How many hypocritical Republicans can dance on the head of a sex scandal?

POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 01:57
VIEWED: 2940
PAGE 1 of 1

NIKI2

Friday, September 11, 2009 6:17 PM

Yeah, another Mark Morford, but he's so GOOD at it!

Quote:
Spank me, then let's do lunch
By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist

In my more subdued moments of delighting in the pathos and adulterous whinings of incalculable greasy right-wing politicians, I oft wonder at the threshold, the limit, if there is some sort of karmic boundary that will eventually snap and recoil and strike them all down on the spot, some sort of grand tsunami of wayward justice that will sweep them all to the great Thai brothel in the sky after one too many gay lovers, meth addictions, adulterous affairs, teen boy fetishes comes to light and the world says, you know what? Enough of you. Back to the primordial slop you go.

It's a fantasy, I know, and an unrealistic one at that, given how there appears to be no mechanism in the reptilian political mind to allow for nuance, no space for notions of responsibility and consequence. It simply doesn't exist.

Really, half the GOP congressman in Washington could admit to a gay affair and the other half to snorting blow off the tailbone of a needy lobbyist/hooker/intern in front of a church on Sunday, and still the party leadership would say, gosh, that's too bad, what a shame, let us now respect the privacy of the families involved at this difficult time and leave them alone and hey by the way, Obama is a socialist tyrant who wants to indoctrinate your babies. Fear him!

So it is we observe the end of the puny political career of California state assemblyman Mike Duvall, R-Riverside County (AKA the dystopian wasteland of Orange County, to you and me), the classic chubby, glad-handing political slug if ever, boasting to a colleague of his rather gross sexual exploits with not one, but two different mistresses -- one allegedly a lobbyist with whom Duvall did regular state business -- on a live microphone he thought was turned off. Ah, technology, will you ever cease to bless us with your copious gifts?

The reaction to Duvall's recorded slop? Pretty much one giant shrug. Sure, he resigned immediately for causing a "distraction." Sure, everyone expressed their pseudo-shock and said the right things about investigations and repercussions and tsk tsk tsk. But even his colleagues stopped short of outright condemnation. And no one anywhere was really the slightest bit surprised by any of it. The truly astonishing thing is how such revelations don't ooze to the surface every single day.

Who by now doesn't see the massive hypocrisy in so many of GOP positions? Who by now hasn't seen the miles-long list of "ethics-based" Republicans who have gladly stuck their fingers into the socket of any power skirt who walks by? Another day, another "family values" Republican praised for his ethical fortitude but who's really about as moral as a cobra at a Mouseketeers reunion.

Of course, in your more cynical and wary heart, you know it's not just the Republicans. Such 'scandal' is merely SOP for Washington, sex and sleaze and hooking up pretty much the name of the game no matter your gender or party affiliation; politicos nailing lobbyists, senators nailing interns, aides nailing publicists, the corridors of power from the mayor's office all the way up to the Big House simply reeking with used condoms and grainy hidden videos and a thousand tubby Mike Duvalls spanking a thousand gold-digging lobbyists who have, it must be said, rather repulsive taste in men.

To imagine Washington as somehow slightly more pure or principled than, say, your average Midwestern frat house during Beer Bong Week is not merely naive, it's downright ignorant. Maybe the real question is why we insist on believing our elected officials are somehow more immune, more upright and just. Is it simply that we like to imagine we're being led by people slightly more thoughtful and wise than ourselves? Willful ignorance, thy name is America.

Of course, it's not merely our doing. The GOP squeezes its own thick layer of hypocrisy over the entire political landscape, making the stink that m

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

WULFENSTAR

Friday, September 11, 2009 6:24 PM

You know, the whole back and forth between Liberals and Republicans is kind of sad.

They set you up, only 2 sides, and you guys hack at each other while ignoring what really matters.

Makes me glad to be an Independent, a BrownCoat.

SIGNYM

Friday, September 11, 2009 6:27 PM

First of all, looking at this guy....

Eeewww!

There's only ONE reason to have sex with him, and that's to lobby for your special interest. But really... isn't that taking your lobbying job just a little TOO seriously? (OTOH, maybe lobbyists have prostitute mentality anyway, so bona fide SEX might not be too much of a leap.) Anyway, I get the "connection" between the Duvall and his energy-industry lobbyist/ hooker.

But AFA as hypocrisy goes, the question of the day is: How many hypocritical Republicans can dance on the head of a pen!s?

Quote:
Liberals and Republicans... really important

Hey Wulf, care to tell us again how important it is that IF Obama had not been born on USA soil THEN he couldn't be Prez? (Sorry, just couldn't resist.)

WULFENSTAR

Friday, September 11, 2009 6:30 PM

or how many hypocritical Dems...

Jesus.

Set up 2 camps, then let them have at each other.

NIKI2

Friday, September 11, 2009 6:43 PM

I'm registered independent and a lot of people did THAT recently, as well. I only lean so far left now because of the last eight years...prior to that, didn't like Clinton or many others.

It's not "partisan" in this case, tho'. For me at least, it IS the hypocrisy of claiming they had the lock on "morality", "family values", "religion" and so forth that makes it so funny. I know there are Dems who've done the same, but the hypocrisy of the right makes it laughablem, especially when you consider the row made about Clinton's indiscretion and Sanford saying IF he was ever in such a predicament, he'd resign. Now? Not so much; he's hanging on for dear life.

Got news for you, Wulf: If Dems claimed the sole ownership of the above, it would be equally funny if they were in the same predicament now.

Sig, you nailed it:

Quote:
lobbyists have prostitute mentality anyway, so bona fide SEX might not be too much of a leap[/quote}On ANY side!

(Like your crack to Wulf, too; very on point!)

