Vlad invaded Georgia? OMG! Say it ain't so. No wonder McCain said we are all georgians. I was extremely impressed with his plan to rescue Savannah. Good stuff. that.

Vlad invading Georgia is like the US Military invading Vermont.

However, Georgia does have a military and rockets, and I believe old holdover warheads, that they should launch on Russia.  They know they have no chance of winning, so I hope they don't back down like France.

War good, say the neanderthals.

1. Your post is incoherent. 

2. Do you know ANYTHING about Russia or Georgia and why Russia is doing what it is doing? 

3. France (French President's intervention) stopped hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians from getting killed in in the stupid flare up. And, you say France was backing down? From what, you idiot?

I so wish you were in that region as you were typing from the basement.

"Army personnel in Kuwait unloaded a dozen faulty tanks that only go in reverse. Tanks that only go in reverse — they've been repackaged and sold to France." —Craig Kilborn

quoting Craig Kilborn does not an argument make. 

"French troops arrived in Afghanistan last week, and not a minute too soon. The French are acting as advisers to the Taliban, to teach them how to surrender properly." —Jay Leno

Wow.  Anti-French humor.

 

Um.  Funny stuff that.  

 

I don't suppose it means a damn to you that the US an France have been allies since the 1770s.

 

Nope, didn't think so.  Enjoy your sophomoric humor. 

Whispers.....

"I don't suppose it means a damn to you that the US an France have been allies since the 1770s."

It all goes with the rightwing conservative narrative of that fantasy called American Exceptionalism.... like when they claim that if not for America, they would all be speaking German......

And yet.... they fail to teach their flock that if not for the French.... we Americans would all have British accents!!

Just knee jerk French bashing from the right wingers is all. They ALWAYS forget that the French, were it not for them, we wouldn't be the USA, nor would we have the largest chunk of land that Napoleon sold to us for cheap to fund his wars. And of course, what Science and other right wingers will say, is something about we paid the French back in WWII, which is true, but go to France now. There aren't too many folks who don't remember that little bit of information. Go the US cemetary in France, and don't tell me that the French don't remember.

Science, are you saying that Vermont is a foreign country?

LOL - are you retarded or something?

Georgia is a foreign country, Science.  Here is your analogy:

"Vlad invading Georgia is like the US Military invading Vermont."

How is it the same?

Of course you would mention Vermont... how nice. I suppose there are no 'regular Americans' there too, right? Good to see that you are dissing one of our great states there, Pseudoscience.

Hey,its not my fault they are easy on child rapist...

Uh, Pseudoscience, you're talking about ONE JUDGE who made a bad ruling IMO - not the entire state of Vermont. Try again.

http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=4319605

This is more of just a feelgood thing that Barack is doing for Hillary by his willingness to a vote for her.  But lets be real, her want for the DNC vote, regardless of her "35 million voices", she lost by the rules fair and square.

She is being like Russia invading Georgia in a way by trying to force herself in between the Democratic Party and Barack who won.

it's simply a way of giving hillary's supporters a chance to vote for her, obama becomes the nominee, and everyone holds hands.  nothing more, in spite of all your fantasies. 

Although the possibilities have to be fun for the members of Operation: Chaos, however effective that's been

Agreed.  I had to swallow my tongue and vote for her at the same time.  

well, well, well. One of the dittoheads has just come forward and admitted to trying to personally corrupt the process. Poor baby. Couldn't stand that republicans chose McCain so you had to console yourself with the idea that you might possibly affect the democratic choice. Stack the deck, so to speak. Let it be known that today's republican can't win on the issues...

If its any consolation - I would rather have Hillary as Pres instead of Barack.  But that's just me.  But then again, I wouldnt have voted for McCain, so I didnt corrupt anything.

You told me some time back that you were gonna console yourself and pull the McCain lever this fall. Are you flip-flopping again?

No, it depends on who the VP is.  If its Lieberman or the guy from PA, then I dont know what I'll do.  However, I will not be voting for Obama regardless.

So you are more at ease with a president McCain, who cribs talking points on foreign policy from wikipedia. Nice. Real nice.

As opposed to someone who doesnt have any foreign policy except what someone else writes on the teleprompt?  

You kidding me?

