Patterico's Pontifications

4/10/2008

Detroit NAACP Headlines Old Uncle Jeremiah Wright

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 3:24 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

GatewayPundit reports that the Detroit branch of the NAACP has asked Jeremiah Wright to speak at its 53rd Annual Fight for Freedom Fund dinner:

“They made the official announcement this morning.
The event is billed as the largest sit-down dinner in the country.

The theme for the NAACP Dinner is “A Change Is Going To Come!”
…Amen to that!

He will no doubt get a standing ovation before he even opens his mouth.
Maybe he’ll include a few snippets from some of his sermons?”

I guess that puts to rest any possibility that Jeremiah Wright is just an “old uncle” who says things most blacks disagree with.

— DRJ

117 Responses to “Detroit NAACP Headlines Old Uncle Jeremiah Wright”

  1. Any direct source? Not saying it isn’t true, it’s just that as far as I can tell, all the conservablogs are citing each other, and none of them are linking to a primary source.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  2. Oh no! Karl Rove’s mind control techiques have overwhelmed the Detroit NAACP’s leadership and Karl is undermining Obama’s chances of becoming President.

    How else could they be so stupid?

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  3. Because Reverend Wrong doesn’t care about anyone but himself. He is always correct, after all. And I have watched all kinds of people who ought to know better defend him repeatedly. When confronted by Wright’s despicable statement that HIV was invented by this country to kill African-Americans, the response is: (1) Tuskeegee, and (2) well, look at all the after school programs his church supports.

    Yet those same people rail about right wing nutjob preachers.

    This is a GIANT mistake by the NAACP.

    So much for that dialogue on race. It’s kind of a sermon, instead. Just like the other ones that Jeremiah likes to give.

    Eric Blair (2708f4)

  4. Phil – Gateway links to the NAACP’s press release.

    This ensures that Wright will stay in the headlines for a few more weeks.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  5. Yeah, Daily, except the NAACP press release doesn’t say Wright is speaking.

    http://prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-09-2008/0004789773&EDATE=

    And the NAACP web site says the speaker is TBDA.

    http://www.detroitnaacp.org/specialprograms/fightforfreedom.asp

    Either someone has changed these documents in reaction to the furor, or they never actually said Wright was speaking.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  6. Phil,

    GatewayPundit had several links so it’s easy to overlook but his second link – “The event is billed as the largest sit-down dinner in the country” – goes to a Detroit Free Press article published 7 hours ago. Several other major newspapers reported this 7 hours ago, too, probably as a result of the 10 AM Detroit NAACP press conference.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  7. The NAACP must have made the announcement verbally. The Free Press articles don’t cite any sources, either.

    Phil (0ef625)

  8. Here is a link to about 174 articles.

    Not hard to find at all, actually.

    Patterico (4bda0b)

  9. It will be interesting to see what he has to say after all this hullabaloo. But I think his emotional outbursts are way overblown. He’s not the one running for the office.

    Most of my friends make comments that I can’t defend at times. Most of you here fall into that category too, by the way. But I don’t shun you for it.

    Some of the best leaders, scientists and philosophers in history had their blind spots.

    If Obama had been listening to someone for the sole purpose of racism, you would have more of a reason to be alarmed, but this was his religion.

    How do you know that Obama didn’t say something to Wright about some of his sermons? You don’t, do you?

    I’m glad that all of you guys have never uttered a racist word and are as pure as the new fallen snow.

    How many times has McCain talked to racists and given them a pass? I bet it happens often. We just don’t have the tape, that’s all.

    Wright is old and I’m sure has had to put up with a lot of abuse from whites, so giving him a small break on some of his emotional sermons wouldn’t kill you.

    Psyberian (d18acc)

  10. How many times has McCain talked to racists and given them a pass? I bet it happens often. We just don’t have the tape, that’s all.

    Psyberian – When you find out and can make a useful comarison to smear McCain, since that’s what you want to do, let us know, please.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  11. So “Denial by any other name is still denial,” presberian? Thanks, anyway.

    J. Peden (7012a3)

  12. Yes, we all have mentors like Jeremiah Wright. And we’ve all had wine and cheese with Bernadine Dohrn. While having wine and cheese with Bernadine Dorhn, we NEVER heard her say that she approved of the Manson family stabbing Sharon Tate to death with a meat fork. If she had said such a thing, which she didn’t and which we wouldn’t have heard if she did, we certainly would have objected. Nobody has spoken out more against the murder of pregnant women than we have!

    Glen Wishard (02562c)

  13. Psyberian, this isn’t about a careless racist remark or two. These were planned sermons. There were many of them. The crowd cheered him on. He openly honors other hate-filled racist blacks. Until you come to grips with the fact that Obama has for twenty years attended a church that considers hatred and racism a part of their message and mission, you can’t be taken seriously on this subject.

    Of course, people who know you couldn’t take you seriously even if you did come to grips with the facts of this situation because you have proven yourself over and over to be a partisan hypocrite. When a Democrat gets in trouble for being associated with a racist, you argue that it’s no big deal. But if the Wright thing had never happened and instead if McCain’s minister had been recorded making a careless racist remark or two then you would be in the front row of the crowd demanding that McCain drop out of the race for being associated with an evil racist. You know it’s true. We know it’s true.

    On another note, doesn’t it ever embarrass you to be such an open hypocrite? I’ve never understood this about the Left, how they can constantly switch their opinion from one side to the other based on how it effect the political debate. I would be ashamed for people to see me so openly dishonest and I just don’t understand how you guys don’t seem to mind, as long as you fool enough people.

    Doc Rampage (01f543)

  14. The Chicago Sun-Times is carrying the story as well.

    The embattled former minister of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has been selected as the keynote speaker for the Detroit branch of the NAACP’s 53rd Annual Fight for Freedom Fund dinner.

    The Rev. Jeremiah Wright will speak April 27 at the event, whose past speakers have included Obama.

    LarryD (feb78b)

  15. I like how you all think Rev. Wright is some sub-human piece of garbage that should be forced to live on an island by himself somewhere, like he has no friends or family since Republicans started screaming from the rooftops how much of an evil racist he is. It’s a pretend story, one of the many shiny distractions Republican leadership uses to keep you all from having to think too hard about anything.

    If you’re a smart person, you don’t care about Rev. Wright. Like Colin Powell. Does he carry any weight in Republican circles anymore? Colin Powell just said he thought Obama has handled all this bullshit well, and commended him for his speech on race. Is Colin Powell some race-card playing victim? Is he just a liberal apologist? Or is he a smart person that recognizes this non-story for the complete and utter bullshit that it is?

    Levi (76ef55)

  16. But if the Wright thing had never happened and instead if McCain’s minister had been recorded making a careless racist remark or two then you would be in the front row of the crowd demanding that McCain drop out of the race for being associated with an evil racist. You know it’s true. We know it’s true.

    McCain’s ‘spiritual guide’ is a faith healer that thinks all Islam needs to be eradicated. He just courted this Hagee guy’s endorsement, and Hagee thinks gays caused Hurricane Katrina and that the divine right of the United States is to trigger the Biblical Apocalypse.

    These are crazy preachers, espousing crazy positions, that John McCain mostly agrees with. I know it doesn’t meet the ’20 year standard’ that you’re all insisting is so important (just like everything else about this story, it’s not), but we don’t need a little hypothetical about what would happen if McCain had some idiot ministers on his side, because he does have some idiot ministers on his side, and he’s gotten a pass.

