The American Spectator

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 1:17PM

O.K. I get the message.

For the past three months, conservatives have instructed us to accept two principles:

1. NO claim of racism by a minority is true; in fact, the minority person making the case is probably a bigot himself.

2. EVERY claim of racism by white people is true; in fact, white people are the primary victims of racism in our society, blacks and other minorities being the bigots.

We get it, we get it.

Jack Mehoffer| 8.5.09 @ 1:21PM

BS, get a life liberal reader.

Juli| 8.5.09 @ 1:23PM

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 1:17PM
O.K. I get the message.

I dont think you do - get to work and STFU or are you troll for the white house?

DSC| 8.5.09 @ 1:27PM

Obama opened himself up to this when he took the job. If his election is supposed to be a sign of equality between the races, then he is just as open to criticism like this as any other president. He can either take it like a man or send in his resignation.

Don't dish it out if you can't take it.

Robbins Mitchell| 8.5.09 @ 1:39PM

"If you can't take the stink,get out of the shithouse,"

Robbins Mitchell| 8.5.09 @ 1:40PM

"If you can't take the stink,get out of the shithouse,"

Robbins Mitchell| 8.5.09 @ 1:40PM

"If you can't take the stink,get out of the shithouse,"

cowalker| 8.5.09 @ 1:43PM

It's not funny or insightful unless there's a nugget of truth in it. The only caricatures of Bush that are funny among those shown above are the Alfred E Neuman and vampire cartoons. Bush's superficial resemblance to the Mad Magazine icon plus his inarticulateness make it funny. Remember the fund raiser where Bush called the ultra wealthy participants his base? And then he presided over 8 years where the rich got much, much richer. That makes the vampire relevant. The rest are just examples of people venting humorlessly.

So what makes the Obama-as-Heath-Ledger-as-the Joker funny or telling? I don't know. The character in the Batman movie was a sadistic nihilist. There was not a hint of the socialist, communist or community organizer about him. He was hateful, like Hitler and the devil, so the image is as clever as drawing Bush with horns. Which I didn't find funny or telling either. Or is it the whiteface which is thigh-slappingly hilarious, and the additional make-up just a plausible deniability factor in an image created to exploit racial tension?

Well, I guess it floats some people's boats out there. It doesn't outrage this liberal. It just makes me shrug.

Solo| 8.5.09 @ 1:47PM

Liberal Reader Wrote:

" O.K. I get the message.

For the past three months, conservatives have instructed us to accept two principles:

1. NO claim of racism by a minority is true; in fact, the minority person making the case is probably a bigot himself.

2. EVERY claim of racism by white people is true; in fact, white people are the primary victims of racism in our society, blacks and other minorities being the bigots. "

I'm sorry....I've not read that anywhere.

Can you site an example? I'll bet not because you are quite obviously constructing a "straw man" to avert attention away from the content of the post.

This is about a blatant double-standard employed by the left. The documentation is presented (which is quite a bit more than you provided).

Sorry....but, you're going to have to find a way to get used to your (the left's) own tactics being applied against you- With one huge advantage: We can use the truth.

The sleeper has awakened.

"Yes We Can"

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 2:04PM

Solo --

Vadum's argument, to call it that, goes like this:

Because people called Bush a Nazi, a claim that a representation of Obama is racist MUST be false.

No attempt is made to refute the claim of racism, which is automatically assumed to be specious.

ONLY claims of by whites (Ricci, etc.) against minorities are given a generous hearing.

Let's not fuck around.

We all know what's going on here. "The sleeper" is the overt racism that was embarrassed to show its face for two or three decades.

With a black man in the Oval Office, it is rearing its ugly head again.

Grzmlyk| 8.5.09 @ 2:09PM

Liberal reader is a callow young person with absolutely no concept of how the real world works; his actual knowledge of any topic is paper thin.

Liberal reader feverishly searches his pet liberal web sites to mount his feeble arguments here, which for some reason liberal reader thinks impresses conservatives who frequent this site.

Liberal reader has not met a liberal shibboleth or bromide that he is not enamored of, regardless how hoary and shopworn it is.

Liberal reader wants desperately to impress friend and foe alike that he is a thinker and not just a regurgitator of propaganda.

Liberal reader is wrong on all counts.

sre| 8.5.09 @ 2:12PM

Of course the ultimate irony is that if Obama was white, he never would have been elected in the first place. No "white guilt" bump. So no victory for an inexperienced Chicago politician who never held a real job and for which there are no public personal details other than association with socialist radicals.

I'm with RM. He wanted the job. Live with it.

SotarrTheWizard| 8.5.09 @ 2:24PM

Cowalker asks:

"So what makes the Obama-as-Heath-Ledger-as-the Joker funny or telling? "

Well, as Alfred told Bruce Wayne, "Some men just want to watch the world burn. . . "

That pretty much summarizes the economy since Obama and friends took over. . . everything they've done has made things worse.

L. Ross| 8.5.09 @ 2:28PM

I personally find this to be an outstanding piece of subversive art. After iconic image after iconic image of BHO as the messiah, come here to heal the world, it is kind of nice to see a conservative response in kind.

Heath Leger's "Joker" makeup is truly frightening, and it seems totally appropriate to combine that image with the face of BHO. After all, for a conservative, he is about the scariest thing to come down the pike since Jimmy Carter.

He and his political cronies are pushing at warp speed to alter the very fabric of this great nation. I'm sorry, but a great many Americans find that terrifying, and I have yet to see an image that sums up my personal opinion of BHO half as well as this one does. Sometimes, he really does seem like a villan who has set out to destroy the foundation of this country.

Bravo to the artist, and I want to know where I can get a print signed by the artist.

Smitty| 8.5.09 @ 2:31PM

LR/Jeremiah: Why so Socialist?

BD57| 8.5.09 @ 2:35PM

Oh, it's not so hard to understand - - - people pushing socialism, even the pretty, neat & well spoken, are offering you a Heath Ledger's Joker deal.

It's directed toward the program, not the salesman.

Smitty| 8.5.09 @ 2:36PM

LibReader's got his big white granny panties in a pinch again. Doesn't take much for the thin-skinned Fascist Liberal to start throwing F-Bombs.

Jeremiah, why so serious?

L. Ross| 8.5.09 @ 2:36PM

Liberal Reader:

Question: Are you saying that because the clown face of "The Joker" is based in classic white clown facepaint, it is a racist slur to apply that stylized, classic look to a black man? Black men can't be scary clowns?

I hope that isn't what you are saying, because if you are, I've lost a lot of respect for you.

Black men can be scary clowns. Anyone can be a scary clown. Clowns are scary. Just ask your average kindergartner.

An angry mob of one| 8.5.09 @ 2:36PM

Cowalker,
That wasn't a fundraiser, moron, it was the Al Smith Dinner in NYC, a charity event and Al Gore was sitting next to him and spoke at the same event. You look like an idiot when you get your history from Michael Moore.

Bailey| 8.5.09 @ 2:40PM

Liberal Reader is too well dressed to stoop to the use of the F word.

Barbara (You will call me SENATOR, General!) Boxer would approve this post.

Caroline| 8.5.09 @ 2:42PM

Michael Moore looks like Jabba the Hut more and more everyday. No Health care for tubbies!

Caroline| 8.5.09 @ 2:43PM

Michael Moore looks like Jabba the Hut more and more everyday. No Health care for tubbies!

CL| 8.5.09 @ 2:45PM

Obama is and the liberals are upset that anyone dare ridicule him because after all he would really like to be treated like Castro/Chavez et al were that kind of thing is just not tolerated agaisnt dear leaders. As for the "racisim" out cries, please, it is racist to demand that anything this man does should not be questioned SIMPLY because he is black. So in other words whatever he says and does should never be questioned or opposed because he's black. He could destroy this country and everyone is supposed to shut up because after all he's the first black president so he's "special". So anything goes ?

