- Rather than sit at home watching the endless loops of the planes hitting the WTC towers, why don't you engage your community by volunteering.
- So, John Stossel goes to Fox. Like we are shocked. Perhaps they thought that Geraldo's mustache needed an opening act.
- Congressman Wilson is getting some interesting covering fire from Fox"News" ( again, I know you're shocked ) but also by Pat Buchanan over at MSNBC. This morning, he claimed that Wilson has been donated more money than his opponent since the airing of his "I'm Sorry, Now Give Me Cash" commercial.
- What is the 9/12 Project about anyway? It's been touted as another in the long line of pointless "tea parties", so what does that have to do with the day after 9/11?
- If conservatives are so up in arms over Obama's "Czars", then why aren't they decrying O'Reilly's very public statements that the Bush administration should have had more "czars"?
Showing posts with label Pat Buchanan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pat Buchanan. Show all posts
Friday, September 11, 2009
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Some Thoughts For Your Day
- Why are conservatives so up in arms about Obama speaking to school children? They were practically falling over themselves each and every time Bush talked about improving gradeschooling for children and lauded the completely disasterous NCLB bill. And moreover, why is the White House backpeddling on this. Don't they realize that they are simply caving to the lunacy of the conservative Right?
- How long do you think it's going to take Glenn Beck to strip down on live TV and start smearing his face with his own shit and then claim that it's all Obama's fault?
- And speaking of Obama and school children, why is it that when conservatives favor religion over science in text books, prefer to remove the "darker" moments in American history, and generally revise widely known historical facts and figures in American history that it's called "educating" while teach children about the entire American experience - both good and bad - is indoctrination?
- How many times is Pat Buchanan going to defend Hitler before MSNBC has had enough and fires him
- Why are conservatives so against reforming healthcare while "red states" have the highest number of uninsured in America?
- And did you know those same "red states" purchase more porn than any other states?
- How long do you think it's going to take Glenn Beck to strip down on live TV and start smearing his face with his own shit and then claim that it's all Obama's fault?
- And speaking of Obama and school children, why is it that when conservatives favor religion over science in text books, prefer to remove the "darker" moments in American history, and generally revise widely known historical facts and figures in American history that it's called "educating" while teach children about the entire American experience - both good and bad - is indoctrination?
- How many times is Pat Buchanan going to defend Hitler before MSNBC has had enough and fires him
- Why are conservatives so against reforming healthcare while "red states" have the highest number of uninsured in America?
- And did you know those same "red states" purchase more porn than any other states?
Friday, July 17, 2009
Advantage - Racheal
As I watched this last night, I was literally standing and cheering Racheal Maddow on.
From the jump, Buchanan frames his side of the debate around the fact that Sotomayor isn't qualified or is somehow less qualified because she hasn't written anything that he has read. Granted, her publications are limited, but simply because she hasn't made the NY Times Best Sellers List is a bit of a flimsy stance to take.
But then the other shoe drops and Buchanan calls her an Affirmative Action hire. The patently ignorant and racist side of Pat Buchanan seeps onto the screen from there.
I don't believe I have ever heard anyone state that because white men wrote the Constitution and The Declaration Of Independance that that is the reason that only white men should be appointed to the Supreme Court. And, if one follows Buchanan's logic all the way down, it means that only white mean should be allowed any high level job in government - and more than likely the private sector as well.
And to claim that not enough black men died during wartime to warrant their entire race from accending to any position of power - whether in government or the private sector - is one of the most disturbing and shameful things to even consider.
And to add to Maddow's explicitly valid point that Sotomayor has more judicial experience coming into her nomination, it should be stated that her experience is also unique, as she has heard cases involving 21 century technology that no other Supreme Court Justice ever has. In taking this into account, Sotomayor is truly more qualified than Pat Buchanan could possibly imagine.
It is people like Pat Buchanan, who are so overtly eager to play the victim any and everytime a person of differing ethnicity moves upward in this country, that are attempting to drag America back into an era where discrimination based on race, creed, color, and even religious affiliation was acceptable.
From the jump, Buchanan frames his side of the debate around the fact that Sotomayor isn't qualified or is somehow less qualified because she hasn't written anything that he has read. Granted, her publications are limited, but simply because she hasn't made the NY Times Best Sellers List is a bit of a flimsy stance to take.