    And if anyone bothers to respond to this, can you just leave out the ‘But Obama sat in Wright’s church for 20 years!’ That’s not convincing. Try to talk specifically about what McCain’s crazy ministers said and explain how that’s not worse than what Wright said. We’ll see if any of you can do it.

    Levi (76ef55)

  17. Levi stop digging a hole. You have already reached China.

    “McCain’s ’spiritual guide’ is a faith healer”

    I am sure if McCain had been involved with a White Supremacist church we would have heard about it by now.

    davod (5bdbd3)

  18. Levi:

    Colin Powell is just being a politician.

    davod (5bdbd3)

  19. Levi – Nice try. Powell is trying to remain above the fray while he pretends to be uncommitted. Talking to Diane Sawyer:

    “Returning to presidential politics, Powell condemned controversial remarks by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s pastor of 20 years, as “deplorable” but complimented the Democratic candidate for his speech on race that followed in the aftermath.”

    “Rev. Wright is also somebody who has made enormous contributions in his community and has turned a lot of lives around,” Powell said, “And so, I have to put that in context with these very offensive comments that he made, which I reject out of hand.”

    By definition Levi, intelligent people don’t write comments such as yours, why do you keep trying.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  20. Try to talk specifically about what McCain’s crazy ministers said and explain how that’s not worse than what Wright said. We’ll see if any of you can do it.

    Levi – If it’s as bad as you say, I think we’d be hearing about it. I think you’re full of shit as usual. Is Bill Maher peddling this crap on his show?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  21. Colin Powell is just being a politician.

    Levi – Nice try. Powell is trying to remain above the fray while he pretends to be uncommitted. Talking to Diane Sawyer:

    So what, he doesn’t actually believe these things? He’s just saying them to keep his political options open? That’s an awfully convenient story. I thought Republicans liked and respected Colin Powell, and would maybe value his fair and accurate assessment of the Wright story? But nope, he’s just bullshitting, right?

    Levi (76ef55)

  22. It’s a pretend story, one of the many shiny distractions Republican leadership uses to keep you all from having to think too hard about anything.

    First of all, this is a real story. I think what you mean is it’s an insignificant story, which is of course a matter of opinion. Pretend stories come from liberals, like the Bush fake memos, the claim Rumsfeld ordered what happened at Abu Ghraib, Rove ordered the prosecution of the former Alabama governor etc.

    Come to think of it, the idea the former Republican CEO of Diebold secretly ordered their engineers to make their machines hackable resulting in the theft of Ohio by Bush in 2004 would be another fake story.

    As for the significance of this story, I would think that a major civil rights organization inviting someone to deliver a keynote address who has suggested we deserved to be attacked on 9-11 and various other lunatic ideas such as that AIDS was created to kill Africans, etc. is significant to any normal person. It would be significant even if Obama didn’t attend his church. I don’t know what Obama’s speech logically has to do with it.

    As for whether Obama had anything to answer for with respect to Wright, I think post 14 does a good job of answering that.

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  23. Levi – If it’s as bad as you say, I think we’d be hearing about it. I think you’re full of shit as usual. Is Bill Maher peddling this crap on his show?

    As bad as I say? This isn’t some mystery, go read about these bozos. Hagee’s whole philosophy of life is that America needs to invade the Middle East and fight wars there until the Rapture comes. That’s a crazy idea, especially to atheist types such as myself, and McCain actively sought this guy’s endorsement. And this faith healer guy, well do you need to say anything beyond ‘he’s a faith healer?’ If you do, he shares Hagee’s wild-eye bloodlust for Muslims, and he thinks Islam needs to be eradicated. This is patently crazy stuff.

    There was this minor little blip of interest in this story, most emanating from liberal blogs. But it didn’t reach the Rev. Wright story’s level of coverage, because, pay attention here, the right wing has more control of the mainstream media than you’ve been told. John McCain has the press corps of this country giddily eating out of his underwear. They can’t be expected to dis McCain, McCain has them over for Bar-B-Q! But if Matt Drudge and Michelle Malkin and Glenn Beck just scream about Rev. Wright enough, they’ll pick up that story, no problem. That fits with the narrative, somehow. That’s how the right wing disseminates it’s opinion, it just shrilly repeats it over and over again until it infects the mainstream media, which is inevitable, because the mainstream media is filled to the brim with lazy snobs.

    Levi (76ef55)

  24. No, Levi, again you are silly. The story did not reach the level of Rev. Wright coverage because Hagee did not baptise McCain’s kids, advise McCain on whether or not to run for President, sit on an advisory council of religious leaders, lecture to McCain’ on a weekly basis for 20 years, and more.

    As Wright did for Obama.

    And since you know this, its been pointed out to you multiple time – once again we see that you just ignore reality and keep repeating failed argument over and over.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  25. Levi – Obama should have just taken a page from the Tev. Eric Lee and said Rev. Wright’s words were obviously being twisted by the Jooos who control the media in this country. I’m sure that would have put the whole thing to bed. Obviouslt he screwed up.

    Contrary to your assertion in #24, those media controlling Jooos are liberals.

    Care to talk about the Obama’s close buddy the PLO operative?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  26. First of all, this is a real story. I think what you mean is it’s an insignificant story, which is of course a matter of opinion. Pretend stories come from liberals, like the Bush fake memos, the claim Rumsfeld ordered what happened at Abu Ghraib, Rove ordered the prosecution of the former Alabama governor etc.

    I don’t have time to talk about all this, but it’s ironic what you say about Rummy, because as of this week we’re finding out definitively that Cabinet level officials knew all about the ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ used in Iraq. If you actually believed Abu Graihb was a few bad apples in the first place, well what can I say? You gobble up bullshit like it’s your job.

    Come to think of it, the idea the former Republican CEO of Diebold secretly ordered their engineers to make their machines hackable resulting in the theft of Ohio by Bush in 2004 would be another fake story.

    There was nothing secret about it. The CEO announced his desire to ‘deliver’ Ohio for Bush, and those machines can be hacked by monkeys. But like I said, not enough time.

    As for the significance of this story, I would think that a major civil rights organization inviting someone to deliver a keynote address who has suggested we deserved to be attacked on 9-11 and various other lunatic ideas such as that AIDS was created to kill Africans, etc. is significant to any normal person. It would be significant even if Obama didn’t attend his church. I don’t know what Obama’s speech logically has to do with it.

    Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell both said we deserved 9-11 because of the gays, and here we are, 7 years later, and Robertson is still an important figure in the Republican party. McCain went and talked at Falwell’s university.

    There’s no significance to any organization asking any person to talk, this is America. Wright’s hardly the craziest, most divisive figure in the public square, he just has a well-greased and desperate smear machine running against him.

    As for whether Obama had anything to answer for with respect to Wright, I think post 14 does a good job of answering that.

    He doesn’t have anything to answer with respect to Wright, post 14 doesn’t convince me that he does. I knew Obama didn’t agree with Wright about those crazier things, he said as much anyway, that’s all I need to know. You guys have erected an impossible standard for him out of this 20 year association of theirs, but I don’t buy that, liberals don’t buy that, smart people don’t buy that. Just keep screaming into the wind.

