he done to you except try to educate you?

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/29/2005 @ 9:10pm

    Frankg, first Clinton, now Moore? We are going to have to introduce you to genuine people. Moore is perhaps the biggest hypocrite to gain fame in many decades. He makes all these badly made, full of lies and distortions movies, goes to Europe to badmouth the United States and calls US citizens stupid, campaigns against wealth while living a very wealthy life (the hat and jacket were costumes), and is thoroughly disliked by the good people of Flint Michigan.

    Here is your lesson for today: Michael Moore could not educate anyone except in the art of the con.

    Posted by love liberty at 09/30/2005 @ 02:23am

42. Put me on your list in slot number 2! Started out Republican, switched to Green, now a Democrat. The change happened after I woke up to what is really going on in this world. I cannot understand how anyone with a conscience can vote GOP...

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS 09/30/2005 @ 01:49am

    It's easy, you combine a conscience with personal responsibility, and a belief in the Constitution.

    I think the political switch echoes your religious change; in both cases, I don't believe you were ever truly a believer. You just came out of the closet to reveal your athiest, big government self. I understand you though; my father is an athiest now turned agnostic who has more faith in UFO's than believing in the Bible. I still love him, we just treat him kindly.

    Posted by love liberty at 09/30/2005 @ 02:33am

43. ALL,

    Sorry for being off topic, but read a story this morning about Israel imploring the US to stop the Iraninan nuke program, or they will have to act to stop it.

    All I can say is God Bless the Israelis, they do not have to be convinced be overwhelming evidence to act in order to protect themselves. Intent and ties to terrorists is good enough for them, and they dont give a damn what the rest of the world thinks. Man, do I love those guys.

    Posted by CPT at 09/30/2005 @ 10:29am

44. FRANKGITS

    OMG, we agree on Israel that makes it twice, look at the sky might be falling

    Posted by CPT at 09/30/2005 @ 11:20am

45. And I suppose Fahrenheit 9/11 was your ordinary fact-filled documentary.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 12:29pm

46. I think the political switch echoes your religious change; in both cases, I don't believe you were ever truly a believer.

    Posted by LOVE LIBERTY 09/30/2005 @ 02:33am

    I am sorry that you are so dogmatic you cannot conceive of a true believer renouncing the faith. You are wrong. I was indeed a true believer, more devout than all the fakes that came to church with me, playing their church games, buying their fire insurance. When it came time for 7AM prayer meetings on Saturday, they didn't show - it was me and the group leader. When it came time for spending free time going door to door witnessing, it was me and one other guy while the hypocrites turned inward to focus on their self-centered, selfish lives. When it came time to tithe 10% of GROSS income, I had my check ready for the offering plate after every payday.

    LOVE LIBERTY, you were not there. How dare you pass judgement on me when you didn't even know me?? I don't mean that rhetorically, I am asking you to justify your arrogant pronouncement.

    Politically, Ronald Reagan wasn't conservative enough for me. I was nearly as fanatical about conservatism as I was about Christ. But as I've said before, I finally faced facts. I finally learned how the world work. Sounds like your father did too. Sorry that you cannot...

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 12:38pm

47. And I suppose Fahrenheit 9/11 was your ordinary fact-filled documentary.

    Posted by USAPRIDE 09/30/2005 @ 12:29am

    I bet you didn't even see that movie!!!

    It was filled with video clips of rightwingers just being themselves. When Bush gives a speach to the "haves and have mores", calling them his base, WHEN IT COMES RIGHT OUT OF BUSH'S MOUTH, what more do you need??? Is this not fact in your opinion?

    I do not understand you sometimes. How can you be in denial about this stuff? It's just politics. Usually people go into denial over horrible tragedies, like the death of a loved one. Going into denial about politics seems odd...

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 2:23pm

48. ILP: I did see the movie. If you call the spliced and out of context garbage, fact, I'm just at a loss.

    That's Moore's style. I'm not impressed.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 3:19pm

49. pridebaby, maybe you could make a documentary about the shirt.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 3:27pm

50. frnakgrits, your posts are getting curioser and curioser, are you a stealth right wingnut?

    you seem to prefer to sweep the dirt under the rug. you don't want anyone, the public, to see the torture photos and videos?

    listen, the troops are in deep shit in Iraq, the "enemy", read the side in a civil war, we've unleashed, that we like, knows all this stuff already. they're fighting to hold on to power they've had for decades if not centuries, not because they like to be popular with us. no these heinous acts, the torture and killing, are committed in our name, private england is wearing the same uniform as cpt, supposedly, they are america, and their deeds need to be made public,

    they were public deeds by virtue of that uniform. this wasn't some Jeffrey Dahmer, this was done by representatives of the US, we paid their salary, not much compared to mercenaries.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 3:39pm

51. Bravo, that's rich, the Grenada and Panama actions, the very pineappple of perfection by our brave soldiers. those were wars right out of Gilbert and Sullivan

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 3:41pm

52. USAPRIDE, I see. Any excuse to absolve your hero George W. Bush. How much of the speach does MM have to put in the movie? All of it? Wouldn't be much of a movie in that case.

    The point is, no matter what Bush does or says, you will find some way to excuse him because you are not objective and open-minded. You are a right-wing partisan who places ideology above the truth.

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 3:45pm

53. PLAIN BRUCE: As the Guardian points out, a 2004 survey of 900 peer-reviewed studies on climate change failed to produce a single report that didn't conclude that man-made activity is, indeed, causing climate change.

    http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,377270,00.html

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 4:03pm

54. JOHANNESROLF:

    Your 3:27 post made me laugh iced tea from my nose!

    Good stuff!

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/30/2005 @ 4:13pm

55. ILP: And no matter what Bush does, or doesn't do, you will disagree. See how it works?

    J: Funny. Too bad the shirt has more charisma than Moore does.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 4:37pm

56. USAPRIDE, No, sorry, wrong again. But hey, that doesn't make you a bad person.

    When Bush admin does something good, I certainly say so.

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/30/2005 @ 5:04pm

57. To any and all bloggers. If you post an opinion, justify it with facts. I don't know you and have no reason to give any weight to your testimony if there is no demonstrable facts to support it - For a well written blog see the blog posted by GUILES 09/29/2005 @ 6:27pm. If there is demonstrable evidence that pictures depicting torture of insurgents by some of our troops pursuant to policies adopted and propagated by the Pentagon places them in greater danger, produce it.

    Posted by Ifida at 09/30/2005 @ 5:13pm

58. frankgrits: more troops will be intentionally targeted. that is just nonsense. the troops are in the midst of an occupation and in the middle of a civil war. they cannot be MORE targeted.

    and yes IFIDA, you are correct

    and why do you, frangrits, believe the perpetrators of the torture have already been punished. the ones giving the orders have not been punished

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 5:45pm

59. one more try farankgrits, your position on the torture evidence is like cpt's and his ilk. according to them any criticism of the government, and during wartime, is bad for the troops. wrong. what's bad for the troops is to be sent to Iraq, without a plan, without the right equipment and now without the support of the people for this war.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 5:58pm

60. frankgrits,what you are saying is that logic doesn't apply here, and it's obvious that you are speaking from pure emotion, but sorry no dice, I calls them as I sees them.the troops are targets, sitting or driving ducks. the only way to make them less so is to bring them home, not to send more, as you have previously suggested. you have a blind spot and there is no point in arguing with you.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 6:41pm

61. Rove or DeLay, Biden or Schumer, they're all in it together. The House gerrymanders itself, and the Senate's only guiding principal is "Keep my Job." America needs a statesman, not a politician, someone who inspires Americans to sacrifice for the common good, someone who cares about people, not special interests(no matter the persuasion), not right or left, it's too late for that. Our Nation needs a statesman, someone not in politics, someone like Robert Kennedy, Jr, who can wear the mantle of his family and inspire people. Americans don't care anymore about mistakes made during youth. Americans are looking for honesty, and neither party gives it to us, they only spin and spin, and have made the whole country dizzy. It is time for all good men and women to come to the aid of our country. Can the Nation start? Can you seek people not in politics? Political experience is no longer a quality to be admired, it has become a disgrace. Let us seek a few good men and women who have given good service to the Nation, and let us elevate them, instead of continous submersion in bickering and fault finding. The politicians are old hat - it's time to throw the bums out. It's time for a new American Revolution. For in the current course of human events, it has become necessary to make change happen. We The People.