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

SIGNYM

Friday, September 11, 2009 7:48 PM

Mark Sanford on resignation as the better option
Haggard on the evils of homosexuality
Duvall, Ensign, Stanley, Gingrich, and the whole “C-street” gang on “family values”. (What does the C stand for, anyway? )
Foley on child exploitation
Sarah Palin on abstinence

TO RWAers, this isn’t hypocrisy. It’s human failing. In order to get back into the fold, all you have to do is make proper obeisance to TBTB, cry big tears and promise that you’ll never ever be bad again. (But if you are, you’ll go through the whole charade again.) This is exactly the response that RWAers like Dobson expect from beaten children:

Quote:
“Spanking should be of sufficient magnitude to cause genuine tears.” Afterwards when the child crumples “to the breast of his parent, he should be welcomed with open, warm, loving arms.” “Tell him how much you love him.”

www.stoptherod.net/dobson.html

This is NOT about doing better. What RAWers really care about is having the sinner acknowledge the power of the hierarchy. Once you do that, you’re fine.

Non-RWAers expect people to "walk the talk": two entirely different goals.

WULFENSTAR

Friday, September 11, 2009 7:57 PM

Any time you Dems try and claim the morale high ground....

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/index.html

Screaming in the dark here... but they set you up, as 2 sides against each other... and instead of saying "Frak that, we want more options", you all bend your knees to 1 of 2 camps. And then try to claim the moral high ground.

Its like watching WW1.

BYTEMITE

Friday, September 11, 2009 8:06 PM

I don't like hypocrisy as much as anyone, but I also don't like the tone of this article. Private life is private life FOR ANYONE, whether or not there's a bit of homosexuality involved on the side.

Infidelity is really a very minor, and very PERSONAL infraction. Corruption is a far bigger problem. Sexual favours are a matter of public concern, everything else involving an affair is unimportant and irrelevant. Whether you're a politician or whether you're an average person, the public has no business in anything else.

I also call out the writer of this article for painting homosexuality as something unseemly if infidelity, abuse, and bribery/sexual favours are not involved. So long as there's mutual consent and public dollars aren't involved, I DON'T CARE.

WULFENSTAR

Friday, September 11, 2009 8:08 PM

Yep...

SIGNYM

Friday, September 11, 2009 8:22 PM

Quote:
you all bend your knees to 1 of 2 camps. And then try to claim the moral high ground.

Smile when you say that, you c*cksucking dick.

You think that just because we don't like Repub hypocrisy that we like Dem hypocrisy any better? Pull your head outta your arse once in a while, willya?

Quote:
So long as there's mutual consent and public dollars aren't involved, I DON'T CARE.

If you claim to be for one thing but do another AND you're in public office: I CARE AND SO SHOULD YOU. We have to have SOME trust that our politicans will do what they say. If not: off with their heads.

NIKI2

Friday, September 11, 2009 9:49 PM

Quote:
In order to get back into the fold, all you have to do is make proper obeisance to TBTB, cry big tears and promise that you’ll never ever be bad again. (But if you are, you’ll go through the whole charade again.)

Everything you said. And not only that, you get APPLAUDED for owning up to it (even tho' they almost never own up to it until its exposed anyway...)

Quote:
Non-RWAers expect people to "walk the talk"

Aw, c'mon, they get "defended" just as much, we just have lower expectations of them and it's less funny because they don't stand on their soapbox and say they've got a lock on morality.

Quote:
Frak that, we want more options

Huzzah! Doesn't mean I don't find the "holier than thou" hypocrisy funnier 'n hell when it's exposed.

Quote:
I also call out the writer of this article for painting homosexuality as something unseemly if infidelity, abuse, and bribery/sexual favours are not involved

Uhhh, that had to be a misunderstanding...Morford doesn't have ANY negative feelings about being gay. I'll have to reread, but he might have been expressing the opinion of the hypocrites...I KNOW he wasn't putting homosexuality down, from years of reading him. Ahh, I reread and I'm right; he's expressing THEIR viewpoint, that homosexuality is as bad, if not WORSE, than adultery, so it's hypocrisy to decry it then do it. Not his opinion, theirs.

Quote:
If you claim to be for one thing but do another AND you're in public office...

Yup. You want a public life, you're fair game in my book. Wouldn't give a damn myself if it weren't for the long-term, blatant hypocrisy.

Quote:
We have to have SOME trust that our politicans will do what they say

Oh, baby, do you still believe that?? I sure don't, but I get a giggle out of seeing them hoist on their own sanctimoniousness!

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

RUE

Friday, September 11, 2009 10:28 PM

Wulf

Do you EVER bother to get all the facts before you spew ?

Here is the latest:

"OWOSSO, Mich. – A man fatally shot an anti-abortion activist near a Michigan high school Friday, drove to a gravel pit and shot its owner to death and planned to kill a third man, but was arrested before he could act, a prosecutor said.

Harlan James Drake, 33, was charged Friday with first-degree murder in the deaths of James Pouillon, 63, and Mike Fuoss, 61, said Shiawassee County Prosecutor Randy Colbry.

"The defendant had ill will toward these three individuals — not for the same reason necessarily, but had a grudge," Colbry said."

So, it comes down to personal grudges, not an 'activist librul'.

Gad, you're such a douchebag.

***************************************************************

And that is after considering all the facts.

NIKI2

Friday, September 11, 2009 10:31 PM

Thanx for clarifying that, Rue. Amazing the place we've gotten to, where the shooting of someone is automatically assumed to be about a cause...sad.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

RUE

Friday, September 11, 2009 10:37 PM

EVERY single initial story said something different, which was a reason to wait for least a few hours to see what came out.

But they ALL said he had shot two people. The second person shot SHOULD have been a serious stumbling block for anyone (with half a brain) to assuming the one man was killed for his anti-choice activities. Because why then was the other killed ?

The fact that he had planned to kill a third man - a fact that came out shortly after they caught him - should have put the final nail in the coffin of the 'political activist' angle.

BTW - I could just as easily have posted that it's a case of one right-wing gun-nut going after other right-wing nuts, and pointing out how nice it is that they're going after their own.

I noticed something that Wulf does. He's not content to hate an individual - no, he has to extend his hate to whole GROUPS of people. So, for example, he can't just hate ME - no, he has to hate my 'ilk'. He can't just hate a violent man who shot two other men - no, he has to assume it was, and hate, left-wing hypocrites. He can't just hate the people who tormented him in school - no, he has to hate ALL blacks. ALL hippies. And so on.

The dude's got serious issues, not the least of which is the version of reality he carries in his head is not at all like the world the way it is.

Which is why he keeps saying there's going to be a revolution!

Any.

Day.

Now.