Obama isn't some reactionary, confrontational idiot. He knows it's going to take diplomacy, not tough guy strutting, to restore our ability to project real power in the world.

And I bet he has Putin shakin' in his boots with his rhetoric.

Isn't that the point? McCain is the war candidate and war is not the answer.

Shakin' those motherly fingers at Iran & Russia by Obama will terrify them, that we can be sure of.

Fear, fear fear. Instill fear. Everyone is our enemy. Use fear to manipulate the people.

There, I think I just wrote the platform for the Republican convention.

Violence is the opposite of power, my friend. Violence is weakness.

But I get it. The right are steeped in violence, from word to deed. From Savage to Jim Adkisson, the right is violent. I feel sorry for your manic belief that violence and war is the answer.

Violence is the opposite of power, my friend. Violence is weakness.

Been watching too much Karate Kid lately?

Are you cheering for another war you will refuse to fight, Science?

Refuse?  No.  In fact, I'm in favor of a national draft and mandatory 2 years of military service after completion of highschool or when you turn 18 if you drop out.

Interesting.  Would you then volunteer to be a part of this plan?

I've already spend time in the national guard.

Well thank you for serving.  I assume sometimes that people who have served would have less inclination to send others to war.  Did you serve in combat?

Nope, never saw combat, or went out of the country.

So?  You have said before you are 28.  If you believe in these causes, fight for them.  Now that you have guardianship of a child, fight for her!

I do fight for her - its call 2 jobs @ 70+hrs per week and saving for private schooling.

That's great, Science, it really is.  Unfortunately though, it sounds like you are all for war as long as you don't have to fight. 

My views havent changed one bit since 2001.  In fact, when I was in the national guard, I actually served on posts involved in sorting out threats of domestic terrorism.  Wasn't my call where I went.

This whole attitude of "you support war because you won't go" is bunk, just as much so as the view of people bashing you for saying "you support the troops but not war".

No, its not the same.  When you advocate missle attacks on a country, or war with someone and you are physically able to fight, you should stand up and go. Period.  Otherwise, you will become like some of our other posters who claim regret over not heading to war 30 years later.

Have you fought in Iraq or Afghanistan, Science?

No, Science chicken-hawked out to stay home and baby-sit so others could go fight for him.  Typical all talk, no hat.  His ilk make me sick.

No, i was in the National Guard and Reserves both in the past.  I dropped my commitment when I took legal guardianship over my 3 yr old niece.

You're starting to sound like someone else here with that story... hmmm.

Science,

While your service is admirable and so is your guardianship, if your niece is only 3, why didn't you fight in Iraq or Afghanistan prior to taking care of her?  We started fighting in Afghanistan in 2001 which would be at least four years before your niece was born and you were 21.  We started fighting in March 2003 which would be at least two years before your niece was born and would make you 23.  Where was your bravado then?

I served from 18 till 23 when I was in college in the reserves, and from 23 till 25 in the national guard.  After that, i moved on to focus on my career after I obtained my masters.

So, when you were in the guard, did you make an effort to enlist so you could fight abroad or are you just for wars as long as you don't have to fight them?

I've already commented on that.  But I served in the guard, away from home, addressing possible leads by helping out domestic terrorism units.

You mean you were targeting the anti-war activists, librarians and Grandma's for peace?

LOL - nice spin.  But no.  Those people are nothing more than an annoyance to me, not a threat.

what were you doing?  clipping letters critical of the war out of local newspapers.

No, but I am glad I didn't reenlist and been forced to help out ungrateful liberals such as yourself when disasters strike.

i'm grateful to anyone who really does serve.  i have no idea if you did or not.

No, you did have control.  You didn't have to enlist in the guard.  You could have signed up directly for the army and been shipped out.  No one was in your way but you, Science.

And I would have, if my choice was to make the military a career choice, but it wasn't.  Most people that go into the military do so because they want to make it their career or to get the money for college.  I knew my career choice was IT and Financials, and didnt need the money for college.  I took out loans and am still paying them back.

So, when it came time to fight, you ran away.  Thanks for your service, but next time you think there is a grave threat to our way of life, pick up and fight!

Whereas having most of the military stuck in Iraq is doing wonders to intimidate Putin.

