Now that the IMAO exclusive debunking of Fahrenheit 9/11‘s supposed record making has been cited by Andrew Sullivan, a number of people have disputed my facts. I’ve updated the orginal post to say how I’m still right (my regular readers are probably saying, “Of course you’re right; you’re Frank.” If only others were so wise).
UPDATE: Question for my regular readers: The extra linkage has seemed to attract a number of muckadoos. Should I explain to them the humor behind comparing Fahrenheit 9/11 and Jackass: The Movie, or should I continue to watch them writhe and pretend to debate them on the merits like I did with The Limey?
Of course you’re right; you’re Frank.
Michael who?
Oh, I get it. Someday, if Moore’s movie is shown on certain cable channels (History Channel, Discovery Channel, Biography Channel, etc.), but not others, then it will be a documentary. Can there be a more dumbass criteria for what constitutes a documentary? Besides, unless you are predicting “Jackass” will be shown on those particular cable channels (which I doubt even you would argue would ever happen), you have demolished the main argument that started the original post.
It is quite comical to see all the half-truths and contradictions on this website, among both the host and commenters.
Here is what’s really sad…ABC news(?) is actually showing clips and conducting interviews with people that appear in this crapaganda schlockumentary. Just their left wing way of trying to give validity to this piece of garbage and his film. Hollywood will stop at nothing to oust Bush.
Not to mention that during the NASCAR event on Sunday the announcer told everyone, that as “Good Americans” they should go see this film?????
What the hell is going on here?
Jim E.,
I challenge you to name one half-truth on this entire website. I either say the full truth or out-right make something up… but never a half-truth!
Actually Miss Annree, that quote was atributed directly to Dale Jr. I was a bit disturbed by that, but as they say, “opinions are like assholes, everone has one, and most of them stink”.
OK, evidence of a half truth: In your UPDATE to the original, related thread, you bring up the fact that “Jackass” has made more money than Moore’s film, as if that somehow bolsters your point (when it does not). As your own link indicates (again, on the UPDATE to the original post), you are comparing 11 weeks of box office for Jackass to THREE DAYS for Moore’s movie. Can you please explain why you think such a comparison is fair and not a half-truth?
Geez, Jimmy, read the CNN article to see the assertions I was debunking (one of which was that Michael Moore’s film already set the record for highest grossing documentary).
I think we have a bunch of full truths read by someone with half a brain. Have you even seen Jackass the Movie? I don’t think you should be making arguments until you have. Me, I’ve seen neither film, so I’m unbiased.
So nice of Mr. Sullivan to link your article, Frank.
First, there was Michelle Malkin.
Now this!
‘Waco: Rules Of Engagement’ is a Documentary.
‘Trinity And Beyond’ is a Documentary.
Neither ‘Bowling For Columbine’
Or ‘Farenheit 9/11’ are Documentaries.
Slickly edited and distorted, flat-out lying Sound Bite Montages, maybe.
But certainly not ‘Documentaries’!
What a funny guy. At least you admitted I’m telling the full truth, so I’ll take that as vindication of my success in fact checking your ass. (Well, you halfway admitted, at least, just like your half-truths. I’m seeing a pattern.)
“flat-out lying Sound Bite Montages”
Two questions:
1. What the hell is a lying sound bite montage
2. examples?
Oh, geeeee…
I don’t know, Jim.
Take take a closer look at ‘Bowling’ and pay attention to the “From My Cold Dead Fingers!” quote from Mr. Heston.
Mr. Moore is implying the scene took place during the NRA Convention in Colorado immediately after the Columbine Incident. When in fact that quote was given Two Years Later in Atlanta, GA.
go to http://www.boxofficemojo.com. They have the figures. Frank was right.
Also, according to Rush at his website. This movie opening ranked #222 of all time. Compare this to last weekend, Dodge Ball made $30 millon, the weekend before that it was Harry Potter with $34 million (in it’s second week). I’m sorry, $23 million is a paltry opening weekend for something that is getting so much hype.
Andrew Sullivan has posted a correction on HIS blog for having linked to THIS blog. Sully admits he was duped and that 911 outdid Jackass.