    Posted by lorenzo212 at 09/30/2005 @ 7:18pm

62. J: After reading several weeks of postings from you I feel comfortable with your opinions. It did take some time to get used to where you wre coming from, but I've adapted.

    It does strike me how you continue to be so narrow on the war in Iraq. Some of the things you are for clearly enhance the danger our troops are in, yet you see nothing wrong with your position. At this point, it's not as simple as, bring them home now. You should re-think your feelings with regard to doing or saying something that could bring harm to your fellow Americans.

    It is lame to use Bush to justify an ill-conceived notion on your part.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 7:34pm

63. Rio Bravo of 3:27 -

    Wow. You are textbook reactionary. The idea of bombing and incinerating people gets you more excited than a dog passing a fire hydrant.

    BTW - You forgot to mention Ronnie looking the other way while his client Saddam gassed the Kurds.

    Posted by seattlescribe at 09/30/2005 @ 7:35pm

64. pride, you write: Some of the things you are for clearly enhance the danger our troops are in,

    this is by no means clear and you offer nothing in support. reminds me of the common sense argument, there just is no common common sense. at least a serious post from you for a change

    frankgrits; unless you have a son or daughter... fatuous argument, this is not a blog for those who have a son or daughter... maybe you'd be more comfortable on a military blog

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 8:08pm

65. J: Why did you go directly into double-speak?

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 8:15pm

66. what the hell are you talking about pride baby? you posit something, offer no argument or facts, I'm not sure I can afford the time with you. and what the hell is double speak. don't you have some Limbaugh talking point you can peddle?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 8:28pm

67. J: If you don't have the time for me, do your "Kachunk" thing or whatever you call it. There is plenty of fresh liberal meat here to have fun with. Who needs you.

    This person actually thinks they are above question.

    Arrogence is a bliss.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 8:42pm

68. USAPRIDE writes: "If you don't have the time for me, do your "Kachunk" thing or whatever you call it. There is plenty of fresh liberal meat here to have fun with. Who needs you."

    Is this an admission that you are only here to disrupt and not for an honest exchange of views?

    Posted by Guiles at 09/30/2005 @ 9:20pm

69. GUILES: No, it means that I've been waiting to share ideals with someone, hell anyone, who has something to say.

    All I've seen here is a dog chasing its own tail. I already know the ending.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 9:29pm

70. this is getting nowhere, frankgrits, the pics released and the enemy blowing up soldiers are two seperate events, not connected.

    had the US troops not tortured and murdered prisoners, the insurgency would still be blowing up their enemies. you have left logic behind.

    the ACCLU has no blood on their hands, not now , not ever.

    you have exposed yourself as a reactionary, just like cpt, I have no other way of putting it, you are a hawk in dove's clothing.

    that's your opinion, just don't try to varnish it. that you have relations in the theatre of war does nothing for your your conclusion, it just explains the reason for your blind spot

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 10:49pm

71. thank you guiles, I think so too

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 10:53pm

72. J: The cynic is alive and well, beneath your flesh and in you heart.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 10:54pm

73. frank when you say you support ALL the troops

    do you include torturers and murderers? your post does more than suggest you do.

    I am supporting the troops, those that aren't torturers and murderers by shining a light on those that do.

    you don't seem to have as much trouble with the torture as you are with releasing the evidence. as I pointed out before, these crimes were committed in our name, yours too, and america needs to see these images so that the outrage over them will mobilize people to demand that the leaders are punished not just the grunts.

    you see these images are the truth and the truth hurts, as it should.

    try to think this through, covering up these crimes benefits only the criminals, not the honorable troops in the field.

    do you think not publishing these pictures will have a benevolent affect for the troops in Iraq? will there be lfewer attacks? of course not.

    the people who have seen thse images have judged them to be far worse than anything released so far.

    not curious? no, no matter how much you squirm and wiggle, the american people deserve the unvarnished truth, now more than ever, even if frank feels he needs to stand in the way

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 11:17pm

74. neither I nor the press has painted the troops with a broad brush,

    the country was degraded by the actions of the murderers and torturers, not by the release of the evidence,

    what is your problem with the truth? truth is a value of its own,

    that was true with MYLai and the tiger squads in Vietnam and it is true now.

    doesn't it bother you that you are defending murderers and torturers AND those whose orders permitted that?

    your antiwar credentials are jeopardised by your stubborn disregard for logic and facts

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 11:22pm

75. "Maybe you just like to see your country degraded for some perverted reason. You need to separate your feelings of anger at the Bush Administration from your good sense."

    this is an undeserved slur, I'm used to that from the right, but I do not have to be accused of being a pervert by you

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/30/2005 @ 11:24pm

76. J: You have crossed the line when you refer to our troops in that manner.

    As you sit in your cozy spot.

    Bad manners my friend. You've just won "THE ASSHOLE OF THE MONTH" award.

    Congrats - you cold fuck.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 11:43pm

77. FRANKGRITS: I'm not so convinced about the higher ups. I've been in similar situations before. Orders do get confusing after being passed thru 10 layers of muck.

    But, I agree. The buck does stop at the top.

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 09/30/2005 @ 11:52pm

78. frankgrits:

    Having a son over there gives you a personal stake that I do not have. Thus, it would be cheap for me to say something like I understand where you are coming from, because I cannot. The anxiety you must face every day is most likely coupled with anger given that, on this board, you have made your overall feelings about the war very clear.

    As to the photos, I think you have a point that we all must admit has some amount of validity. I am not sure that anyone can say for sure that someone seeing these photos will not be pushed into acting against our soldiers. There might be some argument as to how widespread that reaction would be, but it is certainly possible that this could be the final straw that pushes a potential insurgent to take up increased violence. However, there are reasons for releasing the images that cut the other way. The American public needs to see these images, because it exposes the striking reality that resulted from the criminal leadership and policy initiatives handed down from the top. There are many who discount that actual torture went on (likening it to hazing), and I wonder if any of those people actually looked at the photos. Because if they had, I cannot see how they realistically get to that conclusion. In addition, whether the photos are released or not, what happened at Abu Grahib happened, and those atrocities are already well known to the insurgents and those who have some connection to individuals at the prison. This also serves to educate people about "why they hate us" to a large degree. Seeing what happened would hopefully allow us to step into the shoes of Middle Easterners to get a sense of where many of them may be coming from, and what sensitivities we should employ in our relations. Finally, we live in an open society and the freedoms we enjoy should not be highjacked by a fear of the forces that may oppose us.

    I hope your son makes it home safely and very soon. I am sorry that you have to go through what you must be enduring.

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/30/2005 @ 11:59pm

79. Personally, I don't think any of this is about the troops. I think some of you who now realize how completely gulled you were by this government, both republicans and democrats, are now looking for ways to avoid looking at what your refusal to deal with the facts of the war long ago has spawned. Yes, the troops are in the line of fire. And they're there because allegedly educated people let a charlatan tell them he's Franklin Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill rolled into one, a man who possesses all of the faults of the above mentioned, but none of their virtues. I think what we have here is classic liberal guilt. I think you all know you were asleep at the fucking switch, and now you're looking to make it right by supporting this criminal war. Well, you're not going to make it right, you're going to make it much, much worse. Because every day this occupation goes on is one more day the secular opposition that surely exists in that hell hole is driven back, and made unable to function. Of course everything's going to go to hell when the troops leave, because the government you've imposed upon Iraq is not an Iraqi government. People prefer their own hell to whatever outside "democratic" thinkers seek to impose upon them. That's human nature. People really don't object to change, what they object to is BEING changed by people who don't know anything about them.

    Learn from history. This is just a replay of Stalingrad. Stalin had nothing to offer the Soviet people, he had already destroyed socialism. But he was one of them, and so Hitler never had a chance in hell of defeating Stalin's government, however hideous Stalin was- and he was, in many ways, worse than Hitler. But the people of Russia preferred the devil they knew- and the devil who knew them- to any outside invader. And so it is today in Iraq. They're going to defeat the U.S. occupation. The insurgency grows weekly. Get used to it.