 Fact is that a military that is committed to adventures abroad has no ability to deter third party actors from doing anything.

We have plenty of ICBM we can use :-)

And shoot them where, Science?  Do you want WWIII?  Or is it WWIV? I can't tell what the conservative talking heads would call it.

Cheerleading battle but not serving.  Promoting the draft when not eligible.  Touting remote-controlled video-game war.

Welcome to the 109th chairborne.

Well put.  I think someone could have a good business going selling faux flight suits to all these guys, so they can strut around in their family rooms while chugging their brew.

Don't forget the mandatory sock-stuffed codpiece. It makes people think they have something they don't.

Too bad Putin isn't President any longer.

And do you really want to start something with Russia? Great, that would be super. You think we have problems in Iran, we would be in WWIII this time, except Russia's weapons are much better than Nazi Germany, and guess what? They can reach us here in the US now. Yeah, really smart move tangling with The Bear. Especially with a lot of our combat forces, and support for combat forces either tied up in the middle east, or rotating out for R and R, re-training, and future deployments.

Yep, I know... War good! Yeah, great idea. Let's bomb Russia now because they stepped over the Georgia border.

You think McCain has Putin's tootsies quaking? LOL...

Putin has the West by the nuts right now... even Bush is looking like a pussy these days. 

Bush sounded like a real "tough guy" on bringing democracy to Iraq when they really had no chance to defend themselves.  Regardless, we've still lost 4,000+ Americans and maimed 10K+ more in this mis-adventure.  Now, we have a democratic nation being invaded and where are we to protect their freedoms?  Now Bush decides to try diplomacy?  Not so tough looking now is he when his back is up against the wall and the adversary can punch back.  What a tool!

Hey, come on.  Give the guy a break.  Just trying to vote - even with explicit instructions - caused him to forget to not swallow his tongue.  I think he's due a little leeway when it comes to making that decision all by himself.

how about the possibility of one of your posts being, 1] on topic, or 2] pertinent to the comment made?   no more than zero?

Ineffective. But I find it quite interesting McCain's credibility on Georgia. His top advisor is paid to be a lobbyist for Georgia. He claims he personally dispatched Lieberman to go to Georgia. I wonder what would happen if Obama had "personally dispatched" Reid to georgia? Ya, you got it. He'd be dragged through the press for being "presumptuous" while exxon john gets the "wow, how presidential is that?" approach. Hipocrites...

Exxon John - that has a nice ring to it - and a lot of truth behind it as well.

One might think that McCain was being presumptuous.

 

Oh wait.  That's an Obama-only criticism.  IOKIYAR. 

It was a colossal failure. The joke's on the Fat Man this time around.

Mefirst, I see you the same problem as many of us, trying to explain something to the Jokesters that are here for fun. They are not trolls just Arsetriches.

it's simply a way of giving hillary's supporters a chance to vote for her, obama becomes the nominee, and everyone holds hands.  nothing more, in spite of all your fantasies. 

MEFIRST, Hillary's Clinton supporters can vote for her whether she's formally nominated or not. The only way there won't be a roll call is if Obama is nominated by acclimation, which won't happen. Delegates can vote for anyone they choose.

It's been 16 years since the losing Democratic candidate had their name placed into nomination (1992 Paul Tsongas/Jerry Brown). Bill Clinton was the party's nominee and Clinton would not give a prime-time speaking spot to either man unless they endorsed Clinton and swore off having their name place in nomination. One must assume there was a reason that Bill Clinton didn't want either man's name nominated after he had already won. 

While Hillary has urged her delegates to support Obama she has not released them nor has she formally ended her campaign, she simply suspended her campaign.

In a conference call with delegates June 9,  Hillary reiterated she has “suspended” her campaign, which means she is holding on to her delegates.

“I am a National Delegate for Clinton from Texas. I was on the conference call. Delegates were NOT released. We were told the same thing YOU ALL were told on Saturday. That she endorsed and would work for Obama.

To use the term “released” is not accurate. She and Harold Ickes asked that we hold together because of health care issues Hillary wants on the democrat platform.

By the Way: ALL pledged delegates can vote their conscience at Denver. EVEN BO Pledged delegates can switch at Denver”

 

 

 

obama will become the nominee.  bill and hillary will give rousing speeches endorsing him.  