We were all duped by CNN, and it will take some time to get over the hurt.
You must have made the big time in the vast rightwing conspiracy. Now, we are even being told we can learn from monkeys.
rightwingduck,
Moore’s movie was on a third as many screens as any other movie in the top five. It’s per-screen average was triple the other movies released last weekend, which is why it made more money. Frank was wrong, as Andrew Sullivan has honorably admitted.
Mr. Imperial,
I still don’t see a lie. If you’re talking about implying stuff, well, yeah, Moore’s the king of that. He has even worse stuff (distortions, etc.) in Roger and Me. I was more interested in examples of lies from 911. I was wondering what a lying montage of soundbites were and I’m still wondering. If you’re so offended by implications, I’m sure you share my outrage in how the administration has, until recently, implied that Saddam was behind 9/11.
Debate! Debate!
Make them writhe, Frank! Make them writhe! Bwa hahahahaha!
goes back to working on some anti-Moore placards
-The Real Conservative Carl
aka The Half-Elven Commie Slayer
Perhaps you should explain the humor to your regular readers, Frankie. It doesn’t seem like they’re in on the joke.
Did you know that the playing of Farenheit 9/11 was sold out in the town near Fort Bragg?? Of course the press failed to mention that the whole theater has just 125 seats!!! Hmmmm, I wonder what else they’re not telling us?
All the media crowing about Moore’s ‘Record Breaking POS’kinda reminds me of their Noise and Hoopla over the ‘Introduction On The Airwaves of Liberal Talk Radio (Air America, or MoonBat Central, as most refer to it)
How many staions did it start out with?
How many are broadcasting today?
Moore’s Mockumentary will die a slow, agonizing, writhing death this weekend. Falling well short of its Objective.
Having spent 60 Million to make and only grossing 22 Million its first weekend will send the Distributors screaming for blood!
Hopefully, Moore’s.
I’d give them a break and tell them. After all they don’t come here regularly so they’ll never be able to figure it out on their own.
“Having spent 60 Million to make and only grossing 22 Million its first weekend will send the Distributors screaming for blood!”
OK, clue me in. Is this more of the so-called hilarity by people on this site? Or do people not realize that the movie cost only $6 million (not $60 million) and has thus already turned a profit?
I just fear how Fahrenheit 9/11 must be eating into Spiderman 2’s opening today much like Michael Moore eating into… well… anything.
He’s fat.
Jim E.
You mean this post:
“The initial returns of “Fahrenheit 9/11” were less than “Jackass.” But the adjusted returns show F9/11 inching ahead of the boys with the toys. Let’s see if Moore’s propaganda beats out “Jackass’s” total $64.2 million.”
I don’t see anything there that Mr. Frank J. himself did not correct in his original post.
Troll alert!
jim, could you please cite an instance where anyone in the administration said that Hussein was directly involved in 9/11? I think I paid pretty close attention, and never heard that. Oh, wait, reviewing your post, they implied it, but please, documentation would be nice. I still didn’t catch that implication.
Michael who? Never heard of him.
“Warning: Please do not feed the trolls. They may become irritable and bloated with their own inflated sense of self-esteem.”
“… and if angered, they may charge off a cliff with the other lemmings…”
NYEAH NYEAH TROLL!!
IGNORANT TROLL!!!
NYEAH NYEAH!!
Now where is that cliff?
Maggie,
At the risk of being called a troll for actually addressing your question with documentation as you politely requested, here are three examples of the administration linking Iraq with 9/11 & Al Quada:
From Meet the Press, Sept. 2003:
MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it’s not surprising that people make that connection. . . . Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the [9/11] attack.
[later in same interview]:
CHENEY: [talking about importance of Iraq invasion]: We will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.
This is from the Christian Science Moniter summarizing a Bush press conference two weeks before the Iraqi war:
WASHINGTON — In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.
Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president. Still, the overall effect was to reinforce an impression that persists among much of the American public: that the Iraqi dictator did play a direct role in the attacks. A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was “personally involved” in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago.
From Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech in May 2003:
“The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of al-Qaida”
jim e, what you have provided is two examples of the media – not the administration – linking saddam with 9/11. And one startling statement of the truth:
The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of al-Qaida.
What the heckle are you talking about?
Hey Jim E., did you know that John Kerry served in Vietnam?
Dz,
I’m unclear how my quoting Cheney directly constitutes an example of the media linking 9/11 with Iraq. Cheney, not the media, did the linking in that interview.
Also, contrary to Bush’s assertions, there is no evidence that Al-Qaida and Iraq were allies. Just because a president says something doesn’t mean it is true.
Wolf,
Yes.
beo,
You’re suggesting that the President — over a year after the war began — has information linking Iraq with Al-Quada and 9/11, but he’s keeping it to himself? That’s a new one.
And you’re the one making non-sensical conspiracy-theorist jokes at MY expense. Ha!
No Jimmie E., beo is just making you look like a dork. You dork.
Jim E., do you think Iraq was a sponser of terrorism? Do you think Sadam provided material assets, funds, safe havens, training facilities, and intel to terror organizations? If so, does it matter if he had a hand in 9/11? If not, what kind of smoking gun do you need to change your mind?
If it looks like dog sht, smells like dog sht, do you want to step in it?
Hey Frank J., didn’t Kim DuToit change his “comments” policy because of this troll? Are you just that patient?
Trolls provide us with entertainment. This one’s harmless. Let us play with him for a while.
Jim E. – what I am suggesting to you is that there is such a thing as “national security,” and there are such thngs as “information that could compromise our efforts and/or agents in the field.” And there are a buttload of things he knows that you do not. He surprised the whole freakin’ world by moving the handover up two days; he surprised the whole freakin’ world by showing up for Thanksgiving dinner in Baghdad. Do you think that the media (and thus, YOU) are privy to everything he knows?
I don’t think you know much at all.
AND FURTHERMORE – (ahem) we are not fighting a war against Al Qaeda; we are fighting a war against terrorism. Now please tell me that we have no evidence to suspect Iraq of terror ties. cough Abu Nidal ahem paying families of suicide bombers…
You’re right Beo, without assmonkeys such as JimE we would have no one to practice our smack-down skill on.
What can I say, between hearing his whiny statements and being called a “communist” on the gun nut site because I don’t support the Libertarians, my patience is running thin.
There isn’t such thing as monolithic terrorism, so while Saddam WAS definitely funding suicide bombers’ families and the like in Palestine and Israel, he was not in cahoots with Al Quada or funding anti-American attacks. And since Iraq didn’t have a collaborative relationship with Al Quada and had nothing to do with 9/11, it is a fair question to ask why the Bush administration attempted to muddy the waters on those issues. (Or do the ends justify the means?) The war was a mistake because Saddam was contained and not a threat — as the Bush administration repeatedly argued before 9/11 and as the war has now proven (no WMD and still no links to Al Quada/attacks against America have been found).
I’m unclear on how I am a troll. I haven’t hijacked the discussions nor have I been making stuff up out of thin air; I’m merely responding to questions asked directly to me. On the issue of the war in Iraq, I hold the same views as William F. Buckley. I saw the same movie Dale Earnhardt, Jr., recommended people see. I don’t expect people to necessarily agree with me — esp. on this website — but I think you guys are a little out of touch with mainstream America (a charge that used to be leveled — with some justification — against Great Society liberals). Contrary to the implications made by several, I’m not an extremist, nor a pacifist.
beo,
Considering that the Bush Administration, out of political spite, outed a deep-cover CIA official who was specifically working on WMD issues, I doubt it would hold onto and keep secret smoking gun info connecting Iraq and Al Quada in order to not “compromise agents in the field.” They would release it in a nano-second.
Jim E. says …he was not in cahoots with Al Quada or funding anti-American attacks. And since Iraq didn’t have a collaborative relationship with Al Quada and had nothing to do with 9/11…
How do you know this, Jim? Do you have information that the Iraqi prime minister doesn’t?