****************************************************************

Silence is consent.

BYTEMITE

Friday, September 11, 2009 10:57 PM

So when Bill goddamn Clinton was in office and most everyone on the left thought there were better things to worry about, and all the right was calling for blood...

Please.

You all were right the first time, there really are better things to be paying attention to. And that goes the same for the birther movement, too.

Homosexuality is not my concern, nor is someone's personal affairs. I said that if public dollars or sexual favours are involved that it's corruption, and that shit DOES need looking into, but otherwise, like I said, don't care.

People are going to be hypocrites. Everyone contradicts themselves at some point or another in their lives. That too is also minor, and not worth spilling vitriol at people for things that should remain private.

Everyone with a public life also has a private life. The PUBLIC life is fair game. Bills, political stances, all of that. The private life is an attack on their character and not relevant to the issues.

RUE

Friday, September 11, 2009 11:38 PM

"Everyone with a public life also has a private life. The PUBLIC life is fair game. Bills, political stances, all of that."

But then, people run for office on their PRIVATE lives. I am a promisekeeper. I am a religious person. I will stand against pedophilia. My religious position on homosexuality will define my public one. You can be assured that I will adhere to the same religious precepts you believe in.

I think that puts their private lives into the realm of public accountability. Though I agree with the important idea that SignyM pointed out - with people of a certain mindset, there IS no accountability required - just obeisance.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

BYTEMITE

Saturday, September 12, 2009 12:25 AM

Private lives with public accountability? What a scary thought. If you're scrutinizing someone for doing something... Well, cheating and infidelity is wrong, but I just see it as more something between the wife and the husband and the lover. But scrutinizing someone for something that isn't murder, abuse, or theft, if a public person's private life is fair game, then whose isn't?

I get where you're annoyed, and I get that these guys are cheating lying sleazeballs. I would just prefer looking at stuff that they could actually be charged with.

The only one I've seen so far is sex with a minor. Throw him in jail, play the bail-no-bail game for that, fine. The rest of them, this stuff just distracts from who threw them under the bus in the first place, and WHY.

SIGNYM

Saturday, September 12, 2009 12:36 AM

Quote:
So when Bill goddamn Clinton was in office and most everyone on the left thought there were better things to worry about, and all the right was calling for blood...

Bill goddamn Clinton didn't run on a platform of morality.

What I WAS pissed at Clinton for was not keeping HIS promises... like when he shoved NAFTA down our throats, and signed DMCA.

I hate being friggin' lied to, by EITHER side.

BYTEMITE

Saturday, September 12, 2009 12:43 AM

Fair enough. Personally I'm mad about the continuing efforts to destabilize the Middle East.

But those were public issues. On the private issues with Monica Lewinski, it was no one's business, and the investigation and CIRCUS was a joke and a sign of what the hell is WRONG with this country.

SIGNYM

Saturday, September 12, 2009 12:53 AM

I get what you're saying, Byte. But dwelling on the hypocrisy of these so-called "family values, Xtian conservatives" does, at times, wake up their RWA suporters to the fact that they're being lied to by people who do nothing more than put on a show.

FREMDFIRMA

Saturday, September 12, 2009 4:10 AM

Too bad we can't run this guy against Obama.

I'm only half joking - y'all are right about one thing, it's not that they're sleazebags that's so offensive - it's that they pretend not to be in the face of demonstrated evidence that they are!

That's one thing that bought Clinton such a pass, he was sleaze, but he was CHARMING sleaze, and he didn't really pretend he was holding the moral high ground so much.

-F

SIGNYM

Saturday, September 12, 2009 1:40 PM

OMG Frem!

This is the first time I've ever seen Shatner do something funny! What a hoot!

NIKI2

Saturday, September 12, 2009 3:38 PM

Quote:
it's that they pretend not to be in the face of demonstrated evidence that they are!

Quote:
wake up their RWA suporters to the fact that they're being lied to by people who do nothing more than put on a show.

But that's just it, they don't SEE it--remember the symptoms? Nothing will ever make them admit--even the few who DO see it.

The Shatner thing was hysterical! I've seen him do a lot of stuff I think funny...not because he's a good actor, he never was, but because I admire the man's willingness to make a fool of himself and not stand on his "iconic" pedestal. I think he's great (and mind you, I HATED him in Star Trek--exactly for some of the things he makes fun of himself now).

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

KWICKO

Sunday, September 13, 2009 2:53 AM

Quote:
The Shatner thing was hysterical! I've seen him do a lot of stuff I think funny...not because he's a good actor, he never was, but because I admire the man's willingness to make a fool of himself and not stand on his "iconic" pedestal. I think he's great (and mind you, I HATED him in Star Trek--exactly for some of the things he makes fun of himself now).

Bingo. He's a genius precisely BECAUSE he's made himself a caricature of himself. If you haven't seen him do anything funny, you simply haven't been watching. Or listening.

Shatner figured out a long, long time ago that he was no great thespian. And then he figured out that we're laughing at him, but that means WE'RE PAYING ATTENTION TO HIM. So he made a career out of it. He's laughing at us while we're laughing at him. The difference is, he's laughing all the way to the bank. My hat's genuinely off to the man as a true artist - just not in the way that he might have originally intended to be.

Shatner's a lot like Warhol. It's not that his "art" in and of itself is any great shakes; it's that he's such a consummate huckster and sham artist that he's been able to sell all the rest of us on the idea that he really IS that great. That is pure artistry, plain and simple.

Mike

"It was already blue when we got here!"

GEEZER

Sunday, September 13, 2009 12:32 PM

But back to real malfeasance-in-office type scandals. A new chapter in the Blagojevich cesspit.

Quote:
A week before one of ex-Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's closest advisers was to go to prison for fraud, the commercial roofing contractor died at a Chicago hospital, and the mayor of a town where he was found said the death was being investigated as a suicide.

An autopsy was planned Sunday for Christopher G. Kelly, 51, who was discovered Friday night in a lumber yard parking lot in Country Club Hills, a town just southwest of Chicago. Kelly died Saturday morning, authorities said.

http://wtop.com/?nid=104&sid=1761360

"Keep the Shiny side up"

SIGNYM

Sunday, September 13, 2009 5:47 PM

Quote:
But that's just it, they don't SEE it--remember the symptoms? Nothing will ever make them admit--even the few who DO see it.