    As for supporting the troops, you might want to speak up for the veterans from the last Gulf War, many of whom are suffering illness from Depleted Uranium weapons. Some of those folks have even hit the streets, just as Vietnam veterans have for years now.

    Iraq Veterans Against the War needs support. Support the troops who saw what a pigs ear this mess is, and who are looking to keep other young people from getting hauled into this mess. There's lots of ways to support the troops. Why not support the ones who are trying to teach this country about the crimes that are committed in its name?

    Posted by Jayarjunyah at 10/01/2005 @ 12:24am

80. frankgrits:

    I do not take what you say as harsh at all. I think you make a good argument for not releasing them. However, following your line, doesn't protesting and speaking out against the war accomplish the same negatives you are talking about. Given that public sentiment for this war erodes as more and more Americans are killed, wouldn't protests based, in part, on the deaths of our soldiers result in the insurgents thinking that to continue this erosion of U.S. support, more U.S. soldiers should be targeted? Maybe you are not against protest in this same way, and there is admittedly a question of degree here, but I think it is a good question (even if it is a bit of a slippery slope argument).

    Posted by Hman23 at 10/01/2005 @ 12:31am

81. Good night frankgrits, sending good thoughts for you and your son.

    Posted by Hman23 at 10/01/2005 @ 12:51am

82. Yeah, I'm sorry about your boy, too, Frankgrits. None of these kids really asked for any of this. I suppose that's why I'm so furious so much of the time here. I've worked with inner city youth for years, so many of them fall into this trap, and it just isn't right. It's not right.

    Posted by Jayarjunyah at 10/01/2005 @ 01:05am

83. frankgrits, you are showing your true colors, just look at yourself.

    for everyone else's entertainment I offer this script.

    place: somewhere in Baghdad. dramatis personae: Ahmed and Mustafa, two Sunni Iraqis Ahmet:" so, Mustafa what do you wanna do tonight?" Mustafa: "Oh I don't know, but did you see the latest torture photos from Abu Ghraib?: AHMET:" Yes, I did, and they are more horrific than anything we've seen so far. Mustafa:" I say let's not go to the beheading tonight. let's blow ourselves up at an american checkpoint. Ahmet:" good idea, I was going to suggest a malted and maybe chat up that cute chador baby over there, but these photos turn my stomach, get that explosive belt and let's go.

    lights fade as the distant sound of an explosion is heard.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 07:46am

84. frankgrits, why don't you read the words of the judge that ordered the photos released, and while you're at it read the words of general Myers, who presented the government's case for not releasing them.

    then you can place yourself squarely in the camp of the Bush administration on this one.

    I think your selfproclaimed liberalism is mostly lip service. your posts have degenerated into, our enemy very bad.

    these are people who are blowing themselves up, for heaven's sake. an action none of our troops would take.

    they, the Sunni, 20 % of the population are fighting for their very lives, they have ruled Iraq, misruled one might say, and now, facing the might of the american military, they are being cut out of the country they have ruled for decades, if not centuries.

    that's why they are blowing themselves up.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 07:54am

85. frankgrits, when you're done puffing up yourself I will tell you another reason why the photos should be made public.

    one of the many reasons for this trumped up war was that Saddam was a torturer. this reason is being undercut by the fact that torture was encouraged by the leadership of the army and the government, read Gonzales on the Geneva conventions. the phony rationales for the war must be exposed.

    besides, there is no proof that the release of torture photos is in any way related to the frequency of attacks on the occupying army, or Shiite civilians.

    and that's the other problem with your argument. the number and the ferocity of attacks has increased, especially against the Shia, it's called a civil war, do you think they'll attack more Shia because of photos of americans torturing Iraqi prisoners? of course not

    you're running on pure emotion here, and when that happens logic and rational discourse go out the window

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 08:04am

86. pridebaaby:J: You have crossed the line when you refer to our troops in that manner.

    As you sit in your cozy spot.

    Bad manners my friend. You've just won "THE ASSHOLE OF THE MONTH" award.

    Congrats - you cold fuck.

    Johannesrolf: Kachunk

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 08:13am

87. as for the opobrium I have received for my posts, I am used to it, you see I also post on right wing blogs, and they get around to harsh words and invective much sooner. like the dentist I seem to have touched a raw nerve

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 08:18am

88. frankgrits, good to know which side you're really on

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 08:59am

89. pridebaby, you're accusing ME of bad manners? don't bother a reply, I won't see it

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 09:25am

90. don't you hate being the last post on a thread?

    flush from my last play, see above, I would like to offer one more.this one is inspired by the news that Al Quaeda's number two was killed in Iraq.

    scene: a safe house of Al Quaeda somewhere in Baghdad

    dramatis personae: the leadership cadre of the infamous terrorist organization

    action: they have just drawn straws, with the short straw coming to Ahmed

    Al Zarkawi:" that's it, Ahmed, you are now number two

    Ahmed:" Oh no not me, please I beg of you, I have a wife and kids, no not me, by the prophet's beard...

    lights fade as the protestations of Ahmed are heard in the background

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 1:05pm

91. JOHANNESROLF says he has put me on his ignore list. Does he think I won't still respond to his babble? He won't be able to see what I'm saying but everybody else will.

    How stupid is that?

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 10/01/2005 @ 2:09pm

92. USAPRIDE, Well, you was rather offensive. What do you expect?

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 10/01/2005 @ 2:40pm

93. thank you Ilovephysics,

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 2:46pm

94. Just read the whole blog and forgive me for repeating myself but king George was NOT elected twice.He was appointed by the Supreme Court after LOSING the election in 2000.Seems like there was a big mess in Florida's count(surprise surprise his brother's state)2004's election is still being questioned because of redistricting problems?And even with the questions he only got it by 51%.Went back again-it was Poseidon who thinks the king was elected.Pride probably does too but he sounds like the kind of person who really doesn't care how the king got where he is.Poseidon sounds like he cares.

    Posted by BusyHands at 10/01/2005 @ 3:44pm

95. Johannesrolf I have a theory on why the right wing blogs turn to profanity more quickly then left ones do.I believe it's because they don't know what to say when confronted with any truthful statements so they scream profanity in frustration.Their party gives no logical explaination for doing what they do other then GREED and that's hardly a come back for some poor little blogger trying to defend the oh,so moral conservative?right wing.

    Posted by BusyHands at 10/01/2005 @ 3:50pm

96. Holy crap. I'm gone 2 days, and you guys post a lot. Guess I am in for an interesting night of blog-reading.

    Posted by jorcheim at 10/01/2005 @ 4:05pm

97. frankgrits, just a correction of fact. Lt. Calley was tried for the My Lai massacre during the vietnam war not after as you asserted above. look it up, I did.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 5:09pm

98. busyhands, you are of course correct, and not just the right wing unfortunately, see above. welcome back Jorcheim, I hope you enjoy

    Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 5:11pm

99. I have to confess that I was pretty surprised that Bennett has a talk show. What does a Republican have to do to lose his party's respect? I ask sincerely. Petty Crime--Liddy; Major Crime--North; Hypocrisy--list too large to list.

    Greater context: "Addressing a caller's suggestion that the 'lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30 years' would be enough to preserve Social Security's solvency, radio host and former Reagan administration Secretary of Education Bill Bennett dismissed such 'far-reaching, extensive extrapolations' by declaring that if 'you wanted to reduce crime ... if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down.' Bennett conceded that aborting all African-American babies 'would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do,' then added again, 'but the crime rate would go down.'

    I would like the full transcript, but if you care to place these in a context that doesn't make you nauseous, I'm all ears.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/01/2005 @ 7:46pm

100. Sorry, failed to list source: www.mediamatters.org/items/200509280006

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/01/2005 @ 7:48pm

101. What I find so curious about Bennett's comment is that it takes absolutely no account for white collar crime. I mean, seriously. Couldn't you also make the argument that if you wanted to get rid of insider trading, lying to the country to get us to go to war, etc, you could just abort all the white babies as well, especially those born to families who have considerable sums of wealth?

     Just playing devil's advocate, here...

     Posted by jorcheim at 10/01/2005 @ 9:45pm

102. Actually if you were playing devil's advocate, you would be supporting whatever Bennett said.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/01/2005 @ 10:30pm

103. TJBEHRENS1:

     I think any position that supports abortion of an entire class or group of people is pretty much a devil's advocacy. But that's just me.