    Levi (76ef55)

  27. I thought Republicans…………..

    Levi – This is one of your major malfunctions and where you get yourself in trouble. You make up shit that you imagine Republicans think and care about and then believe it. You never present evidence for it because you live in an alternate universe. The same goes for your continued efforts to link McCain with extremist pastors. Let’s see something concrete from you Levi.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  28. McCain’s ’spiritual guide’ is a faith healer that thinks all Islam needs to be eradicated. He just courted this Hagee guy’s endorsement, and Hagee thinks gays caused Hurricane Katrina and that the divine right of the United States is to trigger the Biblical Apocalypse.

    If in fact he has said those things, they are his theology. So what? By “eradicated” I assume you mean he wants the religion to disappear, not all the Muslims, and you just worded it imprecisely for some reason.

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  29. Levi – Ohio in 2004 is a non-issue. All but the young and psychotic dems have moved on. They were wrong. You can read about it. I explained it a few weeks ago. No need to derail a thread.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  30. No, Levi, again you are silly. The story did not reach the level of Rev. Wright coverage because Hagee did not baptise McCain’s kids, advise McCain on whether or not to run for President, sit on an advisory council of religious leaders, lecture to McCain’ on a weekly basis for 20 years, and more.

    As Wright did for Obama.

    And since you know this, its been pointed out to you multiple time – once again we see that you just ignore reality and keep repeating failed argument over and over.

    You must have missed this little request:

    And if anyone bothers to respond to this, can you just leave out the ‘But Obama sat in Wright’s church for 20 years!’ That’s not convincing. Try to talk specifically about what McCain’s crazy ministers said and explain how that’s not worse than what Wright said. We’ll see if any of you can do it.

    Yes, you and others have said that a million times already. I still don’t see how it’s relevant. You can scream ‘But he baptized his kids!’ all you want, that’s not going to make me think Obama’s secretly some sort of racist Black Panther (that is what you’re implying about Obama, isn’t it?)
    I mean what sort of bearing does Rev Wright baptizing Obama’s kids have on Obama’s ability to be President? I know, I know, ‘It shows he has poor judgment.’ Don’t buy that, either. He’s a liberal and he’d be a liberal with the Presidency, his judgment is in excellent shape as far as liberals are concerned.

    You think you’re explaining things to me, you’re just rattling off a bunch of bullshit and insisting that I’m supposed to care about it. I don’t. I’ve asked you to try to explain how what Wright says should inform my estimation of Obama, and you can’t. Nobody can. Because it doesn’t fucking matter.

    Levi (76ef55)

  31. The same goes for your continued efforts to link McCain with extremist pastors

    Wow, what do you mean by that? My continued efforts? McCain sought out Hagee, begged him for his endorsement, so he could shore up evangelical support. You think I’m just making this shit up?

    Levi (76ef55)

  32. Levi – Ohio in 2004 is a non-issue. All but the young and psychotic dems have moved on. They were wrong. You can read about it. I explained it a few weeks ago. No need to derail a thread.

    Did I bring it up?

    Levi (76ef55)

  33. Wow, what do you mean by that? My continued efforts? McCain sought out Hagee, begged him for his endorsement, so he could shore up evangelical support. You think I’m just making this shit up?

    Levi – Link please just to settle the point. I didn’t say you made this up. He doesn’t have a 20 year association with him, does he?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  34. Did I bring it up?

    You whined that if you had more space you could prove it. I say you are full of shit.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  35. Come to think of it, the idea the former Republican CEO of Diebold secretly ordered their engineers to make their machines hackable resulting in the theft of Ohio by Bush in 2004 would be another fake story.

    There was nothing secret about it. The CEO announced his desire to ‘deliver’ Ohio for Bush, and those machines can be hacked by monkeys.

    There was nothing secret about the CEO ordering his engineers to make the machines hackable? He ordered it PUBLICLY? Ah I see idiot, once the CEO said he wanted Bush to carry Ohio we can just make the leap to his having ordered his engineers to make the machines hackable. So it was all out in the open. Also the fact few or none of the voting machines actually used in Ohio were Diebold is of no significance. He wanted Bush to carry Ohio and worked for his election. The machines have security flaws. Therefore he essentially PUBLICLY ordered his engineers to make them hackable, and hundreds of non-Diebold, mostly punchcard machines had their votes switched to Bush as a result. Idiot.

    But like I said, not enough time.

    I think you should take the time to explain this very clearly. It’s obviously something you have worked out very clearly deep in the recesses of your mind and you have an obligation to explain it. It’s probably very complex. Republican CEO wants to “deliver” Ohio for Bush. He announces his intention to steal the votes for Bush in public. Probably he’s not very smart. Diebold machines have flaws. Therefore it follows as night follows day that he sent memos to his engineers to compromise them and that hundreds of non-Diebold machines had their votes switched as a result. You really need to explain this Einstein.

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  36. If in fact he has said those things, they are his theology. So what? By “eradicated” I assume you mean he wants the religion to disappear, not all the Muslims, and you just worded it imprecisely for some reason.

    Perfect example. If it’s a white guy supporting a Republican: ‘So what? It’s his theology.’ Parsley calls Islam a ‘false religion’ and says that America was founded to ‘destroy’ Islam. Those are his words, from his book. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming when he said ‘destroy’ he really meant ‘convert,’ the notion is just as stupid.

    Why can’t Wright say the things he said without Republicans having such a fit? How come ‘it’s his theology’ works for McCain’s guy but not Obama’s guy?

    Levi (76ef55)

  37. You whined that if you had more space you could prove it. I say you are full of shit.

    In other words, no. I didn’t bring it up. Thanks for wasting everybody’s time.

    Levi (76ef55)

  38. I don’t have time to talk about all this, but it’s ironic what you say about Rummy, because as of this week we’re finding out definitively that Cabinet level officials knew all about the ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ used in Iraq.

    You have a link?

    If you actually believed Abu Graihb was a few bad apples in the first place, well what can I say?

    I don’t know, what can you say? You tell me. You can always make more things up.

    You gobble up bullshit like it’s your job.

    No that’s your job. You do it very well.

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  39. Levi – Link please just to settle the point. I didn’t say you made this up. He doesn’t have a 20 year association with him, does he?

    No, he doesn’t. Tell me again why that matters, and why Obama’s 20 year association does. You haven’t proven to me that it does.

    It seems to me that if we’re comparing and contrasting the relative craziness of each of these pastors, the most illustrative evidence would be the actual things that they said, and not how long each has been associated with their respective Presidential candidates. According to you, the only metric that matters is how long they’ve known each other. We appear to be at an impasse, because I’m never going to buy your premise for how we should be talking about this, because it doesn’t make any sense. Too bad.

    Levi (76ef55)

  40. There is an important fact to this matter that is either being overlooked deliberately or is not being made apparent – Jeremiah Wright, as a legal American citizen, has a right to say what he wants by way of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. But the fact remains – he has said the things he has said, on record, in a specific context – as a man of God. Furthermore, they are remarks Mr. Obama accepted without hesitation or question until they were challenged and questioned.

    Thank you for your time.

    The Outlander (e46c56)

  41. You have a link?

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4631535

    Says Cheney and the Cabinet insulated George Bush from all the torture they were authorizing.

    I don’t know, what can you say? You tell me. You can always make more things up.