Not entirely true. Every now and again, the weight of hypocrisy catches up with some.

Quote:
Frank Schaeffer, a former co-conspirator with Pat Robertson, Jerry Fawell, et.al. has written a book explaining just how the leadership of the Right Wing developed and and implemented a plan to inspire "crazies" to kill. In Crazy For God he takes the reader though the late night sessions where they planned the psychologcal method of incendiary rant, to be constantly repeated by - seemingly - different voices which was designed to convince any would-be assassin that God needed him to kill. It further explains how the rhetoric was to be done in such a way that the leaders and appointed speakers would have "deniability" following the fact. These tactics were also designed to create "Manchurian Citizens" able to be manipulated toward any end, and used eventually in an effort to take over the ballot boxes of the Nation.

Geezer... yes, there are trails of unfortunate deaths as a result of many scandals, including the Enron scandal and Iran-Contragate. More - much more- goes on than meets the eye.

NIKI2

Sunday, September 13, 2009 6:38 PM

Okay, yeah, I agree. Numerous people have come out since the end of the Bush Dictatorship to talk about what really happened, and there are other defectors from every cult, clan, and group who eventually see the corruption/idiocy going on around them and speak out. I'll give you that. But for the vast majority of idjits out there, hypocrisy blindness is a chronic disability!

And Mike, you nailed my feelings about Shatner to a "T". When they revived Star Trek he did say long, long ago, as it looks like you already know, that he knew he couldn't act. He found it amusing that he'd become such an icon and hey ho, figured out "why not go with it"? But that we could all be so honest about our abilities and laugh at ourselves as easily!

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

BYTEMITE

Sunday, September 13, 2009 6:59 PM

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LargeHam

KWICKO

Sunday, September 13, 2009 10:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Okay, yeah, I agree. Numerous people have come out since the end of the Bush Dictatorship to talk about what really happened, and there are other defectors from every cult, clan, and group who eventually see the corruption/idiocy going on around them and speak out. I'll give you that. But for the vast majority of idjits out there, hypocrisy blindness is a chronic disability!

You know what's sad, Nik? As many as have come out since the end of the Bush Debacle, it's still only been 8 months since he left. There are going to be more, many more, in the years to come. Too bad it took 'em so long to find their balls - um, I mean, their consciences...

The worst part is those left behind, who not only refuse to see the cult for what it is, but actively attack those who leave it and try to expose it.

Quote:

And Mike, you nailed my feelings about Shatner to a "T". When they revived Star Trek he did say long, long ago, as it looks like you already know, that he knew he couldn't act. He found it amusing that he'd become such an icon and hey ho, figured out "why not go with it"? But that we could all be so honest about our abilities and laugh at ourselves as easily!

Obviously you have never seen me dance. Think 6'8", 260 pounds, I have even less rhythm than your average middle-aged white guy, but I *do* still love to dance. I'm horrible at it, but I really don't care. :) This life is too short to not have fun as often as possible. I find mine in singing and dancing, no matter how horribly.

Mike

"It was already blue when we got here!"

GEEZER

Sunday, September 13, 2009 11:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Yeah, another Mark Morford, but he's so GOOD at it!

What strikes me as really funny about Mr. Morford's anti-capitalist rants is what's at the bottom of the page.

© 2009 Hearst Communications Inc.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 2:00 AM

You act as if you're surprised that Hearst would employ a liberal, or that they could be seen as "playing both sides against the middle".

Mike

"It was already blue when we got here!"

GEEZER

Monday, September 14, 2009 12:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You act as if you're surprised that Hearst would employ a liberal, or that they could be seen as "playing both sides against the middle".

Not really. It is nice of Mr. Morford to give Hearst Liberal cred. I'm also not surprised at the number of folks, like him, who rant that they hate Capitalism yet work for and buy from Capitalists. You'd think they'd have the courage of their convictions, and deal only with communes, etc.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 4:46 PM

Ahhh, Geezer, such a sad little world...you should get out of it more often, there's a big, wide world out here full of greys...and COLORS even!

Nobody will get any argument from me about the Hearsts--remember I've lived here most of my life. But the fact is that the Chron (SF Chronicle, home newspaper of SFGate, it's website) is vastly more liberal than most of the newspapers around here--well, the BIG ones, not the local rags, which can be downright scary left (!). If you'd read them on line at all, you'd have noticed.

Secondly, Mark Morford is DEFINITELY not anti-Capitalist...what a joke. Yes, he's left, quite left, but he's also quite willing to skewer anyone, anytime, for anything. He's a political SATIRE columnist...get it? Satirizing politics? All politics? And not even politics...he's gone after all kinds of stuff, from all corners of the world, and labeling him as you did is actually funnier than hell.

You should read his column "Down with crab cakes! Ban Whole Foods! On the ludicrous outcry against a brilliant, oddball CEO and his unfortunate opinion, that lefties are boycotting Whole Foods because it's CEO said basically he doesn't think most people actually deserve national healthcare, and how stupid the lefties are being about it. Or his rant about multivitamins and how we should, with today's technology, be able to create the one big pill we can all take to enhance EVERYTHING.

There's his joyous discovery of the iPhone in "New iPhone "totally 100 percent perfect" - Apple's 3GS device "completely and entirely without flaw or drawback," critics say", or "In defense of PETA's total stupidity - Who, pray who, will save the houseflies? And our sanity?", laughing at the idiocy of their outcry over Obama killing a fly.

There's "How to stay relevant - Technofreaky whipsaw culture leaving you in the e-dust? Try this", in which he rants

Quote:
See, this column is not merely about how to stay relevant and engaged in this slapdash snarkfest of a modern world just by forcing yourself, against your will and better judgment, to get over your curmudgeonly resistance to newfangled gizmos and social networking and things that go GoogleBingTweet in the night.

He writes about the evolution of hate mail, having attained the magic threshhold of 5,000 Facebook "friends", and lots more. Should I go on?