Allawi: No. I believe very strongly that Saddam had relations with al-Qaida. And these relations started in Sudan. We know Saddam had relationships with a lot of terrorists and international terrorism. Now, whether he is directly connected to the September — atrocities or not, I can’t — vouch for this. But definitely I know he has connections with extremism and terrorists.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5326544/
With all due respect to Allawi, Cheney, and Bush, I’d prefer to see evidence rather than more rhetoric. (And so would our own CIA and the 9/11 commission, for that matter.)
Oh, so there is monolithic terrorism? Really? We are fighting a verb? Environmental wackos are the same as murders of abortion doctors are the same as the KKK are the same North Korea is the same as Osama Bin Laden is the same as the Crips n’ the Bloods is the same as Palestinian suicide bombers is the same as those committing genocide in the Sudan is the same as Milosovic is the same as the Taliban is the same as the IRA is the same as the Basques is the same as the McVeighs of the world is the same as Eric Rudolph is the same as the unabomber is the same as Rwanda is the same as Syria is the same as Lybia (our ally now?) is the same as the Pakistaniis (another ally) is the same as the Saudiis (another ally). I see — they are all the same and that’s what the War on Terror is about. Mmm-kay. That clears it up. Not.
Aside from being called a “dork,” an “assmonkey,” and a “rage against the machine” fan (???), I’m still waiting for evidence of “smack down skill.” I take that back — I’d rather have a polite discussion. Barring that (since I’ve yet to see it in my direction), I do await a good smack down.
P.S. We went to war over buried jets? We’re literally torturing Iraqiis and they have yet to tell us where the so-called WMD are. How many more years will it take before you give up the ghost?? This is really sad.
Jim E.,
does this count as evidence?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/25/politics/25TERR.html?ex=1403496000&en=d9a3d1aa68140e2c&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND
June 24 — Contacts between Iraqi intelligence agents and Osama bin Laden when he was in Sudan in the mid-1990’s were part of a broad effort by Baghdad to work with organizations opposing the Saudi ruling family, according to a newly disclosed document obtained by the Americans in Iraq.
American officials described the document as an internal report by the Iraqi intelligence service detailing efforts to seek cooperation with several Saudi opposition groups, including Mr. bin Laden’s organization, before Al Qaeda had become a full-fledged terrorist organization.
Or is this document just more of Allawi’s rhetoric?
The NY Times is taken as gospel around these parts? Who knew. The NY Times got their pre-war and war coverage (which was full of rah-rah stories documenting WMD and even a story which said US troops found WMD) so wrong, they had to write a semi-mea culpa about it. For all the talk of the liberal media, the Bush adminstration had no greater friend than the front page of the NY Times in the run-up to the war. Their star reporter, Judith Miller, was fed misinformation from Chalabi, which the administration then pointed to as justification for the invasion.
Anyways, to the NY Times article. That article, which deals with the mid-1990s, not the early 2000s, reports that “a request from Mr. bin Laden to begin joint operations against foreign forces in Saudi Arabia went unanswered. There is no further indication of collaboration.”
Other than an agreement to broadcast anti-Saudi propaganda, there is was no evidence of collaboration. You’re making my point for me.
The Iraqiis and AQ obviously met — I’m not denying that — but based on what we now know, they didn’t get along, they weren’t allies, and they didn’t collaborate.
Answer my question.
What kind of evidence will you accept?
Swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck = a duck.
We have uncovered mountains of evidence of terror connections in recovered/captured documentation in Iraq, we have seen the skill of the Iraqis to hid large items, we have had banned munitions turned into IED’s, we know his loyalists planned on harassment and terrorist campaigns prior to their defeat, we have found several terrorist training camps in Iraq…. At what point do you say “Well, gooooooo-ly sarge, who would have ever guessed it?” Gomer.
As to the claims of pacifism – I don’t know you, I don’t care about your beliefs. I do know that those posing the same arguments as you have been tearing at the President since Nov. 2000. I know that there a people who are denigrating the President in a manner that strengthens the resolve of our enemy. I know that the loose coalition of terror groups understand politics (i.e. Madrid bombings) and the effect the protesters have on national policy. I know that Hezbolla (sp) has offered to distribute Moore’s film. So, I’m going to go out on a limb and call you a duck …’er… I mean, a liberal assmonkey troll. If I’m wrong, then you are collateral damage in the war on ignorant America haters.