    Eight people don’t just start torturing thousands of people out of the blue. Even prior to those photos being released, administration and DoJ officials were busy outlining legal arguments in essays and memos for how the President could torture people. This isn’t a hard connection to make.

    You gobble up bullshit like it’s your job.

    No that’s your job. You do it very well.

    Haha, way to go. The ol’ “I’m rubber, you’re glue!” counter. Good luck in fourth grade kid!

    Levi (76ef55)

  42. Parsley calls Islam a ‘false religion’ and says that America was founded to ‘destroy’ Islam. Those are his words, from his book. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming when he said ‘destroy’ he really meant ‘convert,’ the notion is just as stupid.

    I don’t care about anyone’s theology unless it mandates some kind of accompanying action. Muslims think everyone should be a Muslim and that they will go to hell if they’re not. I couldn’t care less. If they start killing people as a result that bothers me.

    Why can’t Wright say the things he said without Republicans having such a fit? How come ‘it’s his theology’ works for McCain’s guy but not Obama’s guy?

    Wright’s statements were not theology. They were not said in any sort of theological context. They were largely just things he believes. As I said before the fact he is invited to speak at a major civil rights organization after saying those things is newsworthy to any normal person.

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  43. But the fact remains – he has said the things he has said, on record, in a specific context – as a man of God.

    What are you saying, that free speech doesn’t apply in certain, specific contexts?

    Furthermore, they are remarks Mr. Obama accepted without hesitation or question until they were challenged and questioned.

    Fantasy. How do you know he accepted them without hesitation or question? Did you find a portal into Barack Obama’s mind?

    Levi (76ef55)

  44. I don’t care about anyone’s theology unless it mandates some kind of accompanying action. Muslims think everyone should be a Muslim and that they will go to hell if they’re not. I couldn’t care less. If they start killing people as a result that bothers me.

    Parsley’s theology mandates action, so does Hagee’s. It mandates perpetual war in the Middle East until Jesus takes all of us to heaven. Wright’s not suggesting anybody take any sort of action at all. He may have said the government invented AIDS, but he didn’t say the government invented AIDS, so let’s kill all the white people.

    By your standards, Hagee and Parsley should be the target of your ire, not Wright.

    Wright’s statements were not theology. They were not said in any sort of theological context. They were largely just things he believes. As I said before the fact he is invited to speak at a major civil rights organization after saying those things is newsworthy to any normal person.

    Don’t pretend like you know anything about the context of Wright’s comments. They were theological, he’s a preacher, and he’s giving a sermon. ‘Just the things he believes?’ What is that if not theology?

    Levi (76ef55)

  45. No, he doesn’t. Tell me again why that matters, and why Obama’s 20 year association does.

    Does it hurt to be that stupid?

    Uncle Pinky (5ba4c8)

  46. They say that a million monkeys typing at random on typewriters for a million years will eventually reproduce the complete works of Shakespeare. I imagine that at some far earlier point before that, they will have typed Levi’s comments. That point seems to have been reached. But who provided them the computers?

    nk (6b7d4f)

  47. Says Cheney and the Cabinet insulated George Bush from all the torture they were authorizing.

    Eight people don’t just start torturing thousands of people out of the blue. Even prior to those photos being released, administration and DoJ officials were busy outlining legal arguments in essays and memos for how the President could torture people. This isn’t a hard connection to make.

    That’s talking about waterboarding. It doesn’t give any other specifics. It probably includes things like sleep deprivation. It doesn’t say anything about Abu Ghraib. I said Abu Ghraib. I don’t know what your point is here. It also doesn’t say anything about “thousands of people”. You constantly need to fabricate, embellish etc.

    You gobble up bullshit like it’s your job.

    No that’s your job. You do it very well.

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  48. Don’t pretend like you know anything about the context of Wright’s comments. They were theological, he’s a preacher, and he’s giving a sermon. ‘Just the things he believes?’ What is that if not theology?

    No anything a preacher says does not constitute theology. More BS. Hagee etc. base their pronouncements on passages from the bible. Someone has said the bible says the US created the AIDS virus?

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  49. Once I started noticing irrational superstitions in church, I basically never went back. But I doubt we’ll ever have a president that has a view similar to mine.

    stef (48e229)

  50. Levi – Your spinning is nice to watch but it doesn’t get us very far. The fact is that many people, not just Republicans, were very concerned with Rev. Wright’s remarks and his long close association with Senator Obama. Ultimately it forced Obama into giving a speech on race which left many questions unanswered about Obama’s views on the subject and his relationship with Wright. That has led to further waffling by Obama, additional embarrassing disclosures and kept Wright in the headlines. It has also led the media to focus on Obama’s relationships with other radical members of the clergy such as Meeks and Pfleger. Those relationships are troubling to more than just republicans, who you do not have a mind reading relationship with, which is which they remain a story. Obama’s lack of transparency and history is the real issue, because like many democrats he is reluctant to say what he really thinks because people would not vote for him.

    Those are the facts as I see them. If there were a similar fact pattern with respect to McCain, I think it would have been demonstated by now in spite of your hysterical, shrill, pearl clutchin allegations. People ask for details, you present nothing. Are these reverends on McCains political steering committees, considered members of his family, his moral compass, etc., etc. Can you point to anything for us Levi or are you just throwing shit up against the wall you heard on Bill Maher again? What is the source of your information and why do you believe it is relevant? Why should we believe anything you say here when you lie so frequently and openly?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  51. That’s talking about waterboarding.

    Waterboarding is torture, isn’t it?

    It doesn’t give any other specifics.

    Specifics like crushing kids’ testicles, as long as the President ‘thinks he needs to do that?’ Are those the specifics you’re looking for? If waterboarding isn’t torture, is crushing kids’ testicles torture?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo#Legal_opinions_in_the_War_on_Terror

    It probably includes things like sleep deprivation. It doesn’t say anything about Abu Ghraib. I said Abu Ghraib. I don’t know what your point is here. It also doesn’t say anything about “thousands of people”. You constantly need to fabricate, embellish etc.

    Abu Graihb is the obvious manifestation of this administration’s torture authorization, so is Guantanamo, and the extradition of a Canadian to Syria for beatings, among other things. If you want me to produce an executive order specifically telling the guards at Abu Graihb to sexually humiliate everyone in the jail, well I can’t do that, but that’s not how the fucking government works, bonehead.

    Levi (76ef55)

  52. No anything a preacher says does not constitute theology. More BS. Hagee etc. base their pronouncements on passages from the bible. Someone has said the bible says the US created the AIDS virus?

    You saw the same clips I saw. You’re judging sentences lifted from paragraphs lifted from 45 minute speeches. There is a theological context for him saying things like ‘God damn America,’ and suggesting that we brought 9-11 on ourselves, if you bother to listen to what he’s saying around the comments that your ilk has focused their hysteria on.

    Your defense of Hagee and Parsley is pathetic. The Bible says God invented America to purge the world of Islam, and that’s therefore a theological position? I don’t even know, maybe it does fucking say that. The point is, that’s a stupid idea, and it would get all of us killed. What happened to your ‘as long as it doesn’t mandate anything’ line of bullshit? Was that just a line of bullshit?

    Levi (76ef55)

  53. Levi – Your spinning is nice to watch but it doesn’t get us very far. The fact is that many people, not just Republicans, were very concerned with Rev. Wright’s remarks and his long close association with Senator Obama.