     Posted by jorcheim at 10/01/2005 @ 10:38pm

104. Here's the thing. Most of us here, left and right, are not stupid, irrational, or evil. We might write things that are over the top for purely argumentative reasons. Yet, who would put themselves in the position of arguing for the extirmination of a race in our country? Who would be so pathologically stupid? I want to explode every time I hear some jackass right winger have to explain him/herself or, worse, have someone else explain that those who have heard or read his/her comments are at fault for having a complete understanding of the English language.

     It's not just foolishness, it's wrong. And it's going to get ugly if these fat, stupid SOB's continue to think they can spout out their gibberish with no repercussions. If Bennett has issues, he should take them out at a craps table; O'Reilly can go have his loofah sex; and Limbaugh can pop whatever it takes to send him to his happy place.

     Whew! Now maybe I can sleep tonight.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/01/2005 @ 11:23pm

105. hey Frei, I have seen the context and the statement is still just as abhorrent, as is anything coming from that fat fuck. but it sounds just like something you would applaud.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 11:23pm

106. Geez, is it that late on the East Coast that I no longer remember how to spell extermination? Could be the Cabernet flowing through my fingertips.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/01/2005 @ 11:24pm

107. alllow me to play Bennet for a moment: if you lined up the entire administration and most of the congress and shot them, the country might have a chance for a future, see it's so easy, anyone can do it, I'm sure everyone would agree, right frei?

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 11:26pm

108. No, no, Johannesrolf. We're talking abortion, not murder. Please limit your elimination of a sector of our country to fetuses.

     What I especially like is the fact that abortion becomes acceptable if one person gets to pick and choose the pregnant women to send to the clinics. Perhaps we could just look at political party affiliation as a means of "cleansing" the country of potential future damage. I'm looking at you, Jenna and Barbara...

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/01/2005 @ 11:42pm

109. TJ, the Bennett comment had nothing to do with abortion as an issue, it had everything to do with racism

     . Bennett is the worst kind of hypocrite, a moralizer without morals,

     we have seen his kind many times before, they are usually exposed as sinners extraordinaire, just as Bennett was exposed as a gambling addict, out of control, lecturing others on how they should control their lives. despicable is the word that comes to mind.

     and those that defend this lowlife, besmirch themselves, and frankly I am tired, tired of Freiheit, one without moral compass, and the mouthpieces mindlessly repeating slogans, like love liberty and usa pride,

     I am tired of the rectionary warmongers, such as cpt and rio bravo, who cares what you write, you haven't had an original thought in years, as is obvious to anyone who reads these posts,

     sie koennen mich alle am arsch lecken, get Frei to translate it for you.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/01/2005 @ 11:54pm

110. I know enough German to say both "yuck" and "you go, Johannesrolf". I didn't just pick a German name; mine was inherited.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 12:03am

111. Agreed,the pictures of the prison abuses is wrong for many reasons the main one being the potential for retribution.I do believe there is a place for pictures in the news.America needs to see the damage the war is doing.Reading or listening to a news anchor give a number of dead or wounded just doesn't get through to some people.Pictures leave an imprint on the brain.WITHOUT showing faces or naming names I think the pictures of what is really going on there should be put on the front pages daily to remind the "silent majority" of the slaughter they are endorsing.

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/02/2005 @ 12:36am

112. Maybe if we abort all babies, in another 75 years the crime rate will drop to zero and as a bonus, mankind will no longer be contributing to global warming, with the exception of the gasses released from decaying corpses.

     I wonder why Bill Bennett didn't propose that?

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 10/02/2005 @ 12:52am

113. Guiles says we would be submitting to blackmail and maybe so.But if you had a son or daughter there you'd be amazed what you would submit to in order to keep them possibly a little safer.Speaking of safer,since we've already strayed way off subject of Mr.Rothberg's article,do you know if the soldiers have been re-imbursed for the armour they had to buy out of pocket?Any comments on that from the "silent majority"?Someone way back was telling us how many troops we have here and there.I wonder how many of them are paying for their own supplies and if they were told before they went that they would have to supply themselves.

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/02/2005 @ 12:52am

114. FREHEIT - Go watch Rashomon. Then maybe you won't ask such questions anymore.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 10/02/2005 @ 12:53am

115. Freiheit there's little left to the imagination when you see a bloody young man with his leg blown off. How could a photographer doctor a picture like that or any of the other horrendous things that war brings.

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/02/2005 @ 12:55am

116. Pictures of fetuses would indeed be very distressing but it would do nothing to bring the reality of the war into the publics view.It was war we were discussing Bravo.Do you not think pictures of it would help people to see what's happening?

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/02/2005 @ 02:06am

117. bravo, a fetus and a baby are not the same thing. it is the right's technique to try to blur distinctions, which is one step closer to lying.

     an abortion is something that takes place in a woman's body, and if that is not a privacy zone what is. it is a decision between a woman and her doctor , period

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 08:36am

118. Frei, I have seen the context and it does not sanitize the racist comments, and I correctly surmised that you would applaud the comment, marking you as, surprise, a racist. now try to wiggle out of that one.

     and you are correct, the cumulative effect of reading the posts of people who have little command of fact and reason can be exhausting, I include the left, see my lengthy exchange with frankgrits.

     those with knee jerk responses are well, jerks

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 08:41am

119. bravo:Last time I checked there was nothing in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Torah, Holy Bible,

     it's very telling that you left out a holy book of at least a quarter of the world's population, the Koran

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 08:46am

120. frei, why don't you come clean and give us the reasons why you think Bennett's foul statement is so marvelous, this I gotta hear.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 08:48am

121. frei, you are correct, I was tired. it was actually a great day, what with the ballgame in the afternoon and a gig at night.

     now allow me to explain why I think Bennett's statement is indefensible and racist.

     it suggests, incorrectly of course, that only black people are responsible for crimes. the context does nothing to hide this.

     of course whites commit far more crimes than blacks because there are so many more of them. also the really big criminals, the Ebbers and Lays are white as well as being white collar criminals.

     I have seen Bennett numerous times on TV and I have yet to hear anything decent come from him. I also remember that he was appointed drug szar, a leader in what is called the war on drugs but which is really a war on people.

     now there's a "war" that deserves discussion. it's just as much a disastrous failure as that debacle in Iraq

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 09:00am

122. bravo, I suggest you leave out the bible, since it too has been used as justification for the murder of thousands. in fact is still used by general Boykin in that fashion. and it's not MY Koran.

     your sophistry knows no bounds. next thing you'll tell me a Zygote, look it up, is also a baby. no it's not a baby until it is born, and until then it is not the business of the state what happens.

     you and your ilk have little trouble with killing actual human beings once they are born, vide capital punishment and your enthusiasm for war.

     of course only a war that other people's children are dying and killing in, you yourself wouldn't dirty your hands, but they are bloodstained just the same

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 12:13pm

123. bravo, why you should besmirch a quite wonderful movie by adopting the title of which as your moniker is beyond me. as for your selfprofessed morality, noone is forcing any one to have an abortion, although in your case I might wish that your mother had availed herself of that option

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 12:18pm

124. bravo, I have stated this before, the socalled right to life movement is mostly about your right to interfere in other people's lives. this a privacy issue,

     the government has no jurisdiction over a woman's womb, just as it has no jurisdiction over your body, telling you for example that you must remove a tumor, also a living entity, according to your tortured definition.

     and your biblethumping rings hollow, that Jesus fellow was known as the prince of peace

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 12:23pm

125. bravo:"It is intresting that humankind has the ability to rationalize and justify taking innocent human life by making decisions based on limited scientific knowledge and all the while totally rejecting religious based moral arguments against doing so!

     no more war, right?

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 12:48pm

126. JOHANNESROLF,

     I'm starting a Democracy Dictionary. This has nothing to do with the democrats; this is simply a tool to use with the REpublican dictionary.