It's standard operating procedure for all candidates to have a presence at political conventions, and be voted upon. What ignorance.

How many times did Harold Stassen speak at Repub conventions, or have his name in contention? Or Stevenson at the Dems-- or Kefauver?

Besides, there's an excellent chance that this is happening to prepare the way for Obama picking Hillary to be VP!

Take that, you Hillary-haters! 

Did you recently recieve a sharp blow to the head?  Are you concussed? 

The entirity or your posts here and every one of your points are significantly more ridiculous sounding that the original headline! 

GIVE IT UP!

You are in a hole.  STOP DIGGING!!!

Back on topic after 25 off-topic posts because people can't simply call out the trolls for what they are....and then ignore their posts.....

Tonight on Hannity and Colmes, Dick Morris said that same thing. He is claiming that a cooperative decision that melds the top wishes of both Barack and Hillary because they aren't the enemies that the righties want them to be is being painted as having the opposite meaning it really has!

Hillary and Barack are not mortal enemies. She really supports his effort to win. Both of them believe that the best course of action for the Democratic efforts would be that her supporters get a chance to show exhibit their support and their enthusiasm. It's not a negative. In reality, the Republicans could never do that - it's their flaw that their arguments expose! They aren't open to allowing differences of opinion to be overtly displayed! They aren't open to giving the minority a chance to be heard. Democrats? They're glad to let Hillary's supporters a voice at the convention!

These right-wing "pundints" (I know, I know, but that's how Hannity pronounces it) are totally fascinated with the Democatic Party process during this election. They are spending a lot of time and resources overanalyzing every little action and reaction, then pronouncing some non-sequiturish-type meaning to the results of their analyses that permits them to fantasize about some big GOOP win in November. To me they seem like thumb-suckers, engaged in infantile-self-soothing on the rocket-ride toward November.

Gawsh, you write purty.

Though I think you left out the part in January when they throw a tantrum because they realize the ride has stopped.

In January the dems' will start their ride on the rocket, if Obama wins. Whoever wins has some big (there is no adjective big enough to describe the bigness of the) BushCo problems to fix:

• end the phony war,
• take up and win the real war,
• overcome the Bush/Greenspan depression, 
• close the border, and
• deal with the bully-style imperialism the Russians copied from BushCo

Bottleblond, you left out the best part of Bill Clinton obsessed closet-case goblin Dick Morris' take on the topic; That Obama is caving in to Hillary, and if he can't stand up to Hillary, how is he going to take on the evil turrists?

I know the handful of  reasonable rightys here will distance themselves from pinheads like Morris, but every time I see him, he seems closer to the GOP archetype that makes it possible to elect presidents like Bush and (Spaghetti monster forbid) McGrampy..

 -- Senator Clinton's campaign have been working very, very hard to ensure a Democratic victory in November. Part of that means a very unified, a very strong party coming out of Denver -- Cardona

The first half of that statement is a crock. Yes, Hillary has been giving a little lip service...as demanded by protocol...to the support of Obama. But it's a real reach to say the she has been working "very, very hard".

She could have quelled the entire escapade by declining, ala LBJ..."I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your president".

Do I think that Hillary can/will usurp the nomination from Obama? Nope, but I certainly don't rule out the chance. The democrat convention will show if Obama is truly a slick operator and master of high stakes politics...or...will he fall prey to trusting the words of a Cinton?

Be careful Obama...be very careful. 

 -- will try to kill Barack. -- roundhouse

You can shove that insane comment straight up your ass.

I visit this site as a conservative for the info and for those opinions that differ from mine and to state my position when I feel like it. I don't need the security blanket of hanging out and being comforted by other conservatives to validate my positions.

Don't you ever...don't you ever again equate me with someone who would support, condone, or propagate the assassination of a U.S. President...you effin moron!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

No one's sure what happened in Arkansas at this time-- and not all righties are evil.

"I visit this site as a conservative for the info and for those opinions that differ from mine and to state my position when I feel like it."

If only I had the option to do the same on right wing sites, but they don't let us libs in. So spare me your insinuation that I can't hang with the big dogs.

Jerk.

