I've got an outrage
an outrage deep inside
oh yeah

4/17/2008 4:54:11 PM

^ No one is forcing you to post here, you buffoon.

4/17/2008 5:06:09 PM

And if it's bad
Don't let it get you down, you can take it
And if it hurts
Don't let them see you cry, you can take it

4/17/2008 5:24:48 PM

^wow. and why did the judge get banned for saying stuff in tsb? that's just nonsense


can anybody or does anybody have the balls to step forward and say this is a REALLY GOOD idea for carter to go visit syria's branch of hamas today and that it was a good idea for him to visit all this week?

4/18/2008 9:00:49 AM

The only reason they are meeting him is for PR points. to say to Israel - "Look! We rank enough to gain the attention of a former U.S. prez!" They could care less about Carter. Behind closed doors, they prob view him the same way they do any Zionist.

4/18/2008 9:11:52 AM

^^ Of course they don't have anything to offer--except more far-left lunacy. Look at all the info I've provided--what have they provided other than skewed opinions?

The left-wing moonbats simply cannot engage in any exchange with me without it causing their rabies and hooksaw derangement syndrome to fester and foam. It's unfortunate.

Hamas says Carter visit a boost to militants' legitimacy

Quote :

"CAIRO, Egypt (AP) — Hamas officials said Wednesday that Jimmy Carter's meetings with leaders of the Palestinian militant group will boost its legitimacy despite criticism by Israel and the U.S. government of the former president's personal peace mission. Carter arrived in Egypt from Israel and the Palestinian territories, where he raised Israeli anger Tuesday by embracing a Hamas official in the West Bank."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jemWR1dnH-ATQzPTG3EZpMf6uSogD9035KS80

4/18/2008 9:32:29 AM

Quote :

"Of course they don't have anything to offer--except more far-left lunacy. Look at all the info I've provided--what have they provided other than skewed opinions? The left-wing moonbats simply cannot engage in any exchange with me without it causing their rabies and hooksaw derangement syndrome to fester and foam. It's unfortunate."

The only info you're provided are opinions as well. And how do you seriously expect any real debate with all that slander?

Quote :

"can anybody or does anybody have the balls to step forward and say this is a REALLY GOOD idea for carter to go visit syria's branch of hamas today and that it was a good idea for him to visit all this week?"

its not a good idea for him to be doing it...the same way its not a good idea for the admin to have a policy of ignoring governments they don't like....that's working sooo well, right?

4/18/2008 11:01:16 AM

^ I would love to see some of you post--even once--without equivocation. But you seem utterly incapable of it.

4/18/2008 11:08:37 AM

^you seem to think things happen in the world totally independent of each other...I guess thats why you're so good at misguidedly twising everything to black and white; Dem bad, Repub good terms

4/18/2008 11:12:02 AM

It's funny, because if I had a nickel for everytime somebody posted neo-con!1!!! or OMG Fox News!!111! or OMG Karl Rove/Rush Limbaugh!1!!!33! I'd have shitload of nickels.

hooksaw, you're dealing with unreasonable people. Anyone who supports what Carter is doing is either delusional or extremely dishonest about how they truly feel, or are so blinded by hatred for anything Bush and intolerance for anything that doesn't fit their fantasy airtight world that they should really be ignored.

They embody every reason why a Democrat hasn't won a majority of votes in a presidential election in my lifetime.

[Edited on April 18, 2008 at 11:17 AM. Reason : more]

4/18/2008 11:15:32 AM

^^ And you're good at red herrings--I've never said Republicans are good and Democrats are bad. On the contrary, I clearly and honestly stated here on numerous occasions that I'm an unaffiliated voter who has never voted a straight-party ticket, which means I have voted for, do vote for, and will continue to vote for Democrats under certain circumstances.