     My first word:

     Godians - those who call themselves "Christians," but ignore all of Christ's teachings for the Old Testament, "an eye for an eye" et al.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 12:55pm

127. woplock, this handle doesn't referr to italians, I hope

     seriously, right you are. are you familiar with "the devil's dictionary" by Ambrose Bearce? if not, pounce

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 1:06pm

128. woplock, we call them Christoids over here

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 1:06pm

129. RIO BRAVO regarding your 1:08pm post to Johannsesrolf,

     We have a single word in our household to indicate someone accusing another of something they regularly do.

     That word is "Pot."

     as in the phrase, "the pot calling the kettle black."

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 1:17pm

130. JOHANNESROLF,

     No hadn't heard of that dictionary...will have a look.

     Sorry to disappoint you, but yes. I am Sicilian. It started out as a punch at Political Correctness.

     I am a Sicilian married to a Polish man.

     The derogatory math (Combining the two) = wop lock....

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 1:20pm

131. bravo,"resulting direct argumentative assumption

     my what big words signifying nothing

     I have answered your equally verbose posturing, I repeat it's not a baby until it is born, and your socalled protection of unborn is hypocritical given your stance on capital punishment and war

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 1:24pm

132. frank, would it kill you to acknowledge my correction of your mistaken assertion of the timing of Lt Calley's trial?

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 1:25pm

133. woplock, most amusing, I myself am a big fan of Pepino, the italian mouse.

     I was raised, partly, in an italian american, lower, I mean working class household, and love to cook italian, making regular treks to little italy to shop, ah mortadella bella

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 1:29pm

134. I was raised in a Sicilian household even though my father was Anglo with a splash of Cherokee. :-)

     So when I say WOP...I mean it with the upmost pride.

     When my grandparents came here from Sicily, as they were entering Ellis Island, the local official told them that they could not keep their family name of "Drago" because it sounded to much like "Dago." So he, of course they didn't understand, changed their family name to "Dargo."

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 1:35pm

135. RIO BRAVO,

     All of us believe things that are immune to any logical or evidential counterarguments. Just consider yourself right and move on. The number of times abortion comes up as a "debate" on these blogs is ridiculous.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 1:49pm

136. TJBEHRENS1,

     Just to play "Devil's Advocate."

     Should the debate be about abortion or the death penalty?

     Or

     Should the debate be about how much influence churches - those who claim to be morality experts - have on our laws? Should they be allowed to lobby? If they should be allowed these things, shouldn't they be paying taxes?

     Just a thought that I have carried with me for a long time.

     The Constitution needs to be updated to our times - not stuck in a time when only "Christianity" was a force in the US. I feel as though we need absolute separation of church and state; after all, any parent knows that if you give them an inch, they will take a mile.

     May the words, "God Bless America," be struck from every politicians' lips. Shouldn't have "The Star-Spangled Banner" been our theme song after 9/11?

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 2:00pm

137. TJ, the abortion "issue" is almost always raised by right wing zealots, and they do need to be rubutted, an interesting turn of phrase

     the constitution was written by people of the Enlightenment, something the religious right wants to eliminate, enlightenment,

     and as the eminent historian Eugen Weber once explained to me: they were swimming in a sea of religion.

     nevertheless they made every attempt to keep religion out of government, insisting not only on freedom OF religion but also freedom FROM religion.

     they also insisted that the US was NOT a christian nation. and this in the middle of one of the preriodic "religious awakenings" which have occurred in this country.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 2:12pm

138. Looking back at RIO's comment "...all the while totally rejecting religious based moral arguments" and Johannesrolf's and Woplock's recent comments about religion makes it so clear that the non-religious left needs to speak loudly and clearly about the idea of morality. Of course, we understand that morality is not connected to religion but so many (and almost all of the rightwingers on this site) cannot imagine someone having a moral compass without strong religious beliefs. The Dem's are too caught in this religion trap to try to separate themselves--I think this is a big part of their problem. By embracing things such as religion and corporate power, they are unable to argue effectively against them.

     I still think there is room for the Greens or another party to make political headway by articulating a clear and moral message based on liberal values, divorced from religion. This can range from poverty and workplace issues to privacy issues and energy and environmental conservation--and more. The "Under God" issue and "God Bless America" thing bother me, but they are pretty harmless in comparison to the increased level of poverty and stagnation of working class wages we have seen in recent years. Certainly the left can come up with issues that most people recognize as more substantive than the "meaty" rightwing diversions like flag burning and the like.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 2:35pm

139. One thing I've noticed about pro-lifers is that they are hugely interested in taking care of the fetus up to the point that it draws breath as a human.It is wonderful to take care of a pregnant woman but then don't abandon them once their little bundle of joy needs food,shelter,education,a living wage,freedom to persue happiness and FREEDOM FROM ILLEGAL WARS.

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/02/2005 @ 2:44pm

140. clear that the non-religious left needs to speak loudly and clearly about the idea of morality

     Posted by TJBEHRENS1 10/02/2005 @ 2:35pm

     I agree with you totally. That wasn't my point. I guess I flubbed another one. I want absolute separation of church and state. "God" by any name does not belong in any of our text when it comes to the matters of state, but this administration has woven "God" into our government; therefore, a lot of the world's notion is that we are all Christians.

     I absolutely believe that morality has nothing to do with religion.

     Below...Rio to me:

     3.Who is your God?

     4.If you don't have one why should anyone who has one listen to you on any moral issue?

     Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/29/2005 @ 4:17pm

     "4.If you don't have one why should anyone who has one listen to you on any moral issue?"

     So you say that only God freaks have morality???

     YOu don't deserve an reply to this one.

     Posted by WOPLOCK 09/29/2005 @ 5:44pm

     Rio,

     Don't bother with Woplock. She is as she says a secular humanist. The only person she really believes in and trusts is herself. As you noted, this so-called "free thinker" is so consumed with stereotypes, it is a wonder she ever can find a free thought. ...

     There you have it Rio; with Humanists like Woplock, we must bow before her greater wisdom. She has evolved beyond us since she no longer needs a higher power (God) to teach her right from wrong. LOL

     Posted by LOVE LIBERTY 09/29/2005 @ 5:15pm

     I have only posted about religion because I realize that with this administration, God is "charted" in.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 2:55pm

141. TJ and Busy, of course you are right. that flagburning thing is always brought up by the right, red meat for their base, and base they are. the under god is a minor blip, again fanned flames by the right. it is they that exploit these hot buttom issues for ther rabid followers, and rabid they are. the class warfare issues are far more important. the problem with class warfare is that we have been on the losing end for a long time

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 2:57pm

142. woplock, I wouldn't pay much attention to love liberty. they confuse morality with piety, a confusion Jesus warned against repeatedly

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 3:00pm

143. woplock, the writers of the constitution were humanists, not a reverend among them, also not a working man among them, rich property owners all, Washington a land speculator and slave owner, was one of the richest presidents ever.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 3:05pm

144. If the top 2% have their way, the middle class will disappear.

     Happening here in S. Florida now.

     The rich are "gobbling" up any land within a few miles to the coast, leaving the west, mosquito filled everglades to those who can afford to stay. Our house happens to lay in the coast zone. We have watched our house climb in market value over 600% in the last 5 years, and we have watched our taxes climb, and insurance become unbearably high. That is not a type O or an exaggeration. Of course, that makes it appear that I have some wealth, but the fact is that it is not liquid and is totally useless to me down here. After all, if I was to sell and to rack in that profit, where would I go? I would have to move out of state, which would please them immensely. I don't live here because I love Florida; I live here because my health needs Florida.

     I imagine things are the same in other larger cities, ie NY, San Fransico, etc. Rid these places of the middle class; work your poor till they die - "no one will miss them, since they are welfare, lowlifes, who wouldn't know work if it hit them in the face, lazy, no good sponging off of the taxpayers scummaggots."

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 3:10pm

145. I do agree with you, WOPLOCK, on bringing the government out from under the blanket of religion. But if this is an immediate goal, I don't think it will get any traction. If we deal with the more earthly issues first and show that there is a morality that exists independent of Christianity's various modes of morals, then the issue of religion's destructive intertwining with the government can be discussed.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 3:16pm

146. A woman gets pregnant and she is unable to provide for the baby after birth, so she gets an abortion.

     But, if we outlaw abortion and she is "forced" to have the baby, the baby will be abandoned by the mean 'ol republicans once it is out of the womb.