"They don't let us libs in"

Oh, crying discrimination again i see?

Yeah, that is the reality. You cons absolutely cannot stand dissent. The Hannity forum and MM are lightyears apart when it comes to tolerance.

Now that you mention it, I also got kicked off one of the pundint comment sites, and my posts were removed, although I hadn't even used vulgar language. Good point.

Exactly.

The next time a con comes on here and plays that stupid card he/she should be booted off here immediately. See how they like it.

Same thing happens in talk radio. Listen to Ed Schultz - he has con callers on his show and they are respected and allowed to have their say without being mocked, interrupted, or rudely hung up on. Think that would happen on The Destestable One, aka His Dumbness, aka Mark Levin's show? Think that Righties have the same high standards as Lefties when it comes to discourse?

Yeah, didn't think so...

Discrimination? Science?

No. Censorship.

Now go flag my posts like the simpering child you are.

                               

                                       TIME OUT.....

Sorry, Prince. I'm pretty pissed.

Wesley, easy on the exclamation points. They always find a bunch of those in the assassins notebooks.

 I kid !

I'll equate you with Savage, Coulter, Corsi, and Rush then, because that is what the republican party is.

If you're just some regular guy who wants a limited government and some fiscal sanity, then you're a democrat.

So I'm really a Democrat???

In name only. In intellect, you're a LaRouchie.

If you're just some regular guy who wants a limited government and some fiscal sanity, then you're a democrat.

Err - increased regulations in ever aspect of goverment, including Global Warming Acts, as well as 800B in new spending is not fiscal sanity.  The true lies of a democrat is more like it.

Err - increased regulations in ever aspect of goverment, including Global Warming Acts, as well as 800B in new spending is not fiscal sanity.  The true lies of a democrat is more like it.

You've enlightened me.  I realize now that the signature of fiscal sanity is a falling dollar caused by a real-estate crisis based on mortgage de-regulation, a budget that has gone from a surplus to a $400B deficit in 7 years (plus the requisite increased foreign borrowing), job losses, and deserting industry.  Fortunately, because of that decreasing value of the dollar, we'll soon be able to provide the labor to build all those Chinese cars, and afford food again!

The dollar is worth more now than it has been in 5 weeks,  Oil is dropping, so are all other commodities.  The housing market will bottom in early 2009, according to Bloomberg.

Now all we need is the removal of manufacturing unions, and the EPA regulations on businesses, and you can have all the jobs back that you cry a bout.  But then again, companies in the US are afraid to do well - because you guys want to "windfall" them.  

Brilliant.

"The dollar is worth more now than it has been in 5 weeks,  Oil is dropping, so are all other commodities."

For comparison's sake, Science, how is the dollar doing in relation to 7 years ago?  What about oil?  What about other commodities?

Not so fast, Pseudo.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/90831-enjoy-these-dollar-days-but-will-they-last?source=patrick.net

"Err - increased regulations in ever aspect of goverment"

In short, tainted food, tainted government. Deregulation is wild west capitalism. We don't need that, we have progressed beyond that mentality.

Like I said earlier, before my post was scrubbed, screw you buddy. Don't try to tell me I can't point out that violence and hate is baked into the Republican cake.

The right is hate. Own it

Look at what the wing nuts in your party are capable of. MLK, Bobby Kennedy, JFK. Look at McVeigh's handy work, or Jim Adkisson. Then you can soak up violent rhetoric on most any radio station, You can listen to Savage, Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, Gibson, O'Reilly and on and on. You can listen to them preach violence and then you can listen to actual preachers preach violence. If that ain't enough, you can have your elected officials paint us as the enemy within, too. don't pretend you haven't heard them tell us we'll get hit again if we vote for Democrats.

So, why don't you kiss MY ass. I don't need to associate your good name with murderous pricks, you do it all by yourself by voting Republican.

Asshole.

That was for, Wes, of course.

Amen, Round, amen.

Take the most recent example - aside from the Arkansas shooting since we do not know all the details - the church shooting. That nutcase is a rightwinger through and through. Had all the hate books too. Typical redneck Sean Hannity-lovin' SCUM.

The Right IS hate. Period.

The right is hate and if they want to lose that stigma, they need to denounce their talking head, radio prostitutes as the hate propagandists they are.