Marc Jeric| 8.5.09 @ 2:46PM

There was no scarier guy in history than Lenin: now his headless sculpture adorns the entrance of a Las Vegas bar. Abu Hussein from Kenya, our Community Organizer-in-Chief, will hopefully also find himself "on the ash heap of history" when his "soviets" (that's Russian for "community organizations") fail to fabricate more election results favoring revolutionary marxists.

Juli| 8.5.09 @ 2:48PM

The comparison of Obummer:
[The Joker] had a big damn chip on his shoulder about his childhood and about a bunch of other things. His goal was to undermine the whole system. . . . And to effect the change that the people of Gotham City didn't want, the Joker created chaos upon chaos. The whole city was focused on him and what he was going to do next. He viewed crisis as an opportunity. So the Joker orchestrated crisis after crisis after crisis. And the Joker wore a mask. I mean whoever put this poster together is pretty smart because there are some similarities here to what the Joker did in that movie and what Obama is doing to this country.

Matthew Vadum| 8.5.09 @ 2:49PM

How dare you put words in my mouth, Liberal Reader. My post and my graphic montage above were about the extent to which Presidents Obama and Bush have been ridiculed.

Nothing more, nothing less.

You're just like Morris Dees, a paid professional hatemonger and liar.

Bailey| 8.5.09 @ 2:57PM

The Obama Joker poster has gone viral. It's everywhere!

Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals Power Tactics #5 --"RIDICULE is man's most potent weapon." and #8--"KEEP THE PRESSURE ON, with different tactics and actions, and use all events of the period for you purpose."

Keep it up Conservatives, we can do this thing!

Angel| 8.5.09 @ 2:59PM

Matt, you really get under that troll's skin. Monster kudos to you, Sir.

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 3:05PM

Vadum,

You keep accusing me of being "paid" to post here.

You're either claiming this is bad faith (i.e., knowing it's not true) OR you are absurdly stupid.

I'm going with the former. You don't honestly believe I'm being paid to post here, do you?

Heather| 8.5.09 @ 3:06PM

Juli, the Joker had a crappy childhood like Obama, too. Must have had something to do with their mad lust for power.

cowalker| 8.5.09 @ 3:06PM

"Heath Leger's "Joker" makeup is truly frightening, and it seems totally appropriate to combine that image with the face of BHO. After all, for a conservative, he is about the scariest thing to come down the pike since Jimmy Carter."

Actually it would be funnier (and MUCH more galling to liberals) to portray Obama as Jimmy Carter. Because very few rational individuals believe Obama wants to see the world burn. It's far more credible that he would unintentionally cause chaos and trouble, and be defensive but secretly depressed about it, rather than reveling in it like the Joker character.

But that lacks the dramar of the makeup and is too complex, I guess.

SoCon| 8.5.09 @ 3:09PM

ASTROTURFER troll Lib Reader/Jeremiah is Axelrod's hired gun. They pay you too much, moron.

Matthew Vadum| 8.5.09 @ 3:12PM

I don't think, Liberal Reader, that you deserve a response.

Your comments are beyond the pale.

Johnno| 8.5.09 @ 3:17PM

There's something "fishy" about Liberal Reader. I think we should report him like good little snitches.

Anne| 8.5.09 @ 3:20PM

Why is this racist? That's what I'm confused about.

Caroline| 8.5.09 @ 3:31PM

Liberal Reader is a storm trooper in Obama's Thought Police Army. Fascism, Marxism? Doesn't matter what word you use; both are police states.

SoCon| 8.5.09 @ 3:34PM

Anne, it's not racist. "Racist" is a code word liberals use to control the debate and suppress free speech.

Ignore their BS.

Heather| 8.5.09 @ 3:38PM

Liberal Reader/Jeremiah's liberal mantra: "Free Speech for me but not for thee."

No dice, dude.

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 3:48PM

Im not paid to post here, but I would if I could get a job in the Obama Administration or with ACORN but they both require a high school education or a GED.

C4P| 8.5.09 @ 4:04PM

ACORN requires a GED? Makes sense because you have to be able to write up all those fraudulent voter registration forms.

Can you write Mickey Mouse? A thousand times?

Roy| 8.5.09 @ 4:11PM

It doesn't really seem all that apropos to me. I doubt very much the artist was an actual racist, but I would not be at all surprised if he thought it would be fun to send the race-card left into an irrelevant tizzy. Nobody's going to look at that poster and say "OK, that's it. I hate black people now." But people have gotten out of the habit of distinguishing between "pissing off the race card left" and "racism".

It's a bit like how a certain type of person gets a kick out of walking as close as he can to the line of obscenity laws to "annoy the prudes".

Other than that - as Batman villains go - I'd say Obama is more like Poison Ivy than Joker. Maybe they should have put him in green tights.

L. Ross| 8.5.09 @ 4:19PM

Roy:

I say "Two-Face". A pretty face for campaigning, and a terrifying face for governing.

Roy| 8.5.09 @ 4:23PM

L. Ross:

Excellent! That frees up Poison Ivy to be played by Al Gore.

SoCon| 8.5.09 @ 4:26PM

Al's too fat to play Poison Ivy: He'd make a good Penguin, though.

cowalker| 8.5.09 @ 5:22PM

L. Ross, given the origin of Two-Face as played in the latest Batman movie, I have to agree with you. I can see it.

A soft, kumbaya-singing liberal tries co-operative tactics and fails (maybe community organizing?), and then decides that only raw power can bring about the utopia of his dreams.

Judging from the comments, I think another factor at work here is a disconnect in strategy. Is the image of Obama intended to evoke laughter or fear? The Joker image is disturbing. It represents the scariness already experienced by those who never trusted or admired Obama. And there is the edginess of playing with race with built-in disclaimers. There is a group among conservatives that opposes Obama solely due to his mixed race, and this is a way to appeal to their racism in a covert way. But it's NOT carrying out Alinsky's ridicule tactic. It is not ridiculing Obama to compare him to a powerful super-villain who is almost unstoppable. And frankly, it looks nuts to people who believe he is in good faith, whether competent or not. Such an image isn't going to change anyone's mind about Obama's motives or competence.

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 5:26PM

Vadum,

When did "the left cackle" at representations of Bush as the Joker? And who is Saul Alinsky? I've never heard of him before I read the American Spectator. Maybe that makes me ill informed; I've never met a Democrat who referred to him in any way.

I don't remember this.

I think when people called Bush "Hitler" or related names it was disgraceful. I said so then. I was one of the people who objected to the use of the word "lie" when it came to the war.

Fact is, most Democrats were more like me than they are like the people who used the extreme rhetoric.

Just like most Republicans are not going to join you out on the fringes for more race baiting and fear mongering.

ds80| 8.5.09 @ 5:39PM

Race baiting? Fear mongering?

Just another Liberal Reader straw man.

Awww, too bad: Libs are squealing, squealing, squealing ... 'coz they're distracted when there's important Hopin' & Changin' to do.

Pete| 8.5.09 @ 5:58PM

Nice poster. Are they on sale somewhere? Saw an "Obama bin Biden" bumpersticker the other day...good stuff. Gives me some hope...won't get really hopefull until I start seeing half torn off election stickers from all the Toyota Piouses around here.

Matthew Vadum| 8.5.09 @ 6:13PM

Perhaps Liberal Reader knows what racism is because he/she took a course at the Madison Wisconsin Institute for the Healing of Racism, Inc.
http://www.richarddavis.org/rap/hr-main.html

SoCon| 8.5.09 @ 6:15PM

Obama thinks he's unstoppable, but he's not, he's incompetent. Ridicule works, and many people are laughing at 'The One's' likeness on a Joker poster being slapped on freeway overpasses all over the country.