    I don’t dispute that people have become concerned, what I’m saying is they shouldn’t be. You shouldn’t be. Nobody should be, because it doesn’t matter. There’s not even any criticisms about Obama in this story, it’s just a bunch of rank speculation. Again, this is how Republicans operate: by suggestion. You’re hypnotists. They suggest something, repeat it over and over again, then insist that the ensuing hysterical news coverage that they created is proof that ‘people’ care about it. But the media frenzy guarantees that the bullshit ‘suggestion’ will stick with some people, and that’s all you’re hoping for. Maybe you pick up a percentage or two with the Wright story, you’ll pick up three of four with the next overblown non-story.

    Still, nobody has been able to relate to me a convincing argument that proves how Obama would be a shitty President because he went to Wright’s church for 20 years and he let him baptize his kids. This is the difference between Republicans and liberals when it comes to elections, it’s a matter of the issues for liberals, it’s a personality contest with Republicans, who all happen to share the gossiping habits of seventh-grade girls.

    Ultimately it forced Obama into giving a speech on race which left many questions unanswered about Obama’s views on the subject and his relationship with Wright.

    I know Colin Powell’s praise of Obama has already as meaningless in this thread, but I’m bringing him up, and the fact that he seemed to not be left with any unanswered questions about Obama and Wright, again. Even had some good words for Obama.

    So what’s Powell’s problem? Is he as stupid as me, or is he just overly obsessed with Obama? Is he just mindlessly voting for the black guy because he’s a black guy?

    That has led to further waffling by Obama, additional embarrassing disclosures and kept Wright in the headlines. It has also led the media to focus on Obama’s relationships with other radical members of the clergy such as Meeks and Pfleger. Those relationships are troubling to more than just republicans, who you do not have a mind reading relationship with, which is which they remain a story. Obama’s lack of transparency and history is the real issue, because like many democrats he is reluctant to say what he really thinks because people would not vote for him.

    Those are the facts as I see them. If there were a similar fact pattern with respect to McCain, I think it would have been demonstated by now in spite of your hysterical, shrill, pearl clutchin allegations. People ask for details, you present nothing. Are these reverends on McCains political steering committees, considered members of his family, his moral compass, etc., etc. Can you point to anything for us Levi or are you just throwing shit up against the wall you heard on Bill Maher again? What is the source of your information and why do you believe it is relevant? Why should we believe anything you say here when you lie so frequently and openly?

    And the rest is all just bullshit unworthy of redress, except for the highlighted. I can provide links for what I’m saying, only if you accept that if I can prove these things to you, you’ll insist on mounting a campaign against McCain equally as hysterical as the one you’ve been on against Obama? I can’t provide ‘moral compass,’ will ‘spiritual guide’ do? And Hagee’s not a ‘member of his family,’ but McCain is provably not above lobbying for his endorsement, if you’ll agree that that means McCain wants to use him to help him win the Presidency? You want the links? Or can we just skip my having to waste 30 seconds if you’re just going to keep being a hypocrite?

    Levi (76ef55)

  54. It doesn’t give any other specifics.

    Specifics like crushing kids’ testicles, as long as the President ‘thinks he needs to do that?’ Are those the specifics you’re looking for? If waterboarding isn’t torture, is crushing kids’ testicles torture?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo#Legal_opinions_in_the_War_on_Terror

    Now you’ve changed the subject imbecile. You first gave me a link that the administration had authorized certain interrogation techniques. Now you give me a different link where someone comments on what the President theoretically can legally authorize. It has nothing to do with your other link imbecile.

    It’s already known been known for some time that waterboarding was used in a few instances. Many people think there’s nothing wrong with that. In any event it doesn’t somehow equate to Abu Ghraib.

    Abu Graihb is the obvious manifestation of this administration’s torture authorization

    That’s your opinion and it doesn’t make any more sense than your Ohio/Diebold theory. My original comment on Abu Ghraib was in the context of fake stories. Seymour Hersch wrote a book claiming to have the usual “unnamed sources” that the Pentagon had ordered what went on there.

    If you want me to produce an executive order specifically telling the guards at Abu Graihb to sexually humiliate everyone in the jail, well I can’t do that, but that’s not how the fucking government works, bonehead.

    You don’t know anything about how the government works. This is a form of making things up, as usual. “I can’t demonstrate that such and such happened, so I’ll just assume it did, because some completely different thing happened which I’ll equate to this thing in some retarded fashion”. This kind of logic is your stock in trade. It’s how you demonstrate the Diebold CEO stole the election for Bush.

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  55. What are you wearing Levi?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  56. Republicans like Lanny Davis are perpetuating the stories, correct?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  57. Now you’ve changed the subject imbecile. You first gave me a link that the administration had authorized certain interrogation techniques. Now you give me a different link where someone comments on what the President theoretically can legally authorize. It has nothing to do with your other link imbecile.

    It is the same story. Yoo is another high-level Bush official, and he’s arguing that the President has the authority to torture people if ‘he thinks he needs to do that.’ And there’s nothing ‘theoretical’ about a person as high up in the administration as Yoo, flatly asserting that the President isn’t bound by any laws whatsoever, that he is literally justified whatever he wants to do, as long as he feels it’s in the best interest of the country.

    This isn’t some random guy, this is a legal adviser to the President, and he’s arguing that the President is bound by no laws regarding torture. You’re telling me you can’t see how this relates to Abu Graihb, or the ABC story about all the Cabinet principles signing off on torture?

    It’s already known been known for some time that waterboarding was used in a few instances. Many people think there’s nothing wrong with that. In any event it doesn’t somehow equate to Abu Ghraib.

    ‘Many people.’ Do you think there’s nothing wrong with doing that? Don’t hide behind ‘many people,’ grow some balls and take a stand.

    And you don’t think an administration that authorized waterboarding would authorize the use of dogs, sexual humiliation, and stress positions that were the methods used at Abu Graihb? How naive can you be?

    That’s your opinion and it doesn’t make any more sense than your Ohio/Diebold theory. My original comment on Abu Ghraib was in the context of fake stories. Seymour Hersch wrote a book claiming to have the usual “unnamed sources” that the Pentagon had ordered what went on there.

    It’s not a fake story, the official position of the Bush administration is that torture is one of the tools we’re allowed to use in the war against terror. It’s willful, blind ignorance to insist that it was just a handful of soldiers acting all on their own, and it’s fucking idiotic to boot. You don’t even seem interested in the possibility that the Bush administration had a part, is that responsible on your part? I thought we were supposed to mistrust the government, isn’t that what you Republicans preach? What happened to that plan?

    You don’t know anything about how the government works. This is a form of making things up, as usual. “I can’t demonstrate that such and such happened, so I’ll just assume it did, because some completely different thing happened which I’ll equate to this thing in some retarded fashion”. This kind of logic is your stock in trade. It’s how you demonstrate the Diebold CEO stole the election for Bush.

    I know how this government works, I’ve been watching as closely as anyone, and I’d consider myself an expert, thank you very much. We’re dealing with the most secretive administration we’ve ever had here, these people ‘lose’ millions of records and e-mails, they censor their own scientists and reports to keep the public ignorant, Bush gives like 2 press conferences a year, they refuse to testify under oath about anything or comply with any requests for Congressional oversight, they expose covert CIA agents to discredit a political critic, they claim executive privilege frequently to the point of recklessness, and they willfully and needlessly broke FISA laws, preventing anyone from knowing who they’re spying on, and now falsely insist on telecom immunity because it would let out a bunch of state secrets, which it wouldn’t. They’re habitual law-breakers, these stories about how they’ve authorized torture prove as much, so they do their best to keep it all a secret.