If anything, Morford is obsessed with sex; virtually every article contains some kind of graphic reference to sex, our bodies, etc. I wrote him in response to his request for friendly e-mail (given the above) and said I loved his stuff, and forgave him his frequent obsessive adoration of talking about sex and things sexual; he replied that he appreciated my appreciation of his column and forgave me for my lack of appreciation of his frequent obsessive adoration of talking about sex and things sexual. He's just plain fun, mostly.

You really should get out more. Or maybe bounce around on the web a bit to look into stuff before you haul off and label people, pigeonhole them and brand them. It just embarrasses you, even if you don't realize it.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 4:51 PM

Mike:

Quote:
You know what's sad, Nik? As many as have come out since the end of the Bush Debacle, it's still only been 8 months since he left. There are going to be more, many more, in the years to come. Too bad it took 'em so long to find their balls - um, I mean, their consciences...

The worst part is those left behind, who not only refuse to see the cult for what it is, but actively attack those who leave it and try to expose it.

Word!

As to your dancing, I could ramble on about a roommate I had once who was so two-left-footed my guy at the time gave up trying to teach him to folkdance (which we were both heavily into), but how I stuck it out and to everyone's amazement, eventually he ended up in the most well-known local professional folkdance troup. Never give up, never surrender!

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

STORYMARK

Monday, September 14, 2009 4:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
or how many hypocritical Dems...

Jesus.

Set up 2 camps, then let them have at each other.

How many Dems run on the family values ticket? How many have pushed to put legal limits on sexual behavior they then indulge in? How many Dems have spent millions and millions investigating a blowjob?

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 4:57 PM

Thanks for proving my point.

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, September 14, 2009 5:14 PM

Quote:
Set up 2 camps, then let them have at each other.

I can't... it just too EASY, *laughing*

Oh man, Mikey... your ball.

-F

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 5:15 PM

Oops, double post...

GEEZER

Monday, September 14, 2009 5:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Secondly, Mark Morford is DEFINITELY not anti-Capitalist...what a joke.

Being on the other side of the country I don't read the Chronicle or SFGate much. The two examples of Mr. Morford's work you've posted didn't seem all that ha-ha, funny, snarky. The America: Arms dealer to the stars! had quite a bit of anti-capitalist rhetoric.

"So it is that a new report has just emerged, announcing with a sort of drab and bitter capitalistic glee that America is once again the number one weapons dealer in the world."

"Sad fact is, capitalism trumps all rational arguments, all notions that we are out only to promote good in the world, and we will sell weapons to just about anyone anywhere short of Al Qaeda itself."

"...we are, at heart, a rather ruthless capitalist military juggernaut that will gladly sell a sharpening stone to an axe murderer if it serves our purposes and makes Lockheed Martin a tidy profit."

So, is this just Mr. Morford being humorous and really agreeing that capitalists selling arms creates jobs and pumps up the economy, or is it that you don't see the rhetoric because you agree with it?

And I notice you're picking up the usual Liberal tone around here: insulting and condescending. Too bad.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, September 14, 2009 5:34 PM

What part of Satire and Sarcasm escapes you, Geeze ?

Column flip, board goes white.

You really need to up your game or get new material, dude.

-F

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 6:26 PM

Quote:
And I notice you're picking up the usual Liberal tone around here: insulting and condescending. Too bad.

Show me the part of THAT response that wasn't supposed to be insulting and condescending. What a typical asshole Republican you are, Geezer.

Oh, and you think it's perfectly fine to sell weapons to mass murderers, then? I mean, you're a CAPITALIST, after all - do you have the courage of your convictions? Anything that can be done for a profit, SHOULD be done?

Mike

Old friend charity
Cruel twisted smile
And the smile signals emptiness
For me
Starless and Bible black

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 6:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Quote:
Set up 2 camps, then let them have at each other.

I can't... it just too EASY, *laughing*

Oh man, Mikey... your ball.

-F

Well, of those two "camps", only one of 'em has both a "big tent" AND a group calling themselves the "log cabin republicans"... They're also a favorite "camp" of Baptist youth ministers. I'm just sayin'...

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 6:42 PM

Ok... dont get the "camp" reference. Yeah, I know, its probably a joke at my expense... but a little news, please. It will help me in the future when I need to deal with juvenile assclowns to know what to be careful about saying...

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, September 14, 2009 7:27 PM

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CampGay

all hail the mighty nyquil an waitin for the coma to kick in.

-F

GEEZER

Monday, September 14, 2009 7:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
What part of Satire and Sarcasm escapes you, Geeze ?

Okay, Frem. Educate me. Read the "America: Arms dealer to the stars!" article and point out the Satire and Sarcasm.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 7:42 PM

Nope, the Arms Dealers column was very political, and as far as I'm concerned, everything you quoted was right on. The frequent references to capitalism were directly relevant to the topic: that because it makes a pofit (isn't that what capitalism is about?), the US is quite happy to sell arms to all and sundry. Where exactly did he lie, except to put in some adjectives reflecting his opinion?

As to

Quote:
And I notice you're picking up the usual Liberal tone around here: insulting and condescending. Too bad.

Well, it was sarcasm from my point of view, not condescension. To condescend, one has to believe they're better than the other person, which I don't. I've agreed with you at times, I believe, and disagreed at others.

What you posted was just such an overt and incorrect judment off of two columns;

Quote:
I'm also not surprised at the number of folks, like him, who rant that they hate Capitalism yet work for and buy from Capitalists. You'd think they'd have the courage of their convictions, and deal only with communes, etc.

that I couldn't help seeing the humor of your words. It's pretty snide and very partisan, and amused me that you can make such sweeping snarks of someone you know little to nothing about.

I firmly believe too many people who make remarks like that live in a black-and-white world, and snarked back at you. Fair is fair; and if you want to accuse me of the "usual liberal tone", you ain't readin', mistah. Some of the very nastiest, most mean-spirited, personally-attacking stuff I've seen here is from the right...if you can compare what I wrote as "condescending" and "insulting" to the downright crude and truly VICIOUS stuff I've seen from others on the right, be my guest, but you're waaaay off the mark. I have my own "line" which I will not cross, and your judgments of me mean nothing.

All in all, my main statement is that you were happy to make a huge leap from two columns to the man himself, and slur him and me, then have the temerity to judge me as well and brand me in your reply--I realize that's your point of view, but it's wrong.