They won't, though. They wouldn't want to "infringe on the rights," of Savage Rush O'Reilly to incite acts of violence on their political opponents.

The radio haters are too effective. Workaday cons and elected cons will not bite the hands that feed them. No they would rather feign indifference and lay false claim to the noble principle of free speech while reaping the benefits of a poisoned public discourse.

Roundhouse posted:

Look at what the wing nuts in your party are capable of. MLK, Bobby Kennedy, JFK. Look at McVeigh's handy work, or Jim Adkisson.

Uh...you better check your google again there RH.  

JE Ray had NO party affiliation, Sirhan sirhan was an arab (Palestinian arab and virulent anti-semitic) who wasn't affiliated with any party other than two Pro-arab/ anti-Israeii campus groups.  JFK's assasin was killed by a communitst defector.  If anything Oswald was closer to the democrat party than the Republicans.  While Mcveigh was affiliated with white supremist groups, he was anti-government.  ANY form of government.  If you can show me where he was a card carrrying member of the GOP, I'll stand down.  

Nice try lumping these sociopaths to the Republican Party, but me thinks you need to do some home work before spewing your ignorance on this forum.  

I forgot to give you Adkisson.  While I can't find anything that says he was a card carrying GOP member, his testimony of and for "hating liberals" will suffice to give you credit for one example.  

 

Put the Warren Report in the ground. Oswald was a patsy.

There is much more to the Oswald story. Research it. Just don't use the Warren Report as your guide.

*************TIN FOIL HAT ALERT!********

Oh do tell Rabbit!  

Popcorn popping and cold beer ready for this!  

Please tell me this is the new Area 51 twist!  

I said research it yourself. I am not your 'assistant' here.

You must be one of the 12 still-living individuals who believe the Warren Commission Report. I pity you and your ignorance.

Whatever hog. I stand by my comments. I see you only responded to half of my comments. Why don't you do some work before you come here and talk like an idiot.

OK flop house.  YOU STAND by your moronic statements!  A cursory look by any fourth grader can show your statements as patently FALSE.

MMfA, your flock strays...

Still can't own the fact that right-wing radio is populated with eliminationists? Can't accept the fact that right-wingers are violent corrupters of the democratic process?

PROVE that the statements are patently false. Do it.

"JFK's assasin was killed by a communitst defector. If anything Oswald was closer to the democrat party than the Republicans."

See, right there it is. Associate liberals with enemies of capitalism, the enemy within theme. Go F yourself, hog. You are as guilty, in spreading eliminationist rhetoric, as Savage.

"While Mcveigh was affiliated with white supremist groups, he was anti-government. ANY form of government. "

He doesn't need to be a card carrying GOPer to share the Republican anti-government ideology. He was a right-winger, a violent rightie. And white supremacy? You Republicans have appealed, in varying degrees of subtlety, to the racist vote in every election since 1968.

You people are sicko haters and you're destroying our country with you anti-democratic, authoritarian thug tactics of violence and intimidation. Face it. You jerks have become the Party of the corporo-fascists, the Party of the jingo-fascists.

You Republicans are straight haters of openess and diversity. Thank God and goodness for you that we liberals have big hearts. We still love you and have hope for you.

Flop house ranted:

He doesn't need to be a card carrying GOPer to share the Republican anti-government ideology. He was a right-winger, a violent rightie

So now you're moving the goal posts.  Your statement was;

"Look at what the wing nuts in your party are capable of "

As I'll point out for you again (you seem a little SLOW on the uptake), that Oswald, Ray, Sirhan, McVeigh were NOT in the REPUBLICAN PARTY.  They had views all over the political spectrum among them. 

Am I to understand that you are equating ALL right leaning people to your examples?  IF that's the case then can I ASSUME that because Barry O is associated with the WEATHER UNDERGROUND founder then He's associated with Left wing terrorism?  

Just wanted to check because MMfA has used considerable bandwidth to disassociate Barry O with WU...just wondering??????

 

"They had views all over the political spectrum among them."

Really? In what ways were those cats liberal?