    The days of Nixon recording himself confessing to crimes are over. The ABC story said it already, Bush is insulated from these kinds of decisions. It’s always been Cheney and Rumsfeld and Rove calling the shots and covering up as need be. But you have to take a bow, too, they couldn’t have done it without a pliant Republican base ready to mindlessly hop to their defense for what are quite obvious abuses of executive power.

    Levi (76ef55)

  58. #56…
    You mean other than a tin-foil hat?

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  59. Rove is gone.
    Rumsfeld is gone.
    Last time I checked, Cheney was fishing.
    Who’s running things?

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  60. Republicans like Lanny Davis are perpetuating the stories, correct?

    Anybody that is anti-Obama has a vested interest in perpetuating the story, and Hillary people are anti-Obama, by definition, just like the Republicans . That said, Lanny’s really the only dumbshit going on the news about it, so it’s not like there’s some pervasive fear of Rev. Wright among Hillary’s supporters, they’re just being opportunistic because they’re desperate.

    Levi (76ef55)

  61. Levi, notwithstanding your retreat to profanity, your commentary continues to invent nonsense, confuse basic facts, repeat discredited arguments, hide behind non sequiturs when pressed and generally demonstrate your inability to discuss whatever current topic like an adult. Your every opinion about Bush is hilariously shown by your own words to be based on fantasies about the Bush administration long ago discredited.

    Now clean up your mouth.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  62. Levi – Lanny also wrote an op ed in the Wall Street Journal this week. It makes the point the, as you admit, that it’s not just republicans. Thanks for the concession.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  63. Levi, notwithstanding your retreat to profanity, your commentary continues to invent nonsense, confuse basic facts, repeat discredited arguments, hide behind non sequiturs when pressed and generally demonstrate your inability to discuss whatever current topic like an adult. Your every opinion about Bush is hilariously shown by your own words to be based on fantasies about the Bush administration long ago discredited.

    None of what I’ve said here has been discredited to my satisfaction, that’s why I’m repeating it. You insist it’s been discredited, so tell me, what is the benign explanation for losing millions of e-mails and documents that rightfully belong in the public record, or blowing a covert CIA agent’s cover status?

    Each of your posts ignores everything I specifically say, and I’m saying quite a lot at a time here, and focuses on me, and how I’m an idiot, and how my arguments are worthless, etc., etc. And there’s about 5 more of you that do the same thing. I don’t see anybody actually engaging me. You just want me to defer to you, and take your word for it that everything I think I know about politics is liberal propaganda and has been discredited by wise conservatives. Do you really think you’re being convincing?

    Now clean up your mouth.

    Oo, you sound like a tough guy!

    Levi (76ef55)

  64. Levi is the happiest guy we know, since ignorance is bliss.

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  65. Levi – Lanny also wrote an op ed in the Wall Street Journal this week. It makes the point the, as you admit, that it’s not just republicans. Thanks for the concession.

    Just because Lanny Davis says something doesn’t make it true. Politicians and media figures generalize that way all the time. They care about something, usually that something is petty, meaningless, unverified gossip, and so they figure everyone in America must care about it to. That’s how ego works. And if you’re a politician or in the media, ego is obviously an issue for you. I mean, is this your first day on the planet?

    Levi (76ef55)

  66. Levi is the happiest guy we know, since ignorance is bliss.

    ZING! Dude, you should totally be an insult comic!

    Levi (76ef55)

  67. You don’t even seem interested in the possibility that the Bush administration had a part, is that responsible on your part? I thought we were supposed to mistrust the government, isn’t that what you Republicans preach? What happened to that plan?

    Mistrusting government isn’t the same as making facts up out of thin air. It was the Pentagon itself that first revealed allegations about Abu Ghraib. There were several investigations about it. Continuing this is obviously pointless because of your proclivity for making unsupported assumptions in a circular reasoning fashion.

    Gerald A (b9214e)

  68. Mistrusting government isn’t the same as making facts up out of thin air. It was the Pentagon itself that first revealed allegations about Abu Ghraib. There were several investigations about it. Continuing this is obviously pointless because of your proclivity for making unsupported assumptions in a circular reasoning fashion.

    What is circular about my reasoning? The public record has documents showing how prior to the war, administration officials were fabricating legal authority for the President to authorize torture, including all of the methods documented in the Abu Graihb pictures. I’m not making that up, and the Bush administration still insists they have the authority to keep doing all of those things. My ‘unsupported assumptions’ have very much support indeed, from a variety of sources, including Bush administration officials.

    You can put these pieces together, or you can insist they stay apart, and pretend like Lyndie Englund is some criminal mastermind that cooked up the whole thing. Lyndie Englund is dumber than a post. Which makes her substantially more intelligent than Bush and his brain trust, who gave the greenlight for the instances of torture at Abu Graihb and elsewhere.

    Levi (76ef55)

  69. Levi repeated like the parrot he is: they [the Bush White House] expose covert CIA agents to discredit a political critic

    Joe Wilson was not simply “a political critic.” He wrote an editorial for the New York Times in which he implied the President lied in his SOTU address, which he didn’t. Wilson lied about the results of his “investigation” in Niger, lied about knowing for sure that VP Cheney had read his report, and continues to lie about how his wife suggested him for the trip.

    In debunking Wilson’s lies that were spread worldwide, it was the responsibility of the White House to explain the reasons why he was NOT credible. Key to that was explaining that Wilson’s analysis was of the Niger situation was NOT (as he carefully implied in his book tour) especially critical to making the case for war.

    Joe Wilson told the MSM and his memoir’s readers one story, but when he was under oath before the Senate Intelligence Committee, the facts mysteriously changed. From the Senate report:

    On at least two occasions [Wilson] admitted that he had no direct knowledge to support some of his claims and that he was drawing on either unrelated past experiences or no information at all.

    For example, when asked how he “knew” that the Intelligence Community had rejected the possibility of a Niger-Iraq uranium deal, as he wrote in his book, he told Committee staff that his assertion may have involved “a little literary flair.”

    Since you will swallow that line, Levi, just change the semantics when it comes to President Bush. He doesn’t “lie.” He just uses “a little literary flair.” There, isn’t that better?

    L.N. Smithee (e1f2bf)

  70. And of course, that Valerie Plame was not actually exposed by the Bush White House – rather Colin Powell’s State Department – is yet another fact that Levi ignores in his never-ending quest to misrepresent every single historical fact of the last millenia.

    Got a little more typing to do, Levi, to work your back through the Battle of Hastings – which will be Karl de Rove’s work by the time you are through.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  71. I’m back to my very old question, if Bush is such a liar why do his critics have to lie so much to “prove” it?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  72. And, if he is a dumb as a stump, how did he win, and how does he continually run circles around his opponents?

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  73. Way to seize on like the least important thing I said. Congratulations, you can both recite the stock Republican response to somebody bringing up Valerie Plame. But really, all that in response to just those 10 indisputable words that I wrote? Everything else I said in that big long post gets dismissed because you want to start in about Joe Wilson?