     Here's the answer. Don't get knocked up! Why does a women's right to choose only concern abortion. How about exercising some responsibility 9 monthes earlier and say no!

     Why make your pathetic decision making skills a part of my life?

     Posted by USAPRIDE at 10/02/2005 @ 3:29pm

147. TJBEHRENS1,

     Sorry...I misunderstood you.

     I just don't know how any movement will clear through the injustices that have been piled on us. The word itself, liberal, has such a negative value...even words such as humanity, have a negative value. But this isn't anything new. The right has used that word in derogatory fashion since Vietnam, and it has somehow "took." I guess we need to coin our own words, or use propaganda to change attitudes, but then we wouldn't be any better than they are.

     I wish I could believe as strongly as you do that things can change in my lifetime. In the future, yes, but my lifetime, I can't see it, unless the Bush administration has hurt the right so bad that they see the light (couldn't resisit the pun), I can only hope that your vision is right. We will learn a lot in 2006 elections.

     All I can think to do is to volunteer to register voters. With only 51% of the VAP voting, I feel as though we have to take the democracy back first. I know that I am only one person, and that I cannot possibly register enough voters to significantly change that figure, but I can hope that others will be doing the same.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 3:30pm

148. woplock, the situation that you describe is another downside of the housing bubble. this takes place all over the country, Seattle for instance has the same situation, my in laws, retired, have seen their taxes increase dramatically, and there too the socalled increased value of their house avails them nothing as they have no intention of selling their house.

     in my situation it is actually far cheaper to rent than own, even taking into account the tax advantages of ownership. but then I have to constantly fight a rapacious landlord, to get him to provide the services he is required to by law.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 3:32pm

149. I lived in So. FL for one year in the late '90s (Hollywood). I loved living there--the beach, the weather, the cute and vibrant downtown. But the people were just ugly. Selfish, stupid, in-your-face cruel sometimes. But at least it makes for interesting Carl Hiaasen books.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 3:32pm

150. Here's the answer. Don't get knocked up! Why does a women's right to choose only concern abortion. How about exercising some responsibility 9 monthes earlier and say no!

     Why make your pathetic decision making skills a part of my life?

     Posted by USAPRIDE 10/02/2005 @ 3:29pm

     LOL...this is so funny!!

     I have kids that their father doesn't pay support on. And I don't receive welfare. I don't think anyone should even begin to open their mouths until they have traveled in someones shoes.

     Has science made it possible for men to get pregnant? Try this exercise...take your foot and shove it in your mouth.

     Hell yes, I am mad. I don't lose it that often.

     Aren't you glad you are the one that finally did it???

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 3:33pm

151. A woman gets pregnant and she is unable to provide for the baby after birth, so she gets an abortion.

     But, if we outlaw abortion and she is "forced" to have the baby, the baby will be abandoned by the mean 'ol republicans once it is out of the womb.

     Here's the answer. Don't get knocked up! Why does a women's right to choose only concern abortion. How about exercising some responsibility 9 monthes earlier and say no!

     Why make your pathetic decision making skills a part of my life?

     Posted by USAPRIDE 10/02/2005 @ 3:29pm | ignore this person

     Oh I missed something...

     Didn't know women got pregnant on their own.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 3:35pm

152. I had thought that abortion might be a complex issue, combining science and morals. I realize it is a much more simple matter, thanks to USAPRIDE. Stupid, whorish women!

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 3:37pm

153. Should the debate be about how much influence churches - those who claim to be morality experts - have on our laws? Should they be allowed to lobby? If they should be allowed these things, shouldn't they be paying taxes?

     The Constitution needs to be updated to our times - not stuck in a time when only "Christianity" was a force in the US.

     Posted by WOPLOCK 10/02/2005 @ 2:00pm

     I have to disagree with you, dear. Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

     But if you can get an ammendment passed to change the first ammendment, more power to ya!!! However, I would certainly start feeling uneasy if you succeeded. After all, repealing freedom of religion doesn't bode well for atheists. I could wind up forced to go to some government church at 6AM Sunday morning. No thank you...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 10/02/2005 @ 3:39pm

154. TJBEHRENS1,

     The people are still "ugly." The money here so vulgar.

     Another point that needs to be addressed is the minimum wage. I like to call it: Legalized slavery without benefits.

     Even the military has a cost of living allowance for it's people -- it's not great, but it's something.

     Should the minimum wage reflect the cost of living for that area?

     Even the rich have to admit that they need their minimum wage people. HOw else did they get rich? and who would wash and vac their BMW's?

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 3:40pm

155. WOPLOCK: Your reponse makes no sense whatsoever. What the hell are you talking about?

     What does your deadbeat, wet dirty dish-rag of an ex-husband have anything to do with abortion.

     Are you saying your life would have been better if his parents had aborted his lame ass. Or, are you saying it was "his" fault that you got pregnant?

     Posted by USAPRIDE at 10/02/2005 @ 3:44pm

156. Why make your pathetic decision making skills a part of my life?

     Posted by USAPRIDE 10/02/2005 @ 3:29pm

     Likewise stop making your pathetic decision-making skills part of the lives of women you don't even know. Just because you made a bad decision and became an anti-abortion fanatic doesn't give you the right to force your bad decision on half the population!

     You rightwingers need to start practicing what you preach.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 10/02/2005 @ 3:44pm

157. frei:"Deines Erachtens ist mir Wurst

     this is godawful german, did you use the computer to translate english to german?

     this out of context thing is a canard, as I have repeated, context or not it is a racist statement and as you are defending it, that makes you a racist too.

     take a look at that statement, do you really want to stand behind that? if you are not defending it what are we talking about.

     can I put it in the vernacular for you? niggers are criminals, ergo aborting black fetusses, or is it feti, lower crime rate. you may try to explain how the context sanitizes that statement, so far you have not, but like a broken record you have repeated, out of context, out of context

     if you support a racist statement that makes you a racist, simple as that. just convince me otherwise, but easy on the lousy german, that's my mother tongue you are abusing,

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 3:51pm

158. I have to disagree with you, dear. Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

     ILOVEPHYSICS,

     That is not what I meant. Geeze I'm running a full blown flubber day! Probably due to lack of sleep, and the fact that my mind travels faster than I can type... LOL

     Most people are under the idea that the Pilgrims came here for religion freedom, but in actuallity they came here to escape religious persecution, in other words, they came here to practice their religion freely, but that doesn't mean that they supported other religions..they didn't. (It's American Lit -- writtein by their own pilgrim hands ... to those who want to dispute...go read.)

     Yes, I do believe in the first ammendment, although I practice no religion. What I want to see is the complete separation of church and state meaning that no doctrine, no speech from any politicians' mouth, should have "God" in it. No disaster is going to be sung about by "God" tunes. Even in our court of law, we swear by the Bible, which of course means nothing to anyone but believers. WE swear oaths by God. AS in the Laramie Treaty with the Dakota natives, but we still stole their lands and massacred their people.

     Nobody's "God" has any place in government or law.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 3:52pm

159. USAPRIDE

     I'm over you.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 3:53pm

160. Nobody's "God" has any place in government or law.

     *Nobody's "God" has NO place in government or law.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 3:56pm

161. Please, spare me. Nothing I've stated has been off mark - only common sense and fact. My Dad left my Mom to raise 3 sons. He sent money at first, but that soon stopped. As the oldest I did everything I could to help my Mom. I know what it's like to live in a broken home.

     Let me also add, My Dad is probably the best freind I have in the world. We all make mistakes. None of us are perfect.

     My wife of 23 years also came from a broken home. We've had our bad times but have always kept the family unit in tact. We have taken responsibility for what we've created. No excuses, no handouts, we have always accepted responsibilty for our actions.

     From the responses you all have posted I can see that bleeding heart liberlaism is alive and well.