I mainly attack Democrats here (1) for balance and (2) because I simply disagree with most of the positions of national Democrats. Is that really so hard to grasp? I realize that this doesn't fit your narrative of me--and of conservatives in general--as Bible-thumping, knuckle-dragging, PBR-swilling rednecks. The image that you and some others here obviously have of me is a caricature--nothing more.

Concerning the equivocation, unlike some of you, I believe that there is wrong and right. I don't go into every situation with a Neville Chamberlain-style moral equivalency that is both naive and dangerous. Are you with me now?

^ There's a lot of truth in that.

[Edited on April 18, 2008 at 11:23 AM. Reason : .]

4/18/2008 11:22:43 AM

Quote :

"I realize that this doesn't fit your narrative--of conservatives in general--as Bible-thumping, knuckle-dragging, PBR-swilling rednecks"

who ever said that? on the contrary, spouting derogatory comments about people with different views doesn't help that view of conservatives (a position which I lean in most situations), and in most cases perpetuates the stereotypes.

Quote :

"Concerning the equivocation, unlike some of you, I believe that there is wrong and right"

there is wrong and right, and it is largely dependent on the particular situation....it is in no way naive to realize that cut and dry, black and white is a rarity. it is, however, reckless to believe that a certain position/action is always right or wrong without taking into consideration the complexities of the issue.

4/18/2008 11:55:56 AM

bump by request

9/17/2009 5:45:40 AM

joe wilson and kanye west and jimmy carter

all in a bathtub

latherin up

9/17/2009 8:58:43 AM

People in America need to understand that when they say they don't recognize Israel's right to exist they aren't talking about people or land they are tlaking about the current government thats in place. "Israel" is the government not the people or hte land and based on the facts no, the government of Israel doesn't have a right to exist. Carter has put politics aside and doesn't care about "protocol" anymore, obviously. Now he's just trying to do whats right and many good deeds before he dies.

9/17/2009 10:27:21 AM

KOOL AID

9/17/2009 10:41:57 AM

Wednesday, September 16, 2009
More Mush From The Wimp

Quote :

"For everybody old enough to remember what life was like under Jimmy's stupefying mixture of sophomoric self-righteousness, boundless naivete and gobsmacking incompetence, shoving Mr. Peanut back under the spotlight in his bitter dotage does nothing to help Obama, who's been looking like Carter II since a few hours after his inauguration. And for those too young to remember history's greatest monster (thanks, Glenn), Jimmah's empty slander is just another sign of the unbecoming moral vanity at the heart of the modern Left, to say nothing of its overweening intolerance for any hint of dissent. People know good and well that being opposed to socialized medicine or trillion-dollar deficits doesn't make them racist. Calling them ugly names isn't going to make them cower away in fear--it's going to make them more convinced than ever that they're in the right."

http://wcollier.blogspot.com/2009/09/more-mush-from-wimp.html

9/17/2009 7:19:12 PM

Quote :

"Calling them ugly names isn't going to make them cower away in fear--it's going to make them more convinced than ever that they're in the right."

ehe

9/17/2009 7:25:07 PM

^ Can you tell me the last time Carter was a net plus for the Democrats, spöoky?

9/17/2009 7:56:24 PM

He's been a net plus for a while.

When the average person thinks of Carter, they think of a nice guy who's involved in Habitat for Humanity.

WTF has Bush Jr done since leaving office? Or Bush Sr (beyond the stuff he did side-by-side with Clinton). What did Reagan do?


Only teabaggers think "Carter = EVIL." I'm not surprised that the author in your link failed to realize the Simpsons reference was satire against the far right.

9/17/2009 8:42:45 PM

Bush and Carter remind me of each other...not politically obviously...but they're both "dumb Southerners"...funny they're viewed very differently by different sides of the political aisle

9/17/2009 8:44:43 PM

^^ and ^ Wow. Both of you are wrong.

Boone-Tard, Carter was so bad as a leader that he made possible 12 consecutive years of Republican governance in the White House following his failed presidency. If you don't understand this, then you simply don't comprehend the facts.