    This is what I’m talking about when I say the Republican base is easily distracted. The Bush administration did expose Valerie Plame, unless you don’t count the State Department and it’s high level officials as members of the Bush administration, which would make you a retard, by the way. And here we go again, pinning it all on one guy. What do you idiots think Karl Rove was doing in the White House? I mean, aren’t you the morons that insist that the Clintons were having people whacked and faking their suicides? You’re telling me that you’re so uncreative as to not believe that the Bush administration would meticulously plan out everything they say to the press?

    Levi (76ef55)

  74. And, if he is a dumb as a stump, how did he win, and how does he continually run circles around his opponents?

    He’s leading a very large flock of much dumber people, that’s how. I mean at least he gets to be President and pretend he’s a fighter pilot and cash in after he leaves office, what do you people get out of it? Endless war and a shit economy. That’s a bad trade. You’d know that if you all weren’t so dumb.

    Levi (76ef55)

  75. Retard.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  76. But, Levi, if the Republicans are a bunch of dummies, and the Dems are the Best and Brightest, why does Bush continually best the Dems?

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  77. And, if he is a dumb as a stump, how did he win, and how does he continually run circles around his opponents?


    He’s leading a very large flock of much dumber people, that’s how.

    So his opponents are retards?

    Paul (4e4a20)

  78. But really, all that in response to just those 10 indisputable words that I wrote?

    This from a commenter that constantly writes 200+ word comments.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  79. But, Levi, if the Republicans are a bunch of dummies, and the Dems are the Best and Brightest, why does Bush continually best the Dems?

    Because everyone is stupid by default, and it’s really easy to stay stupid. It actually requires a little bit of effort to be smart, so there’s not as many smart people as there are stupid people. And because we live in a democracy, stupid people’s votes count just as much as smart people’s. Thus, George Bush.

    Levi (76ef55)

  80. The Bush administration did expose Valerie Plame, unless you don’t count the State Department and it’s high level officials as members of the Bush administration, which would make you a retard, by the way.

    Oh, you mean the holdovers of the Clinton Administration?

    Retard.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  81. Because everyone is stupid by default, and it’s really easy to stay stupid.

    You prove that with every comment.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  82. Oh, I forgot: retard.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  83. And here we go again, pinning it all on one guy.

    As if you don’t do that with Bush.

    Retard.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  84. None of what I’ve said here has been discredited to my satisfaction, that’s why I’m repeating it.

    Proof of discreditation of your statements could be a crocodile chomping your legs off; you would still deny the crocodile’s existence.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  85. You saw the same clips I saw. You’re judging sentences lifted from paragraphs lifted from 45 minute speeches.

    Oh, like you did with Trent Lott.

    I see.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  86. He’s leading a very large flock of much dumber people, that’s how. I mean at least he gets to be President and pretend he’s a fighter pilot and cash in after he leaves office, what do you people get out of it? Endless war and a shit economy. That’s a bad trade. You’d know that if you all weren’t so dumb.

    My God, Levi, this ranks among the most ignorant statements I’ve ever read.

    First, only about 1/3 of the country is Republican…but somehow Bush managed to get over 50% of the vote in 2004. So, at least 16% of the country isn’t Republican but still being led around by Bush. Does that make sense to you?

    Second, Bush actually was a fighter pilot. Okay, technically an interceptor pilot. He doesn’t have to pretend to be one. How many supersonic jets have you flown?

    Third, the country may be headed for a recession. And soon after that will come a recovery. If you knew anything at all about economics you’d realize that this nation’s economy runs in cycles, and no President can change that.

    Finally, you should stop calling people here dumb. Most of us are far more educated than you appear to be, can express ourselves without profanities, and don’t resort to making wildly false accusations.

    Steverino (6772c8)

  87. Levi wrote: Way to seize on like the least important thing I said.

    Like, there is hardly anything you say that IS important.

    But really, all that in response to just those 10 indisputable words that I wrote?

    You may wanna check Dictionary.com about the word “indisputable.”

    Everything else I said in that big long post gets dismissed because you want to start in about Joe Wilson?

    It’s easier for you to post your spew because it doesn’t require much thought. I, on the other hand, try to be accurate, and that takes a little more time. I don’t have all day to try to debunk all your regurgitations, so I have to pick my spots.

    The Wilson-Plame circus is an especially sore spot with me, because it typifies the way the Bush WH has from day one been reluctant to smack easily disprovable lies right back in the faces of their perpetrators.

    Since January 2000, I have stated repeatedly that contrary to popular opinion, Karl Rove was NOT a genius, evil or otherwise. IMHO, he was exposed by the way he botched the exposure of Wilson’s trainload of self-serving crap.

    Face facts: Valerie Plame was NOT covert at the time she was mentioned to Robert Novak. If she was, Richard Armitage — an Iraq War opponent — would have been frog-marched out of the State Dept. building. Period, end of story, no matter what Henry “Pigman” Waxman thinks. From a Washington Post editorial on September 1, 2006:

    …[I]t now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame’s CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming — falsely, as it turned out — that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush’s closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It’s unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.

    Now, having established the facts, if you really believe the Plame affair is sooooo unimportant, you’ll forego any further discussion. Think you can handle that?

    L.N. Smithee (e1f2bf)

  88. Most of us are far more educated than you appear to be, can express ourselves without profanities, and don’t resort to making wildly false accusations.

    This is why I have ceased to have any type of discussion with Levi, and simply mock him unmercifully, using his favorite taunt.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  89. Gentlemen: (I’m speaking to SPQR, Paul, Another Drew, Steverino)

    It is simply a matter that you suffer from a bitter attachment and perhaps you don’t realize it. Unfortunately for me, I fall into the same historical embrace. I am, from the Midwest, have no interest in socialism, think leftists are generally a blight on the country, think their propaganda arm in the MetaStasisMedia is not only negligent in their coverage of news, but malignant and criminal in raping a public trust, …and therefore, I am described as follows:

    You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/

    I am “stupid” by association, despite any honors, awards, degrees, or achievements I may have accumulated. If I disagree with the leftist lockstep construct…I am stupid…because nobody “smart” can possibly disagree. What a tragedy, to be ruled by your intellectual inferiors.

    For my purposes, however, I would rather surround myself with countrymen of honor and loyalty…and spend a lifetime learning with them…than to sit for just a moment with even a single traitor who fashions himself a genius.

    cfbleachers (4040c7)

  90. Levi wrote: …because we live in a democracy, stupid people’s votes count just as much as smart people’s. Thus, George Bush.

    We don’t “live in a democracy.” We live in a constitutional republic. It’s not a frivolous difference. The founders of the country certainly didn’t think so.

    But I didn’t have to tell you that. Yer reely smarrt.

    L.N. Smithee (e1f2bf)

  91. cfbleachers, it is a rather typical leftist belief system, borrowed from the Soviets, that anyone who disagrees does so from a mental defect or mental illness. It is the kind of thinking that results in gulags.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  92. I saw that quote, cfbleachers. I live in the same metro as Scott Johnson…indeed, he now lives only a couple miles from where I grew up. So that describes me also.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  93. It is the kind of thinking that results in gulags.

    Yup.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  94. Levi #80:

    Because everyone is stupid by default, and it’s really easy to stay stupid. It actually requires a little bit of effort to be smart, so there’s not as many smart people as there are stupid people.