Mass circulation of the Obama Joker poster is just the first step in our efforts to bring Obama's fascist liberal agenda down.

Dave| 8.5.09 @ 6:42PM

The trouble is with Liberals when you make snotty comments about their Hero Barack they get all pissed off. Of course they thought it was funny to make comments about GW - and any comments were allowed. The trouble with this Country is that too many liberals are trying to run things - supporting this Commie Regime known as Barack Obama and all his other Commie Stooges- along with the worst group of Commie Bastards - The ACLU.

Of course if you gripe about Obama - you are a racist - whatever happened to free speech - oh thats right- that's not possible in a Commie Dictatorship like we have now - and then when BO is done then we have Comrade Hilary to take up the Commie Flag..

Of course Obama forgets that he is half white !! Just like Michael jackson wasn't black anymore !

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 8:14PM

Cute, Vadum.

But no, I didn't take that course.

Anyone with even a grade school knowledge of American history knows that race and race conflict play extremely importing -- defining -- roles in our society.

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 8:20PM

Pete --

As for your "Obama bin Laden" bumper sticker, really only a low, really low, nasty and stupid person could feel any sort of glee over something like that.

You know, people in New York rightfully resent "conservatives" who fly into the City in early fall to make long faces over the "tragedy of 9.11" for the cameras and then fly back back to "real America" to make speeches about a) how depraved people in New York are; and b) how the predominant political party in New York is actually responsible for terrorism.

You expect to be taken seriously on a subject like terrorism when you fling around things like this?

Why should anyone take you people seriously?

Racism, fascism, terrorism, communism -- you don't even know what these words mean; you don't know how these things are different, or how they're similar. How could you be trusted to fight them?

No, sir. We're better off where we are now. The last 8 years were quite enough.

Liberal Reader| 8.5.09 @ 8:29PM

One of THE darkest days in American history -- still one of the darkest days in American history, even after 9.11 -- is 4.19.95, the day two right wing psychos bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City.

But we on the left have endured years of lectures about how WE are responsible for terrorism. We even listened as your candidate for Vice President called our candidate someone who pals around with terrorists! The WORST terrorist attack on American soil before 9.11 was not carried out by the Weather Underground; it was carried out by militant right wing mutants.

Then, President Bush comes to power, and after 9 months in office, after the former president and his OWN terrorist expert AND the head of the CIA and the top investigator at the FBI warn of impending attacks on the United States AND after the president receives a PDB warning of just such an attack -- what? We get hit on 9.11.

But you know what? It's Obama's fault! Or the Democratic Islamo-Fascists who voted for him!

This passes muster with you people? You accept this as legitimate political discourse?

The dumbing down of America is complete.

Patriot| 8.5.09 @ 9:07PM

Actually, 9/11 was Bill Clinton's fault and everyone knows it, including Clinton. Why else would Sandy Berger purloin secret Archival documents that outlined Clinton's dereliction of duty?

In order to shield Clinton from his many scandals, Clinton's Jamie Gorelick erected a "Wall" between the FBI and the CIA. No intelligence sharing there. Terrorism was treated as a police matter and the FBI was prevented from accessing some of the hijackers' computers detailing the 9/11 plot. Also, Sudan offered Bin Laden to Clinton several times, and each time was rebuffed by Clinton's Administration.

Our country was attacked by terrorists 4 times during Clinton's 8 year tenure: The 1993 World Trade Center bombing, 2 American embassies in Africa and the USS Cole, and Clinton didn't have a clue who was behind it.

If Clinton hadn't been derelict in his Presidential duties, the horrible, heartbreaking events of Srptember 11, 2001 would never have happened.

Democrats of today are weak on national security matters and I don't trust Obama with the security of our country any more than I trusted that sexual predator.

Blunted| 8.5.09 @ 9:24PM

What is your definition of right wingers and where is proof of your spurious accusation, asshole?

Matthew Vadum| 8.5.09 @ 10:05PM

But Liberal Reader's candidate did in fact pal around with terrorists and terrorist sympathizers. They were among his best friends. It's long been established despite the lies from that despicable website, FightTheSmears. His childhood mentor was a disgusting Communist, Frank Marshall Davis. I'm still a little surprised he didn't make Angela Davis the Homeland Security secretary. Liberal Reader suffers from what Marxists call a false consciousness.

cowalker| 8.5.09 @ 10:38PM

SoCon:
"Obama thinks he's unstoppable, but he's not, he's incompetent. Ridicule works, and many people are laughing at 'The One's' likeness on a Joker poster being slapped on freeway overpasses all over the country.

"Mass circulation of the Obama Joker poster is just the first step in our efforts to bring Obama's fascist liberal agenda down."

OK, I still don't see how this image of Obama makes him an object of ridicule. What sticks with me about the Joker is his sadism, his nihilism and his great competence in creating the things that pleased him--death, suffering and destruction.

So what is the point of the poster? Obama is a highly competent villain? How does the poster expose Obama's hidden evil motivations?

If conservatives want to convey the idea of Obama as a well-meaning dolt, who inadvertantly creates death, suffering and destruction, Heath Ledger's Joker is not that critter.

I guess conservatives are torn between Obama as super-villainous uber-controller of all and Obama as incompetent bleeding heart liberal. They really can't have it both ways.

But even if conservatives do pick a clever image and stick with it, it's unlikely to be any more successful at defeating him than all the mean photoshops of G W Bush were at defeating him in 2004. Nor were all the frivolous lawsuits and mean cartoons aobut Clinton successful in defeating him in 1996. In 2012, once again, it's going to boil down to whether the majority perceive their own financial prospects as on the upswing or not. So conservatives will devote themselves to trying to make things worse for the majority of Americans by 2012 so they'll want a change from the Democrats. It's an unworthy goal, but good enough for conservatives, I guess.

SoCon| 8.5.09 @ 11:26PM

I agree with you you about the economics, and Obama's aren't looking too good now; but ridicule is powerful, too, and you Alinskyites have used it successfully for years.

The Joker's goal was total power; but anarchy had to reign before he could achieve that so he created chaos through multiple crises. Sound like anyone you know?

Interesting psychologically because Obama and the Joker both had difficult childhoods (deadbeat dads and all).

The Joker moniker is ironic because there was nothing funny about him--kind of like Obama and his socialist policies. I don't see the Joker as an invincible character, I see him as a pathetic character--and any way you look at it, pathetic ain't good. It works for me.

Kaleokualoha| 8.6.09 @ 4:32AM

YOU WROTE "His childhood mentor was a disgusting Communist, Frank Marshall Davis."

Why do you post that Obama was mentored by Frank Marshall Davis? Because conservative firebrand Cliff Kincaid said so? It appears that you swallow Kincaid's Konservative Kool-Aid propaganda regarding the Davis-Obama relationship. "Dreams From My Father" belies that claim.

Although Obama's book indicates "Frank" was a family friend who offered him advice on racial issues, Obama wrote that Davis "fell short" and his views were "incurable." Obama did not even visit Davis for three years before going to college. Obama's book, itself, proves that Obama did not consider Davis to be a "wise and trusted counselor," which is the definition of "mentor." By what creative definition can Davis be considered his "mentor"?

Also: Why did you post that Davis was "disgusting"?

"The way to combat noxious ideas is with other ideas. The way to combat falsehoods is with truth." - William O. Douglas

PATRICK| 8.6.09 @ 7:15AM

LIBERALS ARE ALL FOR FREE SPEACH JUST AS LONG AS YOU DONT DIAGREE WITH THEM!

louis tully| 8.6.09 @ 9:20AM

Obama the Destroyer--that is who is depicted, brilliantly, in this poster. love it

jim| 8.6.09 @ 1:25PM

Sure are a lot of people who don't think very clearly in America ... & this proves it.