     Posted by USAPRIDE at 10/02/2005 @ 4:00pm

162. TJ, your blanket condemnation of certain Floridians is an ugly slur and unworthy of you. you are insulting your own intelligence here

     Woplock, don't get excited, just ignore usa pride, a filthy mouthed ignorant toad, Kachunk and he's gone and you may then resume discussing with more or less reasonable folk

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 4:02pm

163. oh Frei that is really low, unworthy even of someone with your limited intelligence and perspectacity

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 4:04pm

164. Pride what are you going to do about all those pharmacies that refuse birth control--outlaw sex???

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/02/2005 @ 4:04pm

165. this supports my point more than it does yours, Frei. in context or out, that was a racist statement, as is Bennet's. so don't be coy, are standing behind what Bennett said or not

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 4:07pm

166. Johannesrolf,

     All I can say is you weren't there. I am not condemning all residents of So. Florida; it just happens to have more people per capita who are willing to toss insults to complete strangers than any other place I've lived. Perhaps I need to get out more, but until you've walked in a man's shoes...

     Freiheit,

     Would you please post the quote in its proper context so that we can stop this bullshit argument?!!

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 4:11pm

167. And while I'm on a roll,

     USAPRIDE,

     The only point that WOPLOCK was trying to make earlier is that you seemed not to take the semen provider into account when you blamed women for getting pregnant. If this site were more advanced I could demonstrate this process with a diagram. But as a man who values "common sense" I assume you can understand that when man meets woman and fertilization occurs, the blame and responsibility should not entirely with only one of those parties. As a dude myself, I get a little creeped out by other dudes blaming chicks for things that they are only 50% responsible.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 4:15pm

168. Johannesrolf,

     All I can say is you weren't there. I am not condemning all residents of So. Florida; it just happens to have more people per capita who are willing to toss insults to complete strangers than any other place I've lived. Perhaps I need to get out more, but until you've walked in a man's shoes...

     Freiheit,

     Would you please post the quote in its proper context so that we can stop this bullshit argument?!!

     Posted by TJBEHRENS1 10/02/2005 @ 4:11pm

     TJ is right, and I said the same, but I think most understand that we didn't mean the entire population.

     This is nit-picking to avoid the issue.

     Should we check everyone's writings on this board to make sure that every t is crossed and i dotted?

     Or should we concentrate on content?

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 4:17pm

169. Bushy: No, I encourage "personal responsibility"

     Is any of this sinking in?

     Or do you think it's your right to get a nut and the gub'ment should take care of your right to a night out on the town and anything that could result because of your lack of responsibility!!!

     Posted by USAPRIDE at 10/02/2005 @ 4:20pm

170. Bushy: No, I encourage "personal responsibility"

     Bush and Personal responsiblity should NEVER be in the same line.

     And the fact that you call "male ejaculation" a nut tells me a lot about you. He's called my ex, and he thought women should have a flat head and turn into a six pack at midnight.

     I know you...so transparent.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 4:26pm

171. FREIHEIT,

     Pay attention: I asked for the context. I can even ask for any context that you feel absolves Bennett of racism in his comments. Make up a context if you like. But the only quotes I have found are a little difficult to stomach, much less justify.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 4:33pm

172. WOPLOCK: You are mistaking me with your dish-rag ex. Did he smack you around? Was he a drunk, loud, uncaring asshole? That's what happens, you made a huge life mistake and now all men are evil. Get over it. Put it behind you, move on. You and the kids have only so much time together in this life. Do not dwell on the past. Get on with your life. Bitterness is a crutch.

     If he was, I'm sorry you were subjected. I'm very sorry if your kids were hurt in any way as a result of this jerks actions.

     Time to let it go and move forward.

     Good Luck!

     Posted by USAPRIDE at 10/02/2005 @ 4:43pm

173. Deregulate this…

     Georgie Boy stands at his pulpit Lady Liberty hidden behind Mahogany and velvet Sweat fills her eyes Cheney & Rumsfeld shoving her down and Delay is yelling while swinging his hammer "We should have knocked her teeth out! She's going to grind!"

     Staying the Course Georgie preens his smile waiting for the familiar flash As the pulpit begins to quake Rocking to and fro Georgie mandates "Quaking stop!" But finally Liberty Breaks free And Georgie's face Drops as his little head rolls.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 4:56pm

174. this space isn't made for verse... LOL

     Deregulate this…/

     Georgie Boy stands at his pulpit/ Lady Liberty hidden behind/ Mahogany and velvet/ Sweat fills her eyes/ Cheney & Rumsfeld/ shoving her down/ and Delay is yelling/ while swinging his hammer/ "We should have knocked/ her teeth out! She's / going to grind!"/

     Staying the Course/ Georgie preens his smile/ waiting for the familiar flash/ As the pulpit begins to quake/ Rocking to and fro/ Georgie mandates / "Quaking stop!"/ But finally Liberty / Breaks free/ And Georgie's face/ Drops/ as his little head rolls./

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 4:58pm

175. very awkward....but impromptu

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 5:00pm

176. What is sad, is that is by far the worse poem that I have ever written....probably the worse poem ever written, but it will get the most response out of everything good that I have written.

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 5:03pm

177. FREIHEIT,

     I understand your point and wish I could read the whole transcript with ellipses eliminated. I am often astonished by the things that come out of my mouth (and even sometimes the things that my nasty fingers create through my keyboard). But dang, that's just scary talk. And it goes to the heart of the left's criticism of the right, that its morality is no less "relative" than the left's yet it wants to believe that it actually serves as the mouthpiece for God. The fact that those words could even be put together in one's mind, much less uttered on the air, is so stupid, so--dare I say--uncivilized that it makes me one wonder just how desperate radio broadcasts are for mindless chatter. Makes Howard Stern seem like William Buckley.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 5:09pm

178. Too bad I can't draw...

     Would have been a better cartoon.

     Too bad I placed it...

     Now the world will know that I can't write.

     LMAO......

     "One loses many laughs by not laughing at oneself." .... Sara Jeannette Duncan

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 5:10pm

179. WOPLOCK,

     If you ignore-this-person USAPRIDE, I think we will all understand. We can let you know if he decides to drag his knuckles out of his cave. What a sad, heartless man.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 5:11pm

180. TJBEHRENS1

     Thanks, but it took twice to get over it.

     The last time worked. I worked it out in a very bad poem....but I worked it out. LOL

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 5:13pm

181. WOPLOCK, I was specifically addressing your question of lobbying by churches, and if they should be taxed if they are allowed to lobby. I was not talking about the separation of church and state in general, but rather the specific issue you raised.

     To me, taxing churches that lobby is a violation of freedom of speach and freedom of religion. It would be like taxing an environmental advocacy group or abortion rights group if they lobbied. Please don't confuse the issue with generalities.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 10/02/2005 @ 7:00pm

182. ILOVEPHYSICS

     I stand corrected. :-)

     Posted by woplock at 10/02/2005 @ 8:13pm

183. frank you're still weaseling, that was part of your point and you were fact challenged, there is no splitting of hairs in correcting mistakes of fact. d+

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 11:05pm

184. freiheit:"Here's my point. What Bennett said was abhorrent and horrible.

     you could have put this in your first post and saved us all a lot of trouble, all that tango with context. I saw the interview before you brought it up and I knew very well what the context was, and I don't need to have someone post it, as anyone can jes' look it up. I will let it rest with the above quote of yours, even sans context.

     by the way if you really want a good laugh get the computer to do some translations for you, hilarious, even from socalled respectable sources, german can be a hellof a lot of fun,

     as can germans old and young. the germans for instance have a thing about the composer Handel, who went to england as a young man, settling there, and anglizising his name to George Frederick Handel. after 200 or more years they still want to make him MORE german.but I digress

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 11:18pm

185. frei, you overestimate the entertainment value of calling something or someone a racist. you are somewhat of an agent provocateur, maybe you are the same person as love liberty, and pride usa.

     maybe a semiotic analysis of your posts will reveal your secret. don't have more attractive creeps over there on the right than Bill Bennett, disgraced snake oil salesman, huckster, olegenious,I thought that you had higher ideals

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 11:23pm

186. frank, it is you that sees things through a very severe prism, to the exclusion of logic. there is no arguing with emotion, I am a rationalist.

     I of course agree that Calley had little to do with your argument, I never claimed that he did.

     all I said is that you are mistaken, and your in your emotionalism you have turned on me like a snarling dog,

     it is you who have exposed your poor manners and I can certainly live without your discussion

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 11:28pm

187. Johannesrolf,

     I agree with your stance in this argument. It's hard to imagine the insurgents hating American troops more than before because more evidence of known bad activities are revealed. And it's hard to justify the repression of information about our activities in Iraq, particularly when the military had such a ridiculous grip on this information during the first several months of the war.