    Levi reminds me of Mohammed Daud Miraki.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  95. Levi is a liar.

    I doubt anyone is reading this far and I skipped a lot of the comments near the end, but this has to be said and no one else has said it. The following quote from Levi is a lie:

    Hagee’s whole philosophy of life is that America needs to invade the Middle East and fight wars there until the Rapture comes.

    I believe this is also a lie

    McCain actively sought this guy’s endorsement.

    And this is a bigoted and false generalization:

    And this faith healer guy, well do you need to say anything beyond ‘he’s a faith healer?’ If you do, he shares Hagee’s wild-eye bloodlust for Muslims, and he thinks Islam needs to be eradicated.

    It is also a lie that if McCain actively sought a man’s endorsement then this means that McCain agrees with the guy’s religious beliefs. It is also a lie that Levi doesn’t think it is significant that Obama attended a racist church for twenty years. Levi knows very well how significant that is and if the tables were turned you can bet he would be arguing in exactly the opposite direction. Levi is not an honest interlocutor and I would advise the rest of you not to waste so much bandwidth responding to his dishonest provocations.

    Doc Rampage (47be8d)

  96. Levi is not an honest interlocutor and I would advise the rest of you not to waste so much bandwidth responding to his dishonest provocations.

    Like I said in #89, Doc: this is why I have ceased to have any type of discussion with Levi, and simply mock him unmercifully, using his favorite taunt.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  97. Now, having established the facts, if you really believe the Plame affair is sooooo unimportant, you’ll forego any further discussion. Think you can handle that?

    Do any of you even try to understand what I’m typing? I never said the Plame affair is unimportant, I called my mentioning of it insignificant in the context of the broader point that I was making in that big long post up there at #58. I will admit to being disappointed after I spend a good chunk of time formulating long responses like that only to have the whole thing discarded by someone that wants to rehash an old, tired story. You haven’t talked about the Plame case enough over the past 4 years? I know I have. But I can’t let you get away with this bullshit:

    Valerie Plame was NOT covert at the time she was mentioned to Robert Novak

    All I said is the most basic fact of the case; someone in the Bush White House revealed Valerie Plame’s covert status to the press. Plame’s status as covert up until her exposure by Novak is beyond dispute, because the CIA launched the investigation due to the fact that she was covert. Don’t you think the CIA knows which of its own agents are covert? You think they’d just start some bullshit investigation for no reason other than to make Bush look bad? And again, Joe Wilson didn’t start the investigation, Nancy Pelosi didn’t start it, George Soros didn’t start it, the CIA did. The CIA, that is supposed to be protecting our national security, was forced to defend itself from an administration that was playing politics with state secrets. There’s not anything that justifies the exposure of a covert agent, least of all some half-assed attempt at political assassination on Joe Wilson. But as usual, all the loyal Republicans were lead right to their big, shiny, distraction, this time played by Wilson, and look the other way while everyone in the Bush White House gets away with treason.

    Now I’m done talking about it, you want to get back on topic maybe?

    Levi (76ef55)

  98. Levi is a liar.

    60 seconds of Google searching will back up everything I’ve ever said about Hagee and Parsley.

    It is also a lie that Levi doesn’t think it is significant that Obama attended a racist church for twenty years.

    How could you know that I’m lying about what I think….

    ….are you….. god?

    Levi (76ef55)

  99. Levi reminds me of Mohammed Daud Miraki.

    Skimmed it, totally agree with the guy.

    Levi (76ef55)

  100. Levi – I think you have bigger fires to put out now with respect to Obamas bigotry and condescension toward small towm Americans. He does not look good today Levi. His inner effete snob and socialist are coming out, plus a penumbra of the hate whitey attitude may be showing. Good luck Levi.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  101. Like I said in #89, Doc: this is why I have ceased to have any type of discussion with Levi, and simply mock him unmercifully, using his favorite taunt.

    I count 10 posts you made in the span of under 2 hours that are all devoted to me.

    Come off it. I have you and a handful of others around this place literally swinging off my balls. Every thread I visit generates dozens of additional comments, functionally I’m the most productive part of this place’s comment system, if you can call a bunch of unfunny Republicans’ unfunny insults ‘comments’. I see people bringing me up in threads I haven’t even posted in. So keep on talking about how you’re all just ignoring me, I’ll believe it when I see it.

    Levi (76ef55)

  102. cfbleachers…
    Thank you for the compliment of inclusion.
    You know, one thing I’ve always regretted about Spring was the increase in insect activity. Sort of like what we’re encountering here.

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  103. I count 10 posts you made in the span of under 2 hours that are all devoted to me.

    And I mocked you in every one.

    Come off it. I have you and a handful of others around this place literally swinging off my balls.

    That’s because you are too retarded to know when you are being mocked, idiot.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  104. Now I’m done talking about it, you want to get back on topic maybe?

    You’re the one who hijacked the thread.

    Retard.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  105. Skimmed it, totally agree with the guy.

    Of course. You’re a retard.

    Paul (4e4a20)

  106. 60 seconds of Google searching will back up everything I’ve ever said about Hagee and Parsley.

    Then how come you didn’t post a link to a Google search to prove it?

    What’s a-matter, Levi, don’t want to admit you are wrong?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Paul (4e4a20)

  107. “I have you and a handful of others around this place literally swinging off my balls.”

    Hey, you should send that to Obama for his next speech.

    Vermont Neighbor (e7ed47)

  108. It is amazing. If you wait long enough, Levi is self refuting within the space of a thread. He believes himself to be productive?

    Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    No wonder the left screws up on economics so badly, they don’t understand its basic terms.

    Levi – What you do on these threads is the equivalent of creating a useless government bureaucracy.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  109. I found this interesting press release linked by Tom Maguire in a piece about Wright’s looney tune theories.

    The bottom line? Conspiracy theorists like Wright result in more black deaths.

    STUDY BY RAND AND OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY FINDS CONSPIRACY BELIEFS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICANS DETER CONDOM USE

    Significant numbers of African Americans believe in conspiracy theories about AIDS, and black men with such beliefs are less likely to use condoms as a precaution against spreading the HIV virus, according to a study issued today by the RAND Corporation and Oregon State University.

    Stupidity should hurt more.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  110. sorry about the bad tag.

    [Fixed it. Thanks for the link. — DRJ]

    SPQR (26be8b)

  111. I guess it’s a good thing Wright isn’t running for President.

    Levi (76ef55)

  112. Instead we have someone running for President who sat for years in a pew – silent – while his pastor repeated conspiracy theories that kill blacks.

    No judgment and no leadership. That’s Obama.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  113. Instead we have someone running for President who sat for years in a pew – silent – while his pastor repeated conspiracy theories that kill blacks.

    Non-sequitor in 3, 2, 1…

    No judgment and no leadership. That’s Obama.

    Obama sits in a church…………… OBAMA HAS NO LEADERSHIP!!!! Does. Not. Follow.

    You suck at this.

    Levi (76ef55)

  114. What a wonderful, intelligent and hopeful speech. Just goes to show — it’s hard to really know someone from sound bites.

    Mark (14dc41)

  115. Yeah… Amazing how it was so different from every other recorded speech of his… Almost like it was writen by others, and vetted by someone’s staff…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  116. rev. wright *************.

    [EDIT: Don’t try that again or you will be banned. — DRJ]

    thomas (a62fc4)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4610 secs.