As well, you showed absolutely no recognition of the fact I pointed out that Morford writes on many topics, and disses the left when he sees it as well as the right; instead, you defended your words by pointing out that one column was a politically-bent rant on our country's willingness to profit from wars as if it was incorrect, thereby deserving of condemnation.

Doesn't work. Actually, it's pretty hypocritical of you to even defend capitalism, with respect to the subject matter. What you denegrate him for seems to indicate it is YOU who agree "that capitalists selling arms creates jobs and pumps up the economy". That's a pretty weak stance, IMO.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 7:56 PM

Just for funnies.....

GEEZER

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
And I notice you're picking up the usual Liberal tone around here: insulting and condescending. Too bad.

Show me the part of THAT response that wasn't supposed to be insulting and condescending. What a typical asshole Republican you are, Geezer.

Well, you gotta admit I was right about the insulting Liberal part

. About the only Republican I've voted for is our local State Representative. Since I live in one of the most liberal areas of Northern Virginia (60% for the Obama/Biden ticket), and he's been in office since 1994, you should probably be able to figure he's about as moderate Repub. as it gets and does a good job on local issues.

Quote:
Oh, and you think it's perfectly fine to sell weapons to mass murderers, then?

Why? wanna buy some?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:01 PM

Yup, that's part of what makes them attractive to the right...hotness with no brains has always been attractive to middle-aged men, feeds their fantasies they might actually GET something like that (hah!). It's also a great way to manipulate people to follow your "cause"--give'em a hot woman, and they'll buy everything from motorcycles to government!

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:17 PM

Quote:
Why? wanna buy some?

Didn't even come close to answering the question...not even a funny dodge, just a transparent one. :disappionted: Feel like actually answering it? You've knocked Morford for writing a column saying capitalism trumps humanity in this respect--if you knock him, unless you explain otherwise, it means you agree with the statement...so?

Uh, point out the sarcasm and satire??? Sarcasm:

Quote:
Isn't that fun to swallow with your hopes and dreams for a peaceful and calmly evolving future?

Quote:
we only sell said weapons to our friendly, peace-seeking allies so they may protect themselves from various evildoers and swarthy terrorists whom we also detest and wish death and hate upon, or you could tell yourself that most of said weaponry is really for defense and for shielding babies and puppies and virgins from the darker nature of man.

Quote:
...will gladly sell a sharpening stone to an axe murderer if it serves our purposes and makes Lockheed Martin a tidy profit.

Satire:

Quote:
if everyone owns a few thousand warheads, no one will shoot anyone simply because they don't want to get shot themselves

Oh, wait, this is ridiculous; except for the out-and-out condemning comments, the entire ARTICLE is sarcasm. Did you actually read it?

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

GEEZER

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Nope, the Arms Dealers column was very political, and as far as I'm concerned, everything you quoted was right on... What you posted was just such an overt and incorrect judment off of two columns.

Given that they were the only two columns I've seen, also the only two columns you considered important enough to quote, can you understand how I might have arrived at that judgement? If someone posts a quote, do you regularly go back and read the author's entire body of work before you comment on it?

Quote:
It's pretty snide and very partisan...

Mr. Morford is also snide and very partisan. A lot of what is posted here, from both sides, is snide and partisan. You see it enough, it gets hard not to respond. maybe we need DT back for a while to referee.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:21 PM

I challenge the idea that most Republicans sat by while Bush encroached on the Constitution.

GEEZER

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Uh, point out the sarcasm and satire??? Sarcasm:Isn't that fun to swallow with your hopes and dreams for a peaceful and calmly evolving future?

Oh, you mean the little bits of Sarcasm and Satire, rather than the whole piece being Sarcasm and Satire? Thanks for clearing that up.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:25 PM

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
And I notice you're picking up the usual Liberal tone around here: insulting and condescending. Too bad.

Show me the part of THAT response that wasn't supposed to be insulting and condescending. What a typical asshole Republican you are, Geezer.

Well, you gotta admit I was right about the insulting Liberal part. About the only Republican I've voted for is our local State Representative. Since I live in one of the most liberal areas of Northern Virginia (60% for the Obama/Biden ticket), and he's been in office since 1994, you should probably be able to figure he's about as moderate Repub. as it gets and does a good job on local issues.

Quote:
Oh, and you think it's perfectly fine to sell weapons to mass murderers, then?

Why? wanna buy some?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

Well, ya gotta admit I was right about the "asshole" part.

As for weapons, I've got plenty. Haven't killed anyone with 'em, but there's always tomorrow.

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:33 PM

Quote:

Mr. Morford is also snide and very partisan. A lot of what is posted here, from both sides, is snide and partisan. You see it enough, it gets hard not to respond.

And then you cry when others respond. You're as snide and partisan as they come, so don't whinge about others playing the same game. You're becoming AuRaptor's doppelganger, with marginally better spelling.

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:37 PM

This is getting absurd.

Quote:
If someone posts a quote, do you regularly go back and read the author's entire body of work before you comment on it?

I repeat: what he said is true, it's not a measure of the man as being anti-capitalist to read a perfectly valid argument about the fact that it's bad that America is the #1 arms dealer to the world...?

Yes, I would go back and SAMPLE their work at least before judging them as distinctly as you did--an anti-capitalist liberal who should go buy from commies! I have looked into things in the past. I've also gone to websites referenced in quotes and checked out the website to see if it's badly slanted or contains lies. Me, I would have said "this article..." or "IN THIS ARTICLE..." before branding someone the way you did in visceral terms. But that's just me.

I'm still waiting to hear your reasons for disagreeing with him, by the way.

Quote:
Oh, you mean the little bits of Sarcasm and Satire, rather than the whole piece being Sarcasm and Satire? Thanks for clearing that up.

That just plain doesn't make sense. I said he uses sarcasm and satire in his columns, and most of that column uses sarcasm to make a serious point. How does your reply relate to that? Am I missing something in your argument?