The Joker loved chaos - Obama strikes me as about the least chaos-oriented pol America's seen in years. The Joker delighted in killing - who has Obama killed? The Joker was a raving lunatic - Obama is so ridiculously normal (other than his stellar academic record) that he's verging on dishwater-dull.

"Obama=SOCIALIST" makes just as little sense as "Obama=THE JOKER" ... If you really think a generic center-right POTUS like Obama is a "socialist" then perhaps your Overton Window needs an adjustment ... the massive corporate welfare started by Bush & continued by Obama is hardly socialist, nor is buying out GM while keeping it in the private-sector ( a REAL socialist would've nationalized GM in toto & made it a 100% government-run company in perpetuity) ... & neither is a proposing a public option for medical insurance alongside the private status quo.

Yeah, the poster is popular ... & so is junk-food. Color me unimpressed.

Blunted| 8.6.09 @ 1:46PM

Of course, the ardent Communist, Frank Marshall Davis was just an Obama 'family friend', and of course, Obama's and Bill Ayers' daughters just briefly attended school together in Chicago and Obama didn't really listen to Jeremiah Wright's hateful racist rhetoric for 20 years.

Oh no, Obama's not a radical--why would you think that? Democrat morons.

Jeremiah| 8.6.09 @ 1:52PM

Only a liberal fool wouldn't see the chaos that has enveloped our country since Obama was elected. Obama thrives on chaos, but America doesn't--that's why his approval ratings are in the toilet.

I'll color you stupid.

Kaleokualoha| 8.6.09 @ 4:06PM

BLUNTED WROTE "Of course, the ardent Communist, Frank Marshall Davis was just an Obama 'family friend'. . ."

RESPONSE: Do you have ANY empirical evidence to the contrary? Do you have any evidence that Davis was an "ardent" communist? His biographer stated that he was a closet member.

BTW: Blogosphere opinion is not empirical evidence. It has no probative value.

Blunted| 8.6.09 @ 4:19PM

Everyone knows that the biographer for Davis was a leftist, too. Only a fool would believe what he said.

You are a fool and Obama is a communist.

Kaleokualoha| 8.6.09 @ 4:43PM

Do you have any evidence that "the biographer for Davis was a leftist, too"? As they say on CSI: Follow the evidence!

"Everyone knows that the biographer for Davis was a leftist, too"? Do you consider Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy In Media , which has spearheaded the campaign against the Davis-Obama relationship, to be a "fool"? Kincaid considers Davis's biographer, Professor Edgar Tidwell of the University of Kansas, to be "an expert in the life and writings" of Davis (see http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-communist-mentor/).

"Everyone knew" that Iraq has WMD stockpiles and ties to Al Qaeda before the invasion, but this was also disinformation fabricated by right-wingers to implicate their opponents.

How about some evidence? Opinions are like mouths: everybody has one. Just the facts, ma'am!

Kaleokualoha| 8.6.09 @ 5:46PM

Jeremiah: If you consider Obama's approval ratings to be "in the toilet," what do you consider Bush's 22% approval rating to be? In the cesspool?

Jeremiah| 8.6.09 @ 6:33PM

Bush AIN'T in office no more, moron, and Obummer won't be either as of November, 2012! Obama's a one term wonder.

48--50 % approvals are a disaster for Obama--he rates #10 in the last 12 presidents for public approval at 6 months in office.

Just wait till Health Care further savages his reputation--Can you say LAME DUCK? LOL!!

Just the facts, bozo.

Kaleokualoha| 8.6.09 @ 7:27PM

Jeremiah: You did not answer the question. I am trying to determine a rational basis for your "in the toilet" response. Ad hominem attacks are typical of cognitively challenged debaters without a rational answer to rational questions.

Once again: "If you consider Obama's approval ratings to be "in the toilet," what do you consider Bush's 22% approval rating to be? In the cesspool?"

How about answering this question based on your "in the toilet" assessment, rather than personal attacks? It may be difficult, but please try to respond in an appropriately adult manner.

Nobama| 8.6.09 @ 7:58PM

I did answer your question--not too bright there, are you? Is it disingenuous to compare Obama's 6 month approval rating to George W's 90th? I think so, bonehead Troll. So, I will compare their 6 month rankings.

Obama ranks #10 out of the last 12 presidents in popularity at 6 months in office. He ranks below George W--by a lot! Obama's approvals will probably be in the one digit area by the time 2012 comes around!

I believe rating #10 out of 12 presidents constitutes "in the toilet," don't you, liberal tool? Little short on cognition, aren't you?

Miss Nancy!| 8.6.09 @ 8:04PM

I think I smell the sock puppet, Jeremiah/ Tom Paine/ Marcel/ Murphy/LibReader/Sybil around these parts.

Chicken sh!t. It's a bad day for you democrats, weenie, so you duck this site. Balless wonder liberal, your numbers are legion.

Kaleokualoha| 8.6.09 @ 8:30PM

You did NOT answer my question. You refused to compare their approval ratings because you considered it "disingenuous" to compare their approval ratings at different points in their terms. That did not answer my question, which asked for comparison of their ratings. It evaded my question.

Still using those immature ad hominem attacks? This confirms cognitive impairment, unless you are 8 years old. Is a cordial discussion too difficult for you?

Robert Belvedere| 8.6.09 @ 9:44PM

Linked to at:
http://www.thecampofthesaints.com/2009.08.02_arch.html#1249582738694

Nazi Nancy| 8.6.09 @ 9:49PM

Screw you, Jeremiah. You know your BS traitorous fascist liberal agenda is going down.

You idiots are going to cause riots in the streets, azzclown, and you know it's too soon because you pukes don't have your civilian security force in place yet!

You awakened the giant, dimwit--and the giant ain't happy. And we're just starting. You don't have enough ACORN/Union thugs to beat us and we both know it. Fuck yourself, azzhole. I hope you get yours big time, traitor.

OBSERVER| 8.7.09 @ 12:14AM

It's pretty clear that intellectual engagement is impossible for some posters. The originators of Spectator would shed a tear at the vulgarity of some posters. Perhaps a moderator is necessary.

Nancy is a Nasty Nazi!| 8.7.09 @ 12:43AM

Oh, Boo Hoo, Boo Hoo!!! Another whining liberal. Yawn.

We wouldn't shed a tear if you stupid, moronic paid astroturf liberal trolls would drop off the ends of the earth!

Perhaps a little honesty is needed on the part of you scummy trolls who slime your way through here.

You liberals are scum suckers.

OBSERVER| 8.7.09 @ 1:34AM

Why do you assume that someone who dislikes vulgarity is liberal? Do you think that liberals are less vulgar than conservatives? Do you think the founders of Spectator condone vulgarity?

NOBAMA| 8.7.09 @ 2:38AM

I can tell you are a liberal because you are whining and wetting yourself in faux outrage over the F word--what a joke.

By definition liberals are vulgar perverts: Just look at the liberal pervert blogger who has been trying to destroy Sarah Palin. That's you.

It's AMERICAN Spectator, bonehead.

OBSERVER| 8.7.09 @ 4:29AM

If liberals are "vulgar perverts" by definition, why would they show outrage over the F-word? Either liberals use vulgarity more than conservatives, or they don't. You can't have it both ways.

BTW: An example does not prove the behavior of a group. That is fallacious thinking: The Fallacy of Generalization.

OBSERVER| 8.7.09 @ 4:33AM

FYI: Also known as Hasty Generalization, here is more information:

Also Known as: Fallacy of Insufficient Statistics, Fallacy of Insufficient Sample, Leaping to A Conclusion, Hasty Induction.