And Carter's not dumb. He's simply wrong on a great many issues, and I believe Carter (like Obama) has some level of malevolent feeling toward the United States.

And, Twista, neither Bush nor Carter are dumb.

[Edited on September 18, 2009 at 7:19 AM. Reason : PS: Boone, you have no idea about the history of "Mush from the Wimp," phrase, do you?]

9/18/2009 7:15:18 AM

Where did I say anything about Carter's success as a president?

9/18/2009 8:24:40 AM

^ Perhaps you haven't heard but Carter's presidency is a big part of his record. So, according to you, since Carter is a "nice guy" and has hammered a few nails it makes up for 12 years of Reagan-Bush and all the dumb shit Carter has said and done?

GG!

9/18/2009 9:37:49 AM

carter has become a huge positive because he is able to reach christians today in a way that many democrats are failing to (or not trying). his reputation post-presidency has been very positive and he is well respected by many southern democrats. to dismiss him because you didn't like his presidency is EXTREMELY naive.

9/18/2009 9:57:02 AM

Quote :

"I believe Carter (like Obama) has some level of malevolent feeling toward the United States."

You think Carter and Obama actually wish harm upon the US?

9/18/2009 10:37:49 AM

Quote :

"and I believe Carter (like Obama) has some level of malevolent feeling toward the United States. "

holy wow

talk about moonbat paranoia

you are at aaronburro level of credibility now

9/18/2009 10:44:22 AM

democrats hate freedom and america, dude. where have you been?

9/18/2009 10:45:53 AM

There's a difference between disagreeing with an idea, position, or direction and actually wishing harm upon another.

9/18/2009 10:47:34 AM

Quote :

"and I believe Carter (like Obama) has some level of malevolent feeling toward the United States"

The fact that you're unable to distinguish disagreement from malice indicates to me that your brain stopped developing sometime in middle school

9/18/2009 10:54:02 AM

it's one thing to say that a president's policies are bad for the country, it's an entirely different and moonbat level of crazy to say that they have the policies because they want to harm the country

i mean i abhor glenn beck and others like him, but i don't think any of them are trying to hurt the country

9/18/2009 10:54:34 AM

Quote :

"hooksaw: I believe Carter (like Obama) has some level of malevolent feeling toward the United States"

holy shit, really?

i suspected you were kind of "out there", but i didn't realize you had completely bought into the whole batshit teabagger mentality.

9/18/2009 11:03:44 AM

God Damn America!

9/18/2009 11:24:29 AM

god bless, god damn ... whatever

it's the same end result: god has left the building and jesus is busy helping various football teams score touchdowns.

9/18/2009 3:04:45 PM

Will God help Russell Wilson score many touchdowns tomorrow?

Trick Question, but yes, He will help Himself

9/18/2009 3:06:18 PM

Quote :

"the government of Israel doesn't have a right to exist"

don't just give me your opinion, mambagrl, give me the reasons you believe it. because i don't see you complaining about other governments the British set up during the same time period.

9/18/2009 5:35:57 PM

Britain didn't set up the Israeli government. They kinda took over when they weren't getting their way.

9/18/2009 8:41:03 PM

Quote :

"and I believe Carter (like Obama) has some level of malevolent feeling toward the United States."

haha, wow

9/19/2009 12:25:20 AM

You know, I was going to take a nice break for a few days, weeks, or possibly even months. I reached 13,000--it's a nice round number--I thought, why not?

But then you assholes had to pull me back in with your feigned outrage--unbelievable. GG!

Do some of you even know what "malevolent" means? I doubt it--and I'd bet most of you had to look it up. Not surprisingly, you focused on one meaning of the word--the meaning that suited your tiresome caricature of me.

In any event, in the context at issue, I used "malevolent" to mean "ill will"--and I absolutely stand by my comment. Let me be perfectly clear: Jimmy Carter has some level of ill will toward the United States.