These videos you post are getting tiresome, this is the second thread I've encountered them...I hope you're not taking a page out of someone else's book. What that guy has to say has meaning, yes, I listened to it--but the manner in which he is putting it out there pretty much means nobody's going to listen to him...it negates ANY message he has to offer, and yup, it makes him look like a nutbag. Anyone who chooses to make a statement like that IS a nutbag, whether right or left--and I say that from perusing several of his videos, not just one.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:40 PM

Gawd, Wulf, he's RIGHT! We should have stood up and revolted against the evils of Bush YEARS ago!!! Everything we tried to do peacefully was of no avail, it WAS time for a revolution! It WAS past the time for peace, I wish we had stood up for our rights back when they began to be so overtly taken away!!!

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:46 PM

Niki.

Its not too late.

It never is, so long as even ONE man stands up for the rest of us.

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Niki.

Its not too late.

It never is, so long as even ONE man stands up for the rest of us.

And yet, here you still are. I thought you were arming up for the big giant revolution. Why aren't you out there standing up for "the rest of us"? Go, boy, run!

Mike

Old friend charity
Cruel twisted smile
And the smile signals emptiness
For me
Starless and Bible black

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:51 PM

Sorry, I disagree. If that one man looks so silly that people dismiss him without hearing what he has to say, he's ineffective. I liked what he had to say, but I know 99% of people won't get further than his face and first few words. That does nobody any good, and merely gives people an excuse to point at him and say "look at this fruitcake!"

Mike, that is unnecessarily snarky; you guys have such a hard-on for Wulf, you rarely respond to his actual statements. I don't get it; there must be history here where Wulf acted worse than what I see, because several of you really have it in for him. I don't care; I'll take everyone as who I get to know them to be through their words, but it seems a shame honest debate can't be engaged in between all of us. JMHO.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 8:56 PM

Meanwhile, back to the original question at hand:

"How many hypocritical Republicans can dance on the head of a sex scandal?"

Answer?

"All of them."

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 9:00 PM

Niki,

I freely admit, I've pissed off some here. Not going to apologize for it either.

"Sorry, I disagree. If that one man looks so silly that people dismiss him without hearing what he has to say, he's ineffective. I liked what he had to say, but I know 99% of people won't get further than his face and first few words. That does nobody any good, and merely gives people an excuse to point at him and say "look at this fruitcake!"

Yeah.

A lot of people who looked crazy, or a fruitcake, actually made a difference... changed things for the BETTER.

THAT doesn't bother me. What bothers me, is that there are people, even HERE, who will constantly close their eyes... in the hope that other opinions will go away.

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 9:04 PM

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 9:07 PM

Quote:

Mike, that is unnecessarily snarky; you guys have such a hard-on for Wulf, you rarely respond to his actual statements. I don't get it; there must be history here where Wulf acted worse than what I see, because several of you really have it in for him.

Couple things...

One. There's not such thing as "unnecessarily snarky". Snark is its own reward.

Two. Ever walk into the middle of an argument and wonder what it's all about? Wulf has been trying to recruit people here for his white-supremacist revolution for about as long as I can remember. Once in a great, great while he has a minor epiphany, and can almost act like a normal person. But he always backslides into his old racist self (see the Serena Williams thread about his "Hot Ghetto Mess" comments to see what I mean). And he's ALWAYS preaching his own little revolution to the masses, grandstanding about how a .308 round will decide who the REAL President is (hint: According to him, it's not Obama).

As for taking him seriously, I do and I don't. I don't take the things he has to say very seriously, because I find his notions of the way the world works to be those of a tiny-minded inbred bigot, and thus laughable. I *DO* take him seriously in his racism, though, because this is something that needs to be stomped into dust at every opportunity.

The few times I've thought there actually were signs of growth from Wulfie, he's taken it all back rather quickly, and usually moves two steps backwards for every one step forward.

Mike

Old friend charity
Cruel twisted smile
And the smile signals emptiness
For me
Starless and Bible black

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 9:38 PM

Quote:
A lot of people who looked crazy, or a fruitcake, actually made a difference... changed things for the BETTER.

I've never met or seen one, so I guess we live in different universes.

Quote:
THAT doesn't bother me. What bothers me, is that there are people, even HERE, who will constantly close their eyes... in the hope that other opinions will go away.

I don't see that at all; I see some really good debates between differing points of view, so again I guess we live in different universes. The one I live in, I don't need videos thrown at me, I want to talk to PEOPLE and hear their opinions, ideas, arguments...and I DO NOT need more kidnapped bits of V put up by someone who doesn't even understand what V was about, and is so weird that they think what's happening in this country is ANYTHING like what happened in the movie!

Yes, Mike, it's puzzling. Some days I enjoy reading what he has to write and debating with him; other days he's as bad a fruitcake as PN, who I won't even pay attention to. Velly stlange...

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 9:53 PM

Excuse me.

"Wulf has been trying to recruit people here for his white-supremacist revolution for about as long as I can remember."

Sorry, but that shit has go to go. No. So I say for now and all eternity, no. Im not a white supremacist.

"Once in a great, great while he has a minor epiphany, and can almost act like a normal person. But he always backslides into his old racist self (see the Serena Williams thread about his "Hot Ghetto Mess" comments to see what I mean)."

Um... how is that racist? Don't you mean, its not PC?

"And he's ALWAYS preaching his own little revolution to the masses, grandstanding about how a .308 round will decide who the REAL President is (hint: According to him, it's not Obama)."

Yeah. Its called history. From WWI, to today, usually what changes the world stage is 1 round. And usually, when I promote that, its to prevent the loss of freedoms. Including yours which you use to attack me with

"I *DO* take him seriously in his racism, though, because this is something that needs to be stomped into dust at every opportunity."

My supposed racism. Which is code for me saying things you can't handle or dont agree with.

BYTEMITE

Monday, September 14, 2009 10:10 PM

Niki: Me thinks the honeymoon is over? :)

Yes, partisanism is very frustrating.

Wulf: it's more the fact that just one little outburst from Serena Williams results in her being called ghetto. We don't call YOU ghetto when you get upset about something, despite where you came from, hell, we respect you for that, you've risen above it. So why is it okay to call Serena ghetto?

WULFENSTAR

Monday, September 14, 2009 10:23 PM

Dammit, call me ghetto if you want to.

Not only black people come from the ghetto.

NIKI2

Monday, September 14, 2009 10:39 PM

Quote:
how is that racist? Don't you mean, its not PC?