Description of Hasty Generalization
This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough. It has the following form:

Sample S, which is too small, is taken from population P.
Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S.
The person committing the fallacy is misusing the following type of reasoning, which is known variously as Inductive Generalization, Generalization, and Statistical Generalization:

X% of all observed A's are B''s.
Therefore X% of all A's are Bs.
The fallacy is committed when not enough A's are observed to warrant the conclusion. If enough A's are observed then the reasoning is not fallacious.

Small samples will tend to be unrepresentative. As a blatant case, asking one person what she thinks about gun control would clearly not provide an adequate sized sample for determing what Canadians in general think about the issue. The general idea is that small samples are less likely to contain numbers proportional to the whole population. For example, if a bucket contains blue, red, green and orange marbles, then a sample of three marbles cannot possible be representative of the whole population of marbles. As the sample size of marbles increases the more likely it becomes that marbles of each color will be selected in proprtion to their numbers in the whole population. The same holds true for things others than marbles, such as people and their political views.

Since Hasty Generalization is committed when the sample (the observed instances) is too small, it is important to have samples that are large enough when making a generalization. The most reliable way to do this is to take as large a sample as is practical. There are no fixed numbers as to what counts as being large enough. If the population in question is not very diverse (a population of cloned mice, for example) then a very small sample would suffice. If the population is very diverse (people, for example) then a fairly large sample would be needed. The size of the sample also depends on the size of the population. Obviously, a very small population will not support a huge sample. Finally, the required size will depend on the purpose of the sample. If Bill wants to know what Joe and Jane think about gun control, then a sample consisting of Bill and Jane would (obviously) be large enough. If Bill wants to know what most Australians think about gun control, then a sample consisting of Bill and Jane would be far too small.

People often commit Hasty Generalizations because of bias or prejudice. For example, someone who is a sexist might conclude that all women are unfit to fly jet fighters because one woman crashed one. People also commonly commit Hasty Generalizations because of laziness or sloppiness. It is very easy to simply leap to a conclusion and much harder to gather an adequate sample and draw a justified conclusion. Thus, avoiding this fallacy requires minimizing the influence of bias and taking care to select a sample that is large enough.

One final point: a Hasty Generalization, like any fallacy, might have a true conclusion. However, as long as the reasoning is fallacious there is no reason to accept the conclusion based on that reasoning.

I apologize if I am being too logical for you. Jumping to conclusions generally avoids logic.

NOBAMA!| 8.7.09 @ 1:32PM

I didn't bother to read your BS screed. You're an Axelrod astroturfer with too much time on your hands, clown. You obviously don't have a life.

Doesn't matter: Obama's approvals ARE IN THE TOILET! Tanking! One term wonder lame duck!

SARAH 2012| 8.7.09 @ 1:35PM

Liberals are more vulgar than Conservatives--that's why we eschew you. You have more abortions and affairs and you lie and cheat more.

Why wouldn't you? You are atheistic. Case closed.

OBSERVER| 8.7.09 @ 6:55PM

As a matter of fact, I am involved with legitimate conservative websites such as Jonathan Garthwaite's townhall.com (Michelle Malkin, Pat Buchanan, Charles Krauthammer and Ann Coulter) and Don Wildmon's Christian American Family Association (http://action.afa.net/Detail.aspx?id=31).

We do not condone vulgarity. You do a disservice to us all.

SHAME ON YOU!| 8.7.09 @ 8:14PM

So you know the names of prominent Conservatives, so what? I could name those Conservatives, too.

I know you're lying because studies have proven that liberals lie more than conservatives. Ever hear the old joke; How do you know when a liberal is lying? His/her lips are moving.

Lying is a much greater offense than a little humorous vulgarity. I find it amusing that you affect outrage at a simple four letter word.

Got our puffy pink panties in a pinch, did we? Poor widdle liberal---bet you're crying big crocodile tears over your Leader's tanking, in the toilet poll numbers, too! Get used to it.

Nobama Goons For Rent| 8.7.09 @ 8:16PM

Looks like the F Word stays!! Hooray.

OBSERVER| 8.7.09 @ 9:38PM

What "lie" did I tell? Where did I show "outrage"?

OBSERVER| 8.7.09 @ 9:46PM

FYI:

out⋅rage  /ˈaʊtreɪdʒ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [out-reyj] Show IPA noun, verb, -raged, -rag⋅ing.
Use outrage in a Sentence
–noun 1. an act of wanton cruelty or violence; any gross violation of law or decency.
2. anything that strongly offends, insults, or affronts the feelings.
3. a powerful feeling of resentment or anger aroused by something perceived as an injury, insult, or injustice: Outrage seized the entire nation at the news of the attempted assassination.
- dictionary.com

This is just in case you start to make up your own definition.

HOT CON| 8.7.09 @ 9:50PM

You REALLY have to get a life, babe It's Friday night and it's gorgeous outside--go have some fun.

What are you, about 5' tall and 500 lbs? Do you want to talk? Need a shoulder to cry on? I'm here for you.

Nobama| 8.7.09 @ 9:53PM

Outrage with a small o.

Flower Power!| 8.7.09 @ 9:55PM

No F-Bombs, I promise: Your tender sensibilities and all.

SoCon| 8.7.09 @ 9:57PM

What are you observing? Your navel?

Bye Bye| 8.7.09 @ 10:19PM

ROTFLMAO!!!

OBSERVER| 8.9.09 @ 5:11AM

I am "observing" the juvenile antics of wannabe conservatives. You need to refine your behavior before you associate with adult conservatives. Grow up!!

HOT CON| 8.10.09 @ 8:25PM

It took you TWO DAYS to come up with that lame excuse for a dumbutt answer? You're slipping, porky.

How would a fascist liberal know what adult conservatives like anyway?

Remember, I'm here for you, sweet buns.

SASA| 8.12.09 @ 8:20AM

Louis Vuitton
Louis Vuitton Replica
Louis Vuitton outlet
louis vuitton speedy
Louis Vuitton
Louis Vuitton Replica
Louis Vuitton Outlet
Louis Vuitton Online Sale
Tiffany Jewelry
Tiffany & Co
Tiffany Bracelet
Tiffany Necklace
Tiffany Ring

Apalled| 8.12.09 @ 6:57PM

Juvenile comments suggest Spectator has been shanghaied by Beavis and Butthead because they are incapable of intellectual engagement.

Smarty Pants| 8.12.09 @ 10:44PM

Nice try, moron--your snippy comment would pack some punch if you could spell. I am "APPALLED" at your stupidity. You're Beavis AND Butthead.

Smarter Pants| 8.13.09 @ 7:55PM

The moron is the person incapable of intellectual engagement. Instead of reason, she uses vulgarity and ad hominem attacks. Truly the sign of an immature mind. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

PALIN FOR PRESIDENT 2012| 8.14.09 @ 2:49AM

Too bad you don't have a mind to waste, piglet. Now brush up on your spelling, your mindlessness is obvious.

You probably don't wear panties--you're a commando girl all the way. You liberal girls are like that, you know. Loosey goosey.

Why Palin| 8.14.09 @ 7:58PM

Palin for President 2012? Why would you want a quitter for President? Is she the best Republican candidate available? Or s it because she is female?

Palin 4 President| 8.15.09 @ 2:32AM

Why Palin? Because the girl's got smarts, courage and integrity. She will make a great president in 2012. Obama's got to go.

You disappoint me with your 'quitter' shtick--so predictable for the typical liberal loser. You're not much of an independent thinker; lazy, actually. Try a little originality for a change. You're boring me.

Got a problem with women? A woman hater, eh?

Why Palin| 8.15.09 @ 5:48AM

Palin quit. By definition, she is a "quitter." Her interviews reveal she has no more than average intelligence. She makes up "facts," either through ignorance or design.

Once again: Is she the best Republican candidate available. Don't be a pussy. Answer the question.