9/19/2009 3:07:19 AM

we know what it means, we know how you meant it in context, we are responding to it as you explained

go get your tinfoil hat you moonbat

9/19/2009 8:06:50 AM

^ You don't even know what "moonbat" means. And are you the moonbats' spokesman now?

9/19/2009 9:04:40 AM

Quote :

"Do some of you even know what "malevolent" means? I doubt it--and I'd bet most of you had to look it up. Not surprisingly, you focused on one meaning of the word--the meaning that suited your tiresome caricature of me."

Quote :

"ma·lev·o·lent [muh-lev-uh-luhnt] Show IPA –adjective 1. wishing evil or harm to another or others; showing ill will; ill-disposed; malicious: His failures made him malevolent toward those who were successful. 2. evil; harmful; injurious: a malevolent inclination to destroy the happiness of others. 3. Astrology. evil or malign in influence."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/malevolent

Yeah, we really went digging through the dictionary.

Quote :

"Let me be perfectly clear: Jimmy Carter has some level of ill will toward the United States."

Why did you leave Obama out? He was in your original statement.

9/19/2009 9:09:13 AM

^ Thanks for proving my point. QED.

Quote :

"1. showing ill will; ill-disposed"

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/malevolent

^^ And for pooljizz:

Quote :

"Moonbat is a term used in United States politics as a political epithet referring to social liberals or leftists."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonbat

9/19/2009 9:13:05 AM

In the future, please let us know what part of a definition you intend to use. It's pretty unreasonable to expect people to know you really mean to use only part of the first definition.

Also:

Quote :

"Let me be perfectly clear: Jimmy Carter has some level of ill will toward the United States."

Why did you leave Obama out? He was in your original statement.

9/19/2009 9:17:53 AM

^ Your requirement concerning definitions is ridiculous. I have promptly discarded it.

Concerning Carter, we have the benefit of hindsight and years of questionable actions and statements. Frankly, Obama doesn't have that much of a record--though the direction that he wants to take the country is becoming clearer out of the glow of the campaign trail's klieg lights. And it appears that much of the country doesn't seem to want to go along for the ride.

In any event, I continue to believe that Obama is serving Carter's second term. And I think Obama's presidency will be remembered as similarly unsuccessful.



[Edited on September 19, 2009 at 9:29 AM. Reason : Happy now?]

9/19/2009 9:28:20 AM

9/19/2009 9:30:54 AM

^^

Quote :

"Your requirement concerning definitions is ridiculous. I have promptly discarded it."

Yet it's not ridiculous for you to pick and choose parts of a definition?

----------------------

Do you or do you not believe Obama "has some level of malevolent feeling toward the United States"?

[Edited on September 19, 2009 at 9:34 AM. Reason : ]

9/19/2009 9:32:00 AM

^^ Astonishing. You get completely owned and you accuse me of back-pedaling? Go play in traffic, son.

^ 1. Sweet Jesus! No, you buffoon! So, every word you use means every numbered part of the definition for that word? Is this really your position?

2. Due to the lack of a long record like Carter's, it's not as clear with Obama. But, yes, I believe that Obama has some level of ill will toward the United States--if he didn't, he wouldn't feel the need to apologize for it continually.

Have I now made myself quite clear?

9/19/2009 9:38:58 AM

Quote :

"So, every word you use means every numbered part of the definition for that word? Is this really your position?"

No.

The definition:

Quote :

"1. wishing evil or harm to another or others; showing ill will; ill-disposed; malicious"

Your definition from the same link (as quoted by you above):

Quote :

"1. showing ill will; ill-disposed"

When you decide to choose parts of a single numbered definition, I think it's only courteous to let your readers know that you don't really intend to use the entire first definition of a word.

[Edited on September 19, 2009 at 9:47 AM. Reason : ]

9/19/2009 9:46:47 AM

your position is that obama hates america becuase he has apologized for as much? when did this happen?

9/19/2009 9:49:15 AM