But then the other shoe drops and Buchanan calls her an Affirmative Action hire. The patently ignorant and racist side of Pat Buchanan seeps onto the screen from there.
I don't believe I have ever heard anyone state that because white men wrote the Constitution and The Declaration Of Independance that that is the reason that only white men should be appointed to the Supreme Court. And, if one follows Buchanan's logic all the way down, it means that only white mean should be allowed any high level job in government - and more than likely the private sector as well.
And to claim that not enough black men died during wartime to warrant their entire race from accending to any position of power - whether in government or the private sector - is one of the most disturbing and shameful things to even consider.
And to add to Maddow's explicitly valid point that Sotomayor has more judicial experience coming into her nomination, it should be stated that her experience is also unique, as she has heard cases involving 21 century technology that no other Supreme Court Justice ever has. In taking this into account, Sotomayor is truly more qualified than Pat Buchanan could possibly imagine.
It is people like Pat Buchanan, who are so overtly eager to play the victim any and everytime a person of differing ethnicity moves upward in this country, that are attempting to drag America back into an era where discrimination based on race, creed, color, and even religious affiliation was acceptable.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Someone Needs A Dictionary
Via Think Progress
Here's Pat Buchanan speaking at the "English Only" event.
Ah, the irony tastes so sweet.
Isn't it interesting that those that champion things like the English language, the constitution, or even basic science are always the ones that screw it all up?
Here's Pat Buchanan speaking at the "English Only" event.
Judge Sotomayor is up there at school in New York, she gets a scholarship to Princeton, she’s graduated with all these big honors and awards they said she never won. What’s she doing there in the summer? They said her adviser told her to read children’s classics so she can learn English better. How do you graduate number one in Princeton if you’re in the summer and you’re reading Rumpelstiltskin and Snow White? [laughter] [...]
Ah, the irony tastes so sweet.
Isn't it interesting that those that champion things like the English language, the constitution, or even basic science are always the ones that screw it all up?
Friday, May 22, 2009
Ignorance As A Weapon Of Domestic Terrorism?
Sure, it's a stronge statement, but let's take a look at what we are talking about here.
The reason that "terrorism" works is because the attacker(s) only hav to succeed once. That's it. Once they have, all they have to do is sit back and watch their victim(s) - it's the U.S. in this case - start destroying themselves from the inside.
Conservative misinformation is a perfect weapon to continue to, in essense, aid terrorism in America.
Here's some examples.
Quinn seems to be forgetting that US tax dollars have been footing the bill for Guantanamo since its opening. The issue with prisons in the US has little to do with "shoring up security" as one of the primary problems are overcrowding, lack of basic maintenance on the buildings, and lack of qualified personel to run the prison system.
Also, known terrorists are already housed in US Supermax prisons.
I haven't heard anyone complaining that they are afriad that these men are being detained in the US.
Buchanan seems to accept the line of thinking that suspected terrorist detainees are going to enjoy luxuries when/if they are transfered to Supermax prisons in the US. Again, taxpayer money has has always funded prisons in the US. This talk of "bail" and "when they get out" is rabid hyperbole that lacks any pretense of intelligent discourse. It's fair to say that Pat just might agree with Newt Gingrich's wild assumption that when/if these detainees are released, that they will receive welfare.
Then why hasn't this happened to those terrorists that we already have housed in the US?
Bob Cesca has an interesting take on this clip:
Despite the very real fact that no one has ever escaped from a Supermax facility, Halperin seems to be having visions of a mash-up between Con-Air and escape from New York.
And, as always, the Conservative media mouthpiece that is Fox"News" perpetuates this faulty line of thinking.
Sean Hannity, one of the loudest voices in the lunatic-fringe conservative movement, seems to take great joy in his misinformation.
The Director of National Intelligence, as Hannity stated at the start of the clip, was referring only to the 17 Chinese Uighur. What is more interesting about this point is that George W. Bush's administration was fine with releasing them.
The level of misinformation and blatant lies that have become so ingrained in the national dialogue is staggering.