Nobama| 8.15.09 @ 1:13PM

I knew you were a skank because all liberals are skanks. That's why I laughed at you for your phony outrage over a little vulgarity.

Obama's favorables are at 47% and dropping like a stone, and he has really pi$$ed off the old folks which are a HUGE voting bloc. We could run a chimpanzee in 2012 and we'd beat you morons.

Why Palin| 8.15.09 @ 8:13PM

Gee, pussy, you are still evading the question. It's a simple yes/no question. Is it too difficult for you? What's the matter? Are you having one of those "not so moist" moments?

Once again: Is she the best Republican candidate available. Answer the question, you silly little PUSSY!!

HINT: Possible answers are "yes" and "no"!

Wait A Minute| 8.15.09 @ 11:58PM

Only an idiot would think Palin is the best possible Republican candidate. Wait a minute! One of those idiots already posts right here. What a douchebag! He's afraid to admit or confirm his mistake.

SARAH!| 8.16.09 @ 1:50AM

The only mistake here is that you're still breathing, knuckle dragger. Wanna be porn actors like you don't know anything about politics anyway.

They're waiting for you to film your next perversion, loser.

Do you kiss your mother with that nasty mouth? Yuck.

Liberals Suck!| 8.16.09 @ 1:52AM

Geeez, who is the liberal freak? Go back under your slimy rock, troll.

Why Palin| 8.16.09 @ 5:33AM

Answer the question, you little pansy! You made your bed, now sleep in it! A minute of thought reveals that there are probably thousands of more qualified Republicans than that quitter Palin.

You already committed yourself once, but obviously have recognized the foolishness of your choice. You do not have the balls to confirm your choice or admit you are wrong. Are you an idiot or a pansy? (Probably both!)

You started this foolishness, Goober! Now, shit or get off the pot. Answer the question! Stop running away like a scared little girl, pussyface!

Once again: Is she the best Republican candidate available? HINT: Possible answers are "yes" and "no"!

LIBERALS ARE TOAST!| 8.16.09 @ 3:22PM

Ha Ha Ha! Sarah Palin got rid got your liberal DEATH PANELS (Brilliant Girl!), now we got rid of the nasty public option. You dumb butt liberals are so PWND!

But we're not going to stop there! We're going to beat your crappy butts in 2010 and get rid of the Joker in 2012! The people have awakened and we are pi$$ed! The Independents are trending right and you fascist liberals' days are numbered.

You skeezy democrats are GOING DOWN! Thank you, God.

Photon| 8.16.09 @ 11:37PM

Evidence of Palin's "death panel" hypocrisy AND deception is clearer and clearer. According to 2008 Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman:

"Right now, the charge that’s gaining the most traction is the claim that health care reform will create “death panels” (in Sarah Palin’s words) that will shuffle the elderly and others off to an early grave. It’s a complete fabrication, of course. The provision requiring that Medicare pay for voluntary end-of-life counseling was introduced by Senator Johnny Isakson, Republican — yes, Republican — of Georgia, who says that it’s “nuts” to claim that it has anything to do with euthanasia." - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/opinion/14krugman.html

It turns out that Palin's "death panels" claim is not only disinformation about end-of-life counseling, but Palin actually endorsed virtually the same concept in 2008:

[QUOTE]
For ‘Death Panels’ Before She Was Against Them? Palin Endorsed End Of Life Counseling As Governor

In recent weeks, right-wing groups have been pushing the myth that health care reform will somehow kill seniors. One of the most high profile voices pushing this lie has been Sarah Palin, who claimed President Obama will institute bureaucratic “death panels.” Today, again on her Facebook page, she continued the attack. Though some Republicans have rebuffed this absurd, inaccurate notion — like Johnny Isakson (R-GA), who called such talk “nuts” — others, like Newt Gingrich, have piled on to agree with Palin.

However, on April 16th 2008, then Gov. Sarah Palin endorsed some of the same end of life counseling she now decries as a form of euthanasia. In a proclamation announcing “Healthcare Decisions Day,” Palin urged public facilities to provide better information about advance directives, and made it clear that it is critical for seniors to be informed of such options:

WHEREAS, Healthcare Decisions Day is designed to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care and medical decision-making whenever patients are unable to speak for themselves and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions. [...]

WHEREAS, one of the principal goals of Healthcare Decisions Day is to encourage hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, continuing care retirement communities, and hospices to participate in a statewide effort to provide clear and consistent information to the public about advance directives, as well as to encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to improve public knowledge and increase the number of Alaska’s citizens with advance directives.

WHEREAS, the Foundation for End of Life Care in Juneau, Alaska, and other organizations throughout the United States have endorsed this event and are committed to educating the public about the importance of discussing healthcare choices and executing advance directives.

Though this proclamation is now deleted from the Alaska governor’s website, it shows that Palin’s current fear-mongering is purely political. Palin is not the only conservative leader completely flip-flopping on this issue. Merely months ago, Gingrich too endorsed end of life counseling. At a conference in April of this year, Gingrich said advance directives can “save money” while also helping to “decrease the stress felt by caregivers.”
[END QUOTE (article at http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/13/palin-deathpanel-flipflop/)]

NOBAMA EVER!!| 8.17.09 @ 1:01AM

Yeah, moron, but PALIN NEVER MANDATED A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF END OF LIFE COUNSELING, SHE WANTED IT TO REMAIN A PERSONAL MATTER WITHIN THE FAMILY. It's completely DIFFERENT!! Nice try, though, putz. Liberals lie, liars are liberals. Ha ha!

We busted your butts on ObamaCare and we ain't stopping there. It rhymes, loser. Aren't you impressed?

Photon| 8.17.09 @ 8:55PM

Obama never "mandated" it either. It was always voluntary, you idiot! Do you know what "voluntary" means?

Photon| 8.17.09 @ 9:57PM

In case you have a problem with reading comprehension, here is the definition of "voluntary":

vol⋅un⋅tar⋅y  /ˈvɒlənˌtɛri/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [vol-uhn-ter-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural -tar⋅ies.
Use voluntary in a Sentence
–adjective 1. done, made, brought about, undertaken, etc., of one's own accord or by free choice: a voluntary contribution.
2. of, pertaining to, or acting in accord with the will: voluntary cooperation.
3. of, pertaining to, or depending on voluntary action: voluntary hospitals.
4. Law. a. acting or done without compulsion or obligation.
b. done by intention, and not by accident: voluntary manslaughter.
c. made without valuable consideration: a voluntary settlement.

5. Physiology. subject to or controlled by the will.
6. having the power of willing or choosing: a voluntary agent.
7. proceeding from a natural impulse; spontaneous: voluntary laughter.

Here is the definition of "mandatory":

man⋅da⋅to⋅ry  /ˈmændəˌtɔri, -ˌtoʊri/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [man-duh-tawr-ee, -tohr-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural -ries.
Use mandatory in a Sentence
–adjective 1. authoritatively ordered; obligatory; compulsory: It is mandatory that all students take two years of math.
2. pertaining to, of the nature of, or containing a command.
3. Law. permitting no option; not to be disregarded or modified: a mandatory clause.
4. having received a mandate, as a nation.

Do you understand the difference?

NOBAMA DEATH PANELS!| 8.18.09 @ 2:14AM

There's nothing voluntary about the OBAMA DEATH PANELS, moron. Several liberal writers have already written columns attesting to this fact.

You stupid fascist liberals just want to gut medical care for our old folks so you can give it to illegal aliens for more democrat votes. Power whores. You cheesy, stinking traitors should be run out of town.

No matter, we're kicking your nasty butts all over the place. Obama's approvals are in the toilet, your stinking democrat weenie congressmen are too afraid to go to their town halls, republicans are leading in the polls--face it--you're doomed, ASSHOLE!!