They just happened to kill liberals because they held liberal views, I guess. Screw that. The right is violent, the right hates, the right motivates through fear and bully tactics. I know you want to run away from the truth, so you play the thick headed literalist; you glom on to my saying that the members of your party are haters. As if the Republican Party isn't full of murderous right right-wing creeps.

So, here. Allow me to amend myself only slightly:

The right is hate.

The right is extremist.

And the weather underground? How many people did they kill?

But seriously, you roll that argument out while you hyperventilate over actual examples of right-wing murderers because you can dish out, not up, your own right-wing guilt by association tactics when they're used against you. Stinking hypocrite. At least what I'm saying is real. You cons are fantacists.

Flop house.  There is a saying when you've dug yourself a hole to deep to crawl out of, stop digging.  Ever heard of that one?  No?  You've dug a deep hole.  

There is no point in carrying this on.  You haven't backed up your assertions not once, but you've managed to to come unhinged and call names and basically admit that what you posted was complete nonsense.  

I'm going to help you out a bit and get you up to speed on some facts so you'll stop making an ass of yourself on here: 

weather underground

left wing terror study by Dept of Energy

As for how many people the WU killed.  Four by my count.  I'm sure you'll try and justify it like most left leaning sites do.  The good news is by your standards we can link Barry to Boudin and Ayers' with impunity now!  

Thanks Flophouse!  

Uhhh, that report says that left wing extremism is waning while right wing extremism is on the rise. But thank you for digging it out, it was very enlightening. A very good overview of the domestic extremist threats. Seriously. Thank you.

Anyway, I point out specific instances of liberals being killed for being liberal and you don't consider that support of my argument? I'd say that I did a fine job. It's not my fault you can't face the truth or that you can't hear the violent imagery and language on right wing radio.

And Bill Ayers? Really? That dog won't hunt. The association between Ayers and Obama has been shown to be weak at best, not to mention about 35 years too late to be of any significance.

The right is hate. Own it. Own it like you guys own the Rush Coulter O'Reilly Malkin Hannity Savage monster.

I see you've moved the goalposts again.  Here is your original post that I take offense to:

Look at what the wing nuts in your party are capable of. MLK, Bobby Kennedy, JFK. Look at McVeigh's handy work, or Jim Adkisson

Now you're saying:

Anyway, I point out specific instances of liberals being killed for being liberal and you don't consider that support of my argument?

How did we go from "nut in your party" to "libs being killed for being libs"?  NO that doesn't support your argument if you can call it that.  More like a rant.   

STOP DIGGING RH...You can't back up your post.  As much as you want to change the subject and deflect I'm not letting you off the hook.  

I'll give you another chance.  Show where "libs were killed for being libs".  

I should save you the trouble, because you can't do it.  Your only case is Adkisson (you hope because the only evidence is preliminary at this point ).  NONE of the high profile cases can be linked to "liberal being killed for being a liberal".  

I'm glad you read the left wing terror link.  It is very enlightening.  You are correct left wing terrorism has waned over the last ten years, but  the article also states that left wing terror groups are alive and well.  Just as right wing extremist groups.  If you read it as you say then you know that terrorism runs in cycles.  The focus is right wing now but the study says it would be a mistake to ignore left wing cells.  

Remember this was written before the events of 9/11, and islamic terrorism has been shown to be more in line with left wing terror cells due to the state sponsorship of the cells.    

"islamic terrorism has been shown to be more in line with left wing terror cells due to the state sponsorship of the cells."

Totally specious. That's a weak connection at best, unless of course you believe the left is out to subjugate women or impose Islamic law in the manner that right-wing dominionisst seek to impose Biblical law on our country.

So, just maybe I can't prove that the following list of haters are GOPers, but you can rest assured that their extreme right-wing ideology is more in line with Republican family values than Democratic values.

Now, there was no need to protest the funeral of Falwell, but do you think was appropriate for this Mark D Uhl kid to build bombs to answer them?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3201543&page=1

Then there's this Aryan. How many Aryans vote Republican? Many more, probably 100% more, than vote for Dems.