One of the basic definitions of "terrorism" is this:
By it's very nature, the conservative movement, their media arm, as well as the pundits, writers, and radio personalities that abide by their doctrine of fear and misinformation are perpetuating a level of terrorism in this country that is growing to such a state that it is becoming such an ingrained portion of common conversation that many people aren't able to discern between the lies and the truth.
The reason that "terrorism" works is because the attacker(s) only hav to succeed once. That's it. Once they have, all they have to do is sit back and watch their victim(s) - it's the U.S. in this case - start destroying themselves from the inside.
Conservative misinformation is a perfect weapon to continue to, in essense, aid terrorism in America.
Here's some examples.
Quinn seems to be forgetting that US tax dollars have been footing the bill for Guantanamo since its opening. The issue with prisons in the US has little to do with "shoring up security" as one of the primary problems are overcrowding, lack of basic maintenance on the buildings, and lack of qualified personel to run the prison system.
Also, known terrorists are already housed in US Supermax prisons.
Detained in the supermax facility in Colorado are Ramzi Yousef, who headed the group that carried out the first bombing of the World Trade Center in February 1993; Zacarias Moussaoui, convicted of conspiring in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001; Ahmed Ressam, of the Dec. 31, 1999, Los Angeles airport millennium attack plots; Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, conspirator in several plots, including one to assassinate President George W. Bush; and Wadih el-Hage, convicted of the 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kenya.
I haven't heard anyone complaining that they are afriad that these men are being detained in the US.
Buchanan seems to accept the line of thinking that suspected terrorist detainees are going to enjoy luxuries when/if they are transfered to Supermax prisons in the US. Again, taxpayer money has has always funded prisons in the US. This talk of "bail" and "when they get out" is rabid hyperbole that lacks any pretense of intelligent discourse. It's fair to say that Pat just might agree with Newt Gingrich's wild assumption that when/if these detainees are released, that they will receive welfare.
Then why hasn't this happened to those terrorists that we already have housed in the US?
Bob Cesca has an interesting take on this clip:
Yeah, what if we put a terrorist in a prison (sort of like the dozens of terrorists currently in our domestic prison system) and then the ghost of Saddam Hussein appears as a gigantic marshamallow man and bashes a hole in the prison wall, releasing a mutated 100-foot-tall "Mr. Jingles" mouse into nearby neighborhoods where it devours YOUR CHILDREN.
Despite the very real fact that no one has ever escaped from a Supermax facility, Halperin seems to be having visions of a mash-up between Con-Air and escape from New York.
And, as always, the Conservative media mouthpiece that is Fox"News" perpetuates this faulty line of thinking.
....the administration has consistently maintained that terrorists will not be released into the United States. At a January 27 hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, Gates responded to a comment by Rep. John McHugh (R-NY) about the administration's detainee policy by saying, "I can't imagine a situation in which detainees at Guantanamo who were considered a danger to the people of the United States would simply be released here."
Similarly, during a May 7 hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) asked Attorney General Eric Holder: "Do you have the authority under the law to do this, to bring terrorists into this country and bring them into the community?" Holder responded, "[W]ith regard to those who you would describe as terrorists, we would not bring them into this country and release them, anybody who we consider to be a terrorist, as I think you're using the word."
Nevertheless, Fox News hosts and contributors have repeatedly advanced the baseless Republican charge that the administration intends to release terrorists held at Guantánamo Bay into the United States...
Sean Hannity, one of the loudest voices in the lunatic-fringe conservative movement, seems to take great joy in his misinformation.
The Director of National Intelligence, as Hannity stated at the start of the clip, was referring only to the 17 Chinese Uighur. What is more interesting about this point is that George W. Bush's administration was fine with releasing them.
...Blair was answering a specific question about detainees belonging to the Uighur ethnic group from western China. As Media Matters for America has noted, the Bush administration told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in September 2008 that the 17 Uighur detainees "will be treated as if they are no longer enemy combatants."
The level of misinformation and blatant lies that have become so ingrained in the national dialogue is staggering.
One of the basic definitions of "terrorism" is this:
The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized.
By it's very nature, the conservative movement, their media arm, as well as the pundits, writers, and radio personalities that abide by their doctrine of fear and misinformation are perpetuating a level of terrorism in this country that is growing to such a state that it is becoming such an ingrained portion of common conversation that many people aren't able to discern between the lies and the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The Playlist Of Doom