ROTFLMAO!

Photon| 8.18.09 @ 2:59AM

There are no death panels, lamebrain, but the counseling between the physician and patient is entirely voluntary.

Show me a report from a reputable news organization (foxnews will do) saying that this counseling is mandatory. Then show me photographs of Bigfoot or Iraqi WMD stockpiles discovered by US forces! The clock is ticking.

Photon| 8.18.09 @ 3:07AM

Here is CBS News debunking your Death panel lies, you idiot!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/11/health/main5233968.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Please note that it says "if the patient wishes." That means "voluntary" you idiot!

Photon| 8.18.09 @ 3:19AM

Here's another one for you, idiot, complete with video link:

Tonight on FNC’s Hannity, host Sean Hannity was discussing how the Democrats have pulled back on health care reform and the death panels, when FNC contributor Dick Morris corrected him and said that there never was any death panel.

- http://www.politicususa.com/en/Death-Panel-FNC

Observer| 8.18.09 @ 4:46AM

(Sigh!) This just goes to show what happens when liars start to believe their own lies, just like right-wingers and the Iraqi threat. Right-wing fantasyland is a cognitive disorder of the worst kind: schizophrenia, or detachment from reality.

"Jumping to conclusions seems to be quite common in the fantasyland of the right-wing blogosphere. When asked to substantiate their conclusions, we may encounter bluster, red herrings, and ad hominem attacks more often than rational, focused answers. Military Intelligence students are quickly disabused of such behavior, and learn the value of supporting every conclusion they proffer. Researchers at the Rand Corporation and other highly regarded research institutions often come from such rigorous backgrounds, where conclusions are based on empirical evidence, rather than wishful thinking.

It's a pity that blogosphere researchers and commentators are not held to similar high standards of accuracy. It's a pity that their fans consider clearly documented misrepresentation to be insignificant as long as it confirms their biases. It's a pity that such predisposition to believing disinformation can be exploited just as easily by Accuracy In Media (AIM) editor Cliff Kincaid as it was by the Bush administration in selling the Iraqi threat. Even today, when all of the false evidence supporting Iraqi WMD stockpiles has been clearly debunked, Bush loyalists may insist their conclusions were true despite the lack of evidence. "

PALIN 2012| 8.18.09 @ 1:45PM

Of course there are no DEATH PANELS in ObamaCare--Sarah got them eliminated! Bonehead.

You really should relax a little, YOU'RE sounding VERY UNHINGED. You need meds---and I'm not talking about the dope your skeezy crack ho mom sells out of her bedroom.

You need to see a doctor; thank God and Conservatives you still can because we didn't let you fascists destroy our fine medical system.

ObamaCare is dead and Palin helped kill it!!

GO SARAH!!

Photon| 8.18.09 @ 8:50PM

There never were death panels. That was a lie, just like the Iraqi WMD stockpiles. Can you provide a link to ANY reputable source that confirms they ever existed, or even that MANDATORY end-of-life counseling was part of the bill?

NOBAMA DEATH PANELS!| 8.18.09 @ 11:53PM

Bill and Hillary Clinton, Madeline Albright, Harry Reid, Joe Lieberman, Sandy (The burglar) Berger, Tom Daschle, Barbara Boxer, Al Gore, Dick Gephardt, John Edward, Bill Cohen, John (Do you know who I am?) Kerry, Ted (Chappaquiddick) Kennedy, Nazi Pelosi, etc, ad nauseam ALL SAID IRAQ HAD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, MORON!

So ALL OF YOU FASCIST LIBERALS LIED, TOO!

GOOGLE IT, LOSER.

Photon| 8.19.09 @ 8:32PM

They all believed the false National Intelligence Estimate. However, according to the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Bush administration went beyond the NIE and deliberately misrepresented the Iraqi threat, including the false link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Bush was nailed by the Senate. Google it yourself, idiot! (Links available upon request)

Once again: Can you provide a link to ANY reputable source that confirms death panels ever existed, or even that MANDATORY end-of-life counseling was part of the bill?

NOBAMA DEATHPANELS!!| 8.20.09 @ 12:09AM

Stupid liar liberal! NOWHERE in the Senate Intelligence Report did it say that President Bush DELIBERATELY misrepresented the Iraqi threat. Senator Rockefeller (traitor) chaired that committee and it was a liberal partisan hack effort anyway. If they proved Bush misrepresented Iraq's WMD, then why didn't you stupid, impotent liberals punish Bush and Cheney? Because you proved NOTHING!

Rockefeller was outed for conspiring with our enemy, Syria, in January 2002 before the Iraq war and should have been kicked out of the senate and prosecuted under the Logan Act. Typical liberal--always a TRAITOR!

Rockefeller is an unAmerican scumbag like you, moron.

United States Senate| 8.21.09 @ 2:47AM

Here you go, straight from the United States Senate:

The Committee’s report cites several conclusions in which the Administration’s public statements were NOT supported by the intelligence. They include:

Ø Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa’ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa’ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.

Ø Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.

Ø Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.

Ø Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq’s chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community’s uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.

Ø The Secretary of Defense’s statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.

Ø The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed.

Additionally, the Committee issued a report on the Intelligence Activities Relating to Iraq conducted by the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group and the Office of Special Plans within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. The report found that the clandestine meetings between Pentagon officials and Iranians in Rome and Paris were inappropriate and mishandled from beginning to end. Deputy National Security Advisor Steve Hadley and Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz failed to keep the Intelligence Community and the State Department appropriately informed about the meetings. The involvement of Manucher Ghobanifer and Michael Ledeen in the meetings was inappropriate. Potentially important information collected during the meetings was withheld from intelligence agencies by Pentagon officials. Finally, senior Defense Department officials cut short internal investigations of the meetings and failed to implement the recommendations of their own counterintelligence experts.

Today’s reports are the culmination of efforts that began in March 2003, when, as Vice Chairman, Senator Rockefeller initially requested an investigation into the origin of the fraudulent Niger documents. In June 2003, he was joined by all Democrats on the Committee in pushing for a full investigation into prewar intelligence, which was eventually expanded by the Committee in February 2004 to include the five phase II tasks.

The Committee released its first report on July 9, 2004, which focused primarily on the Intelligence Community’s prewar assessments of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs and links to terrorism. Those findings helped lay the foundation for some of the intelligence reforms enacted into law in late 2004.

In September 2006, the Committee completed and publicly released two sections of Phase II: The Use by the Intelligence Community of Information Provided by the Iraqi National Congress; and Postwar Findings About Iraq’s WMD Programs and Links to Terrorism and How They Compare with Prewar Assessments.

In May 2007, the Committee released the third section of Phase II: Prewar Intelligence Assessments About Postwar Iraq.

Separately, in early 2007, the Pentagon Inspector General released its own report on the intelligence activities conducted by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy and also concluded that those activities were inappropriate.

- http://intelligence.senate.gov.....?id=298775

The biggest lie, of course, was the false link between Iraq and Al Qaeda

Truth| 8.21.09 @ 4:16AM

You can piss & moan all you like, sweetheart, but the proof is in the pudding: they lied about the Iraqi threat, just like they are lying about the death panels. You can shoot the messenger all you like but the truth is irrefutable.

"Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - Bible, John 8:32

CONSERVATIVES RULE!!| 8.21.09 @ 3:17PM

If you've PROVEN that Bush DELIBERATELY mislead the country about Iraqi WMD, why haven't YOU LIBERAL ASSHOLES named a Special Prosecutor to investigate President Bush and Vice President Cheney? Hmmmm?

You can quote all the lies from the Senate you want, but it's just BS from traitorous asshole Rockefeller who is a lying partisan hack liberal. NO ONE believes it but liberal azzhat tools and idiots like you.