     Still...Frank's position is understandably different than this. I think that anyone who has a loved one in such a situation deserves a little slack on the logic front. Frank's no rightwinger; he's just a concerned parent. It's nice to see this. We have friends in the same situation. Their son just returned from his second tour in Iraq with the diagnosis of acute post-traumatic stress disorder. They are still convinced that his enlistment (after 9/11) was worth it. This is the point at which illogical thinking becomes scary.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 11:41pm

188. frank, you got pretty nasty, but I'll pass. you see we operated from a different premise, fact versus emotion, we have restated and restated.and let's hope we'll someday find something else to argue about, the final answer will be in continuing court cases, we'll see who will have the final word

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 11:42pm

189. TJ, you are a born diplomat, change careers this instant.

     you are also correct. many arguments can be projected to a slippery slope.

     when during the vietnam war, Ellsberg,

     that man is a saint I tell you, a saint,

     when he released the top secret pentagon papers, he was accused of treason and that his actions had harmed the troops.

     the truth is a sword of fire burning through everything which stands in its way, and I believe that the truth about the Iraq war will set the administration and the country on fire. the corruption inquries are also tinder

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/02/2005 @ 11:47pm

190. The sad thing is that sword of fire never reaches those who started the whole flaming thing. Who was fired because of Ellsberg? Who truly suffered as a result of Iran-Contra? Does Kissinger still walk the streets, looking for a cheap blonde to make him feel like a man?

     All the great investigative work by Sy Hersh, the Abu Ghraib photos, the phony intelligence, the Gitmo abuses, the increased violence in Iraq, the failure of each momentous day in the new Iraq to bring greater calm and stability, the corruption of Halliburton contracts, even the stupid fake stories of Jessica Lynch or Pat Tillman in Afghanistan: what will it take for something to stick, for someone to at least say, "Oops. My bad."?

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/02/2005 @ 11:56pm

191. may I butt in here with one observation. the enemy, the anti iraqis, they have known all about these atrocities all along, they were the first to know. it's a battle for the hearts and minds here in america, and if you think that not releasing damaging evidence is some kind of umbrella over the troops you are mistaken.

     they hear and believe much worse on Aljezeera every day you keep asserting that all the culprits have been punished. do you have any facts on this or is that a surmise, or wishful thinking.

     I don't think wishing the draft back is the way to go. and go away with national servicce, that all smacks of bolshevism.

     we have enough semi slaves already. in a town near mine, a smallish suburban house was home to 64 illegal aliens, the landlord was collecting $9000 a month, those guys were working in construction labor for $3 an hour.

     if that is not outright slavery it is at least indentured servitude.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/03/2005 @ 12:53am

192. frank, the second part of your above post shows you as a serious person, not for the first time certainly, my sincere compliments

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/03/2005 @ 12:56am

193. Does anyone on this site get sick of watching themselves argue with strangers?

     Posted by urmygyro at 10/03/2005 @ 08:39am

194. Does anyone on this site get sick of watching themselves argue with strangers?

     Posted by URMYGYRO 10/03/2005 @ 08:39am

     I think all those people quit coming here.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 10/03/2005 @ 12:07pm

195. Are we still arguing the pictures of prisoners?Since Frank seems to be the only one with a child in Iraq I can totally understand his stance on this subject.I suggest that those of us who can relate get busy and write our reps and urge them to use their influence to squash the pictures of prisoner abuse.While we are at it we could express our disdain for the abuse.Bush just recently refused to sign a bill that forbid abuse.What does that tell you about the great liberator?If this torture is used to get information why don't they use drugs instead?The torture is not only hurting the prisoners,it's doing a lot of damage to the young people encouraged to inflict it.Many of you may think writting reps a waste of time but the turn around of the cut on PBS proves that letters help.The only reason PBS is still receiving funds is because WE WROTE.Thousands upon thousands of us WROTE.

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/03/2005 @ 1:53pm

196. urmygyro, yes all the time, but it's a calling

     frei, the wurst part was clear, the other wurst part was how long it took you to condemn that statement. I imagine everyone else has long lost patience and fled this thread

     whenb they get bored enough elsewhere yhey may be back, physics

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/03/2005 @ 4:33pm

197. Thanks for all the spit on the inside of my monitor, Freiheit. German! Sheesh...

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/03/2005 @ 5:30pm

198. I have been watching this debate about Abu Ghraib photos with interest. I see this as sort of a "catch 22". The pictures can be used as a recruiting tool for Iraqi resurgents and even non-Iraqi terrorists. On the other hand keeping the photos under wrap will encourage this administration to keep other things secret under guise of "endangering troops". This can also encourage them to keep the soldiers over there indefinitely just to keep the photos from coming out.

     Posted by BillE at 10/03/2005 @ 6:05pm

199. can we get past the pictures of the actions to the actions themselves. did we ever think it would come to this.

     John McCain is doing himself a lot of good with his insistence on the highest standards, not the standards of our enemies

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/03/2005 @ 7:38pm

200. Mapplethorpe, you mean. Does the Pentagon enjoy looking at flowers and beautiful, black men? Tell me more. If we're going to distract from a serious issue to something that only a grumpy, hick fart from NC would worry about, let's get it right. Thanks to Jesse, we no longer fund the work of individual artists. This is a progressive country.

     The issue is that this administration (like most before it) will never "get to the bottom" of anything unless it is pressured to do so. I've come to believe that much of our national debt is due to the increased purchasing of large brooms and rugs. Somewhere, though, is a rug with a huge evil lump.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/03/2005 @ 8:51pm

201. Freiheit und Johannes rolf,

     Von wem haben sie deutsch gelernt?

     Posted by john maasch at 10/04/2005 @ 02:51am

202. Posted by john maasch at 10/04/2005 @ 02:51am

203. You must mean left bloggers because left politicians(most of them)are still talking about winning in Iraq.Politically motivated of course,what isn't in this country?Most of what any politician,Republlican or Dem.does is TO the country.When they do something FOR the country it's only because it might gain a lot of votes in an up coming election.

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/04/2005 @ 3:05pm

204. Adding to above: When the election is over they bend over backwards to undo the "good" thing they did FOR the country.There are a lot of hidden little ammendments in BILLS that we never see.

     Posted by BusyHands at 10/04/2005 @ 3:08pm

205. Hi Frei,

     This blog is about dead, but I wondered if you felt that the Pentagon had thoroughly investigated the Abu Ghraib matter and had corrected any systemic mistakes. They have managed to start punishing those foolish enough to serve as models, but I can't help but think that if we found ourselves in a similar situation in the next few years, the same thing would happen.

     But you should understand, that first and foremost, I hate America and expect the worst ;-)

     And Freiheit, I think you're as cool as any conservative I know. What the hell does that mean.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/04/2005 @ 5:59pm

206. maasch, german is my mother tongue

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/04/2005 @ 7:18pm

207. frei, your enjoying that anus bit too much, been getting your jollies from old Bob Mapplethorp?

     what that has to do with the subject is unclear, get serious frei

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/04/2005 @ 9:25pm

208. frei:"I believe this isn't really about the images, or the torture. It is about an agenda to undermine US efforts in Iraq by the left, because the left believes that the war in Iraq is immoral and illegal and based on a lie.

     so?

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/04/2005 @ 9:26pm

209. I was suggesting more homo phile, frei

     you seem to aspire to gadfly status, when you are really just a fly. you're just not serious, playing a kind of gotcha rhetorical game, while that may be entertaining for you it leaves me bored, and so Kachunk, I'm done

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/05/2005 @ 09:17am

210. Risky post: Have you ever really seen Mapplethorpe's photos, Frei? Yeah, he had his own, er, "quirks" and "tastes", but his prints are just beautiful. (He says with his can of PRB in one hand and his Penthouse in the other, with the MLB playoffs on in the background). Even Piss Christ is a pretty cool looking shot, though the title could have used a little work.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 10/05/2005 @ 11:50pm

211. Tj, you know of course that Pisschrist is NOT by Mapplethorpe, and yes, Bob's work is quite beautiful, homoerotic and otherwise, the flowers are divine

     Posted by johannesrolf at 10/12/2005 @ 5:10pm