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/05/other-kinds-of-terrorists.html

How could we forget the abortion clinic bombers and Dr. killers?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_viol.htm

Then tere are these Republicans:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/nov2000/elec-n24.pdf

On Wednesday morning a mob of Bush

supporters besieged the Miami/Dade County board of

canvassers, grabbing a Democratic lawyer and threatening to

assault those involved in manually recounting the ballots. A few

hours later the Democratic-controlled board announced it was

abandoning its recount, effectively disenfranchising hundreds

of Gore supporters whose votes were not registered in the

original machine tally.

Gotta go dinner's on. I'll be back later.

Roundhouse, I don't like to call names on this forum as it usually means you have lost the debate, but you are tempting me....your handle is apt...Roundhouse punches take a lot of energy and are rarely effective!

RH posted:

Totally specious. That's a weak connection at best, unless of course you believe the left is out to subjugate women or impose Islamic law in the manner that right-wing dominionisst seek to impose Biblical law on our country.

No Round, not specious.  Not a weak connection.  I never said the left was out to impose sharia law.  I'll let the experts fill in the rest for you;

A lefty blog explaining some things

More good stuff on left & right terrorist

An quote from Dr. Amy Zalman, PHd, expert on domestic terrorism;

 

Some Leftists Become Islamists

The end of the Cold War does not entirely explain what happens to left-leaning violent extremists, however. As Robison, Crenshaw and Jenkins relate, when the socialist justification lost its full force, would-be terrorists had to find new ideologies to legitimate themselves, which may explain the rise of both Islamist and ethno-nationalist claims among terrorist groups.

Additionally, even though Islamist tendencies may appear on their surface more conservative and "right wing" than left, they have some subterranean likeness:

Although Islamist and traditional Leftist ideology may be logically incompatible systems, our analysis indicates their deep kinship at the level of terrorist action. Both spring from the social strains of transitional development and are facilitated by political opportunities associated with increased political rights. Both are likewise spurred by Western military dependency and yet are reduced by foreign investment.

Since you didn't link anything to support your arguments, and I'm WAY  to lazy to go chasing you down rabbit holes, I'll just grab a couple of your examples and let you mull that over this weekend.  

Ayran and clinic bombings.  You do realize that the FBI classifies these as SPECIAL INTEREST crimes and can fall under hate crimes.  They are mostly left wing with the exception of Rudolph who they classified as right wing.  The Atlanta Olymipic bombing had no political motivation and is still unclassified. My point in this is that you can't pigonhole every terrorist act as REPUBLICAN as you have tried to do several times here.  

I've been posting on this forum for three years now.  Long enough to see trends.  I'll let you in on a little secret Roundhouse.  If no other libs are chiming in and coming to your rescue, then that's a good bet you're pushing a losing hand!  

Look around...only the rabbit tried to help and he went squealling down his hole as the facts started stacking up against you.  

The quote from Dr.Zalman didn't come out:

Although Islamist and traditional Leftist ideology may be logically incompatible systems, our analysis indicates their deep kinship at the level of terrorist action. Both spring from the social strains of transitional development and are facilitated by political opportunities associated with increased political rights. Both are likewise spurred by Western military dependency and yet are reduced by foreign investment.

I forgot this also: 

Italy's left wingers dabbling with islam

 

 If no other libs are chiming in and coming to your rescue, then that's a good bet you're pushing a losing hand! - hogprint

Or he's kicking your ass, and doesn't need any help. The mob mentality toward a losing cause is more of a conservative play.

So you're backing this statement chicken hauler?

Roundhouse posted: 

Look at what the wing nuts in your party are capable of. MLK, Bobby Kennedy, JFK. Look at McVeigh's handy work, or Jim Adkisson

You support this?  Please show me where they were Republicans.  Flophouse hasn't backed it up yet and neither can you.

The flophouse has tried his best to squirm away from his rant but he cant do it.  

I'm going to let you two morons in on the obvious.  JE Ray and Oswald were convicted FELONS and a defector respectively.  Both did not have the RIGHT to vote.  Sirhan was a Palestinian sympathizer that was affiliated with two pro -arab campus groups.  Mcveigh was anit-gov and had NO party affiliation.  Adkisson was the only example that MIGHT fit the bill.  I can't find a party affiliation yet, but he said he "hated" liberals, so I've given the flopper credit for that ONE.  

If you'd have taken the time to read the links you'd know this.  Go back and educate yourself Lieutenant, you've been demoted from Col for being stupid.