You own the House, Senate and the Presidency--it would be no problem for you to name a SP. So why haven't you? Because you liberal losers have NOTHING and you know it!

I ain't crying or whining these days but liberal morons like you must be carrying around pantloads of crap in despair over your Dear Leader's free fall in public opinion polls!! Even Charlie Cook says you're going to get smashed in the 2010 elections.

I'm lovin' every damn day that our country sees clearly that you FASCISTS on the left are incompetent, lying thugs who CANNOT GOVERN!

DEMOCRATS OUT IN 2010!

ROTFLMAO!!

Truth| 8.21.09 @ 6:43PM

Did the Bush administration lead Americans to believe that Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks or not?

BTW: Deception or misrepresenting the truth is common among politicians. Unless done under oath, it is not a prosecutable crime.

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 - 1860)

Nobama| 8.21.09 @ 8:37PM

The word is DELIBERATELY, moron. If you can't prove that you've got NOTHING! Hence, the reason you fascists couldn't go after Bush and Cheney. I'm ridiculing YOU not your argument, doofas, but it seems you're too dumb to understand that.

Admit it, you lost the argument.

Truth| 8.22.09 @ 3:54PM

The pattern of misrepresentation proves intent. Only an idiot, such as yourself, would claim that their misrepresentation of the Iraqi threat was accidental. They would have to be dumber than you to continue making such "mistakes," and that is impossible.

"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
- Galileo Galilei (1564 - 1642)

Truth| 8.22.09 @ 4:06PM

Oops, perhaps I got ahead of myself. Here's another question for you to evade, like you have still evaded my earlier questions:

Are you claiming that they did NOT misrepresent the Iraqi threat, or that they accidentally misrepresented the Iraqi threat? There are only three misrepresentation possibilities:
- No misrepresentation
- Accidental misrepresentation
- Intentional misrepresentation

You can add that to these questions to answer:
- Is Palin the best Republican candidate?
- Did the Bush administration lead Americans to believe Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks?
-What are "death panels"?
-Can you provide a link to ANY reputable source that confirms death panels ever existed, or even that MANDATORY end-of-life counseling was part of the bill?

Sorry for the inconvenient truths. I expect more tap-dancing and evasion instead of direct answers, because that is the common response of fools living in right-wing fantasyland.

"The first duty of a man is the seeking after and the investigation of truth."
- Cicero (106 BC - 43 BC)

Truth| 8.22.09 @ 5:50PM

Here's something for the schizophrenic residents of Right-Wing Fantasyland. Liberals are unhappy with Obama's CONSERVATIVE actions, written by Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08......html?_r=1

Of course, schizophrenia is a cognitive disorder characterized by an inability to recognize reality. It is especially common in Right-Wing Fantasyland, as demonstrated by some other comments here.

"The men the American public admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth."
- H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)

NOBAMA!!| 8.22.09 @ 8:44PM

Ha ha ha! All of your liberal diarrhea of the mouth doesn't mean squat if YOU CAN'T PROVE INTENT, MORON!

If you leftist turds COULD have proven INTENT you would have prosecuted Bush and Cheney--and both you and I know it.

Pattern DOES NOT prove intent even in liberal loopey, looney land.

Sorry; YOU LOST, Loser. Say Uncle!

Palin 2012| 8.22.09 @ 8:49PM

Obviously, you're not a lawyer; if you were perhaps you would understand the significance of INTENT in the law. Why do you think you libs couldn't prosecute anyone from the Bush administration?

Sure, you wanted a witch hunt but the American people wouldn't let you do it. You've got nothing!

Truth| 8.23.09 @ 12:43AM

"Why do you think you libs couldn't prosecute anyone from the Bush administration?"

You are wrong, grasshoppa, by asking a poorly loaded question. This a loaded question because it wrongly assumes libs actually cannot prosecute anyone from the Bush administation. As a matter of fact, libs can easily prosecute members of the Bush administration.

Prosecution for lying a wasting a trillion dollars and countless lives in Iraq would be difficult because it is hardly a crime, regardless of intent. Intent does not affect culpability in this case.
The significance of INTENT in this case is zero because even the worst intent does not make lying illegal unless under oath.

Prosecution for torture war crimes, however, would be easy. Obama has alienated liberals by sweeping Bush administration war crimes under the rug. Waterboarding is torture under domestic and international legal precedent. Torture of detainees is a war crime under international treaty, with no exceptions for national security or ignorance of the law. All signatories, including the United States, are bound by treaty terms that REQUIRE the prosecution of suspected war crimes.

There aren't any witches being hunted, and torturers are war criminal witches running around with impunity in contravention of federal law. That's why liberals are pissed at Obama.

Still waiting for your answers to my questions, coward. Man up and answer them (if you are a man!):

Are you claiming that they did NOT misrepresent the Iraqi threat, or that they accidentally misrepresented the Iraqi threat? There are only three misrepresentation possibilities:
- No misrepresentation
- Accidental misrepresentation
- Intentional misrepresentation

You can add that to these questions to answer:
- Is Palin the best Republican candidate?
- Did the Bush administration lead Americans to believe Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks?
-What are "death panels"?
-Can you provide a link to ANY reputable source that confirms death panels ever existed, or even that MANDATORY end-of-life counseling was part of the bill?

Piety requires us to honor truth above our friends.
Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC),

Nobama| 8.23.09 @ 3:50AM

If prosecution is so friggin' easy, why don't you libs do it? Back up your bogus claims.

Palin 2012| 8.23.09 @ 3:54AM

Exactly, dumb ass; Obama CAN'T prosecute Bush because he knows he CAN'T prove intent.

You're stupid. Typical liberal--you can spew wikipedia BS but you can't think for yourself.

You've been pwned and you're too braindead to know it. lol

SKYROCKETING JOB LOSSES| 8.23.09 @ 4:01AM

If you libs tried to prosecute Bush you would lose because you couldn't prove intent. Obama knows this that's why he hasn't tried to prosecute Bush.

Why do YOU think Obama hasn't tried to prosecute George W? Think now--I know it's difficult for you--but stretch your brain. It's called logic--use some!

Truth| 8.24.09 @ 6:50PM

Speak of the devil:

"'Inhumane' CIA terror tactics spur criminal probe

Email this Story

Aug 24, 6:06 PM (ET)

By DEVLIN BARRETT and PAMELA HESS

(AP) Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton conducts the daily press briefing of media at a...
Full Image

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration launched a criminal probe Monday into "unauthorized ... inhumane" interrogations of terror suspects during President George W. Bush's war on terrorism, spurred by newly declassified revelations of CIA tactics including threats to kill one suspect's children and to force another to watch his mother sexually assaulted."

http://apnews1.iwon.com//artic.....GTUG1.html

Nobama| 8.25.09 @ 1:06AM

Convenient ain't it that Obama launches a CIA probe right now when his poll numbers are absolutely in the toilet! 45% favorables with a -14 point differential between his positives and negatives. 7 months into his presidency and his popularity is in free fall. Can you say ONE TERMER?

Is it possible that your dear leader is just another bottom feeding political whore who would sell out his country's national security to save his nasty political butt? Could it be?

Obama doesn't give a damn about the American people--he's all about power and control. He's a loser like you.

Well, if your city is next to get hit with a mushroom cloud--you can only blame your own stupid F-ing selves.

Besides, I said Bush/Cheney. You'll NEVER be able to touch them, Asshole.

NFL jerseys| 9.3.09 @ 11:15PM

It is a wonderful article,I like it!Welcome to read following news: NFL jerseys,Photoshop CS2,ghd Hair Straightener,Adobe Photoshop CS4,cheap uggs.

discount Laptop cpu fans| 11.8.09 @ 10:52PM

brand new discounting laptop AC Adapters
brand new discounting Laptop Batteries