Uh, no, the NY Times isn’t taken as gospel.
Did I say that? No.
The fact that NYT (which doesn’t appear to be a friend of the administration: see http://www.thatliberalmedia.com/archives/cat_new_york_times.html) published a story about the document — after verifying its authenticity for itself — just might quell some of the doubts that most liberals have about the doc’s veracity.
Recovering Liberal,
I never questioned the veracity of the document or the article. Did I say that? No. Just surprised that I was being directed to the NY Times with the so-called liberal bias of the media and all. Didn’t mean any offense.
tacberry,
If William F. Buckley can say the war was a mistake without anyone questioning his patriotism (I assume his bonafides are in order), then so can I. The war was a mistake.
And in terms of you equating disagreement with the president during a time of war with anti-Americanism, shame on you. As Teddy Roosevelt said, “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
boy do I love ellipses…..
MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it’s not surprising that people make that connection.
MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: We don’t know. You and I talked about this two years ago. I can remember you asking me this question just a few days after the original attack. At the time I said no, we didn’t have any evidence of that. Subsequent to that, we’ve learned a couple of things. We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization.
We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ’93. And we’ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven.
Now, is there a connection between the Iraqi government and the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93? We know, as I say, that one of the perpetrators of that act did, in fact, receive support from the Iraqi government after the fact. With respect to 9/11, of course, we’ve had the story that’s been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.
That’s a might big leap there Jim.
oops, sorry, did you fall asleep there?
This is from the Christian Science Moniter summarizing a Bush press conference two weeks before the Iraqi war:
WASHINGTON — In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.
I guess first of all we need to establish the meaning of often. I’m counting 2 out of eight? maybe? and that’s including some suspension of regular speach patterns. (thinking of Pop Racer);D
“Saddam Hussein is a threat to our nation. September the 11th changed the strategic thinking, at least, as far as I was concerned, for how to protect our country.My job is to protect the American people. It used to be that we could think that you could contain a person like Saddam Hussein, that oceans would protect us from his type of terror. September the 11th should say to the American people that we’re now a battlefield, that weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a terrorist organization could be deployed here at home.”
This mentions September the 12th, eh, close enough, oh, wait it’s a year later too.
“I recognize there are people who — who don’t like war. I don’t like war. I wish that Saddam Hussein had listened to the demands of the world and disarmed. That was my hope. That’s why I first went to the United Nations to begin with, on September the 12th, 2002, to address this issue as forthrightly as I knew how. That’s why, months later, we went to the Security Council to get another resolution, called 1441, which was unanimously approved by the Security Council, demanding that Saddam Hussein disarm.”
Here’s the url the press conference transcript in case you’d like to check up on me.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030306-8.html
Let’s see him argue with those sources. Good Job Maggie.
Having fun with the troll.
poke giggle….
Jim,
if you don’t question the veracity of the article or the document on which it’s based, then why do you question the veracity of the statements made by heads of state that coincide with the content of that document?
Could it be that there’s (gasp) some truth in what they’re saying??
limey style
In case Jim comes back; the NY Times is one of the most liberal news sources I have ever come across. I have yet to see an article where they give Bush praise instead of bashing him or at least ignoring something he has done. A few months ago, they had an animated ad on their home page that condemned Bush by calling im a liar and saying that he didn’t care about the American people. The end of the ad prompted people to vote for Kerry. Jim, if one of your own newspapers is saying that Bush was right (which they try to never do), doesn’t that mean something?
Way to answer my question troll.
WHAT SORT OF PROOF IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU?
On the lighter side: If you saw me leaving your house via the back door, and your wife greeted you in her bathrobe, with her hair tussled, and a satisfied smile, how many times would it take before you show up at the house with a shotgun?
