[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> Richie, you've trumped me in the closed mind sweepstakes - I don't recall locking step with Bush on this board. But bitter liberals who profess hatred for Bush and the administration, and then expect their political views to be taken seriously are going to have to try a little harder. You're free to condemn Bush, but you'd better come up with a better argument than "they're only in it for Haliburton!" That stuff don't flush with the thinking classes. -- Scott Tilde - A mind is a terrible thing... and it must be stopped!, 18:50:49 04/08/03 Tue


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> You sound just like the "liberals" who you claim are nothing but bitter. No matter what I say, or any point I make, your answer would be "Oh you're just a Bush hater" instead of their line of "Oh you're just a Clinton hater" Clinton was a lousy President who cared nothing about the Constitution, Bush is a lousy President that cares nothing about the Constitution. But you and the Clintonites will never see it because you refuse to. -- Richiep, 20:22:01 04/08/03 Tue


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Richie, I'm getting your point that neither Prez is perfect. Being a 'small L' libertarian at heart, I'm not totally happy with either. But I maintain that Bush is far more accountable to the Constitution than Clinton. Unfortunately, both the Democratic presidents of my adult lifetime - Carter and Clinton, weren't stellar examples of accountability. Both sacrificed American security to political correctness. [click for more... if you dare] -- Scott Tilde, 00:55:14 04/09/03 Wed

I don't claim that all liberals are bitter. Colmes is a conversant liberal, but WABC's Richard Bey and Mr. Beggar, Jerry Long, are bitter liberals. They spit out nonsensical slurs and then become even more bitter when few take their rantings seriously.

Bitter Jerry exhibits a typical Vietnam-spawned fear of patriotism, as if it's somehow being forced on him. No, Jerry - feel free to challenge your country's perogatives without offering any coherent alternatives, but don't expect to be treated with principled deference when you spout this drivel. Be prepared to defend it. And if you can't, don't whine. It's pathetic to watch.


Let me parse a few of Bitter Jerry's more "profound" utterings:

"While Americans may not know the nationalities of the Sept. 11 hijackers, let alone the members of the Carlyle Group, we all claim to know what is or isn't patriotic in time of war."

Now, what are we to make of this nonsensical bullsh*t?

First of all, no one claims to define patriotism in a time of war. That's your typical liberal paranoia. Plenty of people feel that we ought to support our troops once the war has started. After all, the anti-war argument has been lost - we are at war. Polls show that a growing majority at least understand why we are at war and are comfortable with the premise.

We know that the majority of the September 11th hijackers were Saudi nationals, but I have no freakin' idea what the Carlyle Group has to do with anything. Has it occurred to this Sturdy Simpleton that Cheney and Bush were making how many million per year each in the private sector, and yet they somehow sacrificed that for, what, a couple of hundred thousand a year as Prez and VP? Hello? Just to "control the oil market by going to war with Iraq"? Do you have you any idea how intellectually bankrupt this crap is? Feel free to quote me something "Clinton haters" said that approaches the vapidity of this sewage.

Liberals are apparently trying to get their point of view on talk radio. Maybe they ought to start slow - try and take over for George Noory. Yeah, it's overnights, but it would be a smooth transition from UFOs to this stuff. After the majority of listeners become transfixed by the overwhelming logic, it's no doubt a short trip to overthrowing Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage.

More from his Sturdy Bitterness:

"Saddam is a butcher... but he always was. And it would have been nice if tough-talking Don Rumsfeld, during one of his early '80s grovels to Baghdad, in lieu of warm handshakes and canape nibbling, had shot him."

Yeah, it's tough when you have to choose between Iran and Iraq, but that's what we had to do back in the 80s. You remember the Ayatollah Khomeini? Those US hostages? The death fatwas? Remember that Jerry? Let's see if you can accurately pick the Top 10 Despots 20 years from now. Put your picks in an envelope, seal it, and I'll get back to you, you self-righteous facade of common sense.

I could go on, but I complained about verbose posts, and this is like shooting fish in a barrel. You get the point. (Or you don't, but if you don't by now, another paragraph isn't going to help.)

Bush stepped up to the plate. He made his case for this war, albeit with unneccessary embellishments which did nothing to bolster his case, but the case was solid enough nonetheless. I like Bush's impatience with the political correctness and ignorance of the UN and the EUnichs. They needed to have their anti-intellectual behinds rocked and that was done.

You can bet the world's going to be a better place for it. If that's Bush boot-licking in your book, then I plead guilty with pleasure.

It sure beats a random bombstrike and a stained dress, don't it?

~

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> I once watched their TV show and I was amazed that grown men in their 50s would be still be trying to imitate saturday night live, second city, monty python. Add that to the crappy production values and you have to wonder how much these guys have to pay the inquirer for space on their editorial page. -- Bring back Mort Sahl, 13:31:54 04/11/03 Fri


[ Edit | View ]

No, they were great!

Oh this is just great! Could you guys list your political affiliation when you shoot your one-liners out? Can anybody go two sentences here? What was good? What sucked??

[ Edit | View ]