Nope. I responded to it in the thread--it's the combination of "hot ghetto mess" and the three people you cited--your mind went directly where it went; why didn't it go to Joe Wilson acting out, if you wanted a second example to Williams'? It's about how the mind works.

Quote:
From WWI, to today, usually what changes the world stage is 1 round

Now THAT is pure, unadulterated

and not even slightly true!

Naw, Byte, not over by a loooong shot, trust me! There are different KINDS of people here, PN only represents one of them, and Wulf is kinda in the middle. "Over there", it was all PN, all the time! This is heaven in comparison, and hasn't even come CLOSE in the time I've been here to everyday interaction over there!

I think I mentioned it; over there, one thread can go on for hundreds and hundreds of posts, with the little "clique" agreeing with one another smarmily and anyone who disagrees getting attacked en masse. Original topic disappears quite quickly, and one side pretty much runs things. See the difference? This is joy unbounded, and every place has to have it's, uhhh, "different" types

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

KWICKO

Monday, September 14, 2009 10:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Dammit, call me ghetto if you want to.

Not only black people come from the ghetto.

But why do you assume that ALL black people come from the ghetto?

Or, to be more specific, why do you assume that THESE particular black people come from the ghetto?

Mike

Old friend charity
Cruel twisted smile
And the smile signals emptiness
For me
Starless and Bible black

KWICKO

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 12:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Excuse me.

"Wulf has been trying to recruit people here for his white-supremacist revolution for about as long as I can remember."

Sorry, but that shit has go to go. No. So I say for now and all eternity, no. Im not a white supremacist.

So you say. But you also say things about considering Obama worthy of being called a "human", but not Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson; to you, they are NOT "human". So what are they? Obviously you consider YOURSELF human, right?

Quote:

"Once in a great, great while he has a minor epiphany, and can almost act like a normal person. But he always backslides into his old racist self (see the Serena Williams thread about his "Hot Ghetto Mess" comments to see what I mean)."

Um... how is that racist? Don't you mean, its not PC?

No, I mean it's racist. When the FIRST thing you go to has to do with the person's skin color, that's racist. I've asked twice already: What is it about Serena or Kanye that makes YOU think "ghetto" as your first reaction to them, if not their skin color? Why do you ASSUME that they're from the ghetto, if not because they're black? Would you call Kevin Costner "ghetto"? How about Krist Novoselic (bassist from Nirvana)? Joe Scarbrough? Sam Nunn? Woodrow Wilson? Are they "ghetto" in your book? What about George Bush (either one)? General Omar Bradley? Are they "ghetto" to you?

Quote:

"And he's ALWAYS preaching his own little revolution to the masses, grandstanding about how a .308 round will decide who the REAL President is (hint: According to him, it's not Obama)."

Yeah. Its called history. From WWI, to today, usually what changes the world stage is 1 round. And usually, when I promote that, its to prevent the loss of freedoms. Including yours which you use to attack me with

First, where in history OTHER THAN THE START OF WWI did 1 round change the world stage? Second, which "freedoms" specifically have you lost under Obama? List them, please. (Hint: You don't get to use the Second Amendment, because it's oh-so-obvious that that particular "freedom" is quite alive and well these days!). The "freedoms" I use to "attack" you with? Can you show me specific legislation that's been signed by Obama that rescinds my free speech and free press rights? Faux News is still on the air, right? Even Glen Beck is on the air, right? And correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't a few right-wing nutsacks been VERY vocal in exercising their freedom of speech just lately?

Quote:

"I *DO* take him seriously in his racism, though, because this is something that needs to be stomped into dust at every opportunity."

My supposed racism. Which is code for me saying things you can't handle or dont agree with.

No. It's code for you saying things that are racist about black people.

Mike

Old friend charity
Cruel twisted smile
And the smile signals emptiness
For me
Starless and Bible black

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 2:33 PM

"So you say. But you also say things about considering Obama worthy of being called a "human", but not Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson; to you, they are NOT "human". So what are they? Obviously you consider YOURSELF human, right?"

There is more to being human than being born. As an example of people I feel are inhuman... Jeffery Dahmer, Hitler, Stalin, Himmler, Pol Pot, ect... are Sharpton and Jackson on the same level? Probably not. But all of those people share the same structuring. They will do anything to gain power, they don't care who they hurt, and once in power, use it to secure themselves.

And before you ask, yes. I could easily put Cheney in that list.

"First, where in history OTHER THAN THE START OF WWI did 1 round change the world stage?"

The shot heard round the world. The assassination of MLK, Kennedy, Abe Lincoln, and the suicide of Hitler. I can go on if youd like.

NIKI2

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 4:15 PM

None of those changed the WORLD stage, or changed it much or dramatically! You're too enmeshed in American arrogance if you think so. The world is bigger than us; just because we hve a history of offing politicians doesn't mean the world "changes" every time we do!

Oh, wait, it's not just Yankee arrogance, it's also your adoration of violence and weapons, isn't it? I got news for you...the pen has TRULY changed the world stage farrr more than any "one shot". As have behind-the-scenes machinations, manipulation, propaganda, and many more forces not nearly as exciting or dramatic as a gun.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

SIGNYM

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 4:46 PM

Quote:
They will do anything to gain power

And your continued reference to making the world a better place by assassination pretty much puts you in the same category, doesn't it?

KWICKO

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 1:57 AM

Quote:

There is more to being human than being born.

Can I use that at my next pro-choice rally? Sounds like you're a supporter of abortion rights!

You don't REALLY think Hitler's suicide changed the course of anything, to you? I mean, the Russians were pretty much knocking on the door of his bunker when he did it; it's not like he was going to make an impassioned speech and change the course of the war!

The others are arguable. How did Lincoln's assassination change the world stage? Please elaborate. Was the outcome of the Civil War effected by it? What did MLK's assassination accomplish? I mean, I'll defer to your expertise in this matter, given that you and only you (according to you, anyway) are capable of analyzing such situations without any shred of racism.

What did JFK's death change? How about RFK?

How many bullets did the 9/11 hijackers need to change the world stage?

You have such a small view of the world, Wulfie. You need to clean out your headgear and pop out of your foxhole now and again to see how far you've been left behind.