Maggie,
I never said that the Bush administration overtly connected Iraq with AQ&9/11, but that it implied a connection. How do you explain that a plurality of Americans, at least until recently, think Saddam was behind 9/11? It’s because Bush and Cheney and others constantly mentioned Iraq in the same breath as 9/11 & AQ. You seem quite proud about ellipses, but I don’t see what that changes at all. In fact, you have added severeal parts where Cheney overtly connects the Iraqiis with AQ, even though to this day we haven’t found any evidence to bolster his allegations (such as “al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization”). And consider the part where Cheney implies that Saddam was behind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Have you heard of that unproven conspiracy theory before? The same people that believe that (Cheney, Wolfowitz, Woolsey) also think that Saddam was behind the McVeigh’s Oklahoma City Bombing. And no I’m not joking — they believe the conspiracy theories of a woman named Laurie Mylroie. You see, the long interview excerpt you provided only furthers my case because it shows Cheney implying that Saddam was behind a lot of other bad things. How come the administration never connects, by implication or otherwise, Saudi Arabia to 9/11 even though we know most of the hijackers were Saudi and we know of actual connections between AQ and Saudi Arabia? Also, you know the part about the Atta meeting with Bagdad officials that Cheney keeps talking about? Never happened. It’s been investigated frontwards and backwards and the ONLY people I’m aware of who to this day still repeat that canard are Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, and the NY Times’ William Safire. In short, Maggie, the Bush administration implied connections between Iraq and AQ&911.
Trucido,
Just because John Kerry pays for and produces an ad on a website doesn’t mean anything. George Bush could buy the same exact ad space. Is that a serious argument on your part? Judith Miller, a NY Times reporter, was leaked all sorts of misinformation by Chalabi and the neocons in the run-up to the war. The NY Times front page news section helped Bush get support for the war. The NY Times has since admitted that several of their front page news stories, in retrospect, were flat wrong. Judith Miller, by the way, co-wrote a book with Laurie Mylroie, the anti-Saddam conspiracy theorist (mentioned above) beloved by Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Woolsey. The NY Times’ was played like a fiddle by the neocons in the run-up to the war and was hardly anti-Bush. Judith Miller, their top reporter on Iraq, was in favor of the war and her reporting (which was full of flat out lies) reflected that.
A Recovering Liberal,
The U.S. didn’t go to war in the spring of 2003 over an article (which I don’t think is significant at all, as I have already written) that was published in June of 2004. I am unaware of any heads of state making grand pronouncements on the basis of that one NY Times article. There is no evidence of a collaborative relationship between AQ and Iraq.
Tacberry,
Evidence that Iraq was a threat to the national security of the United States would be a start. Are right-wingers William F. Buckley, Tucker Carlson, Anthony Zinni, Tom Clancy, and Pat Buchanan all idiots in your eyes, too? They all think, like myself, that the war was a mistake. Do they hate America?
This is Colin Powell on Feb. 24, 2001, talking about sanctions against Iraq: “And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq…” Iraq was not a threat to U.S. national security and it was a war of choice. And if my wife had a “satisfied” smile, I know it wouldn’t be your house I’d be showing up to.
Can someone please explain to me why I’m a troll (other than the fact that I’ve dared to enter this echo chamber)? I haven’t changed the subject, I’ve actually answered questions posed to me, and I’ve made an effort to be polite. I’ve been called several names, and have even had someone joke about f***ing my wife, and yet I’M somehow the troll? Please explain.
Then again, I see a new post on the main page that mocks any of us who are actually being serious on this crazy and silly site. Silly us. Or silly me.
I will just answer my part and let you others have yours.
Jim E,
It does mean something, because all of the ads posted there have to be approved before they are posted. Ad space on nytimes.com is quite limited, so the fact that it made it is significant. The NY Times thought it was good enough to be posted. Everyone pays the same amount for their ads, so they weren’t bribing the Times to take it. On a related note, can you imagine a site that supports Bush or even takes a middle stance posting a bush bashing ad? That’s reaching a little too far.
Don’t think of it as a joke. Think of it as an illustration.
You refuse to accept that which is painfully obvious.
Sadam has aided and abeded terrorists. Sadam had in his posession weapons that he was required to destroy (and prove their destruction)under the peace agreements following the 1991 Gulf War. It is no stretch of the imagination to say that these weapons would be passed on to terror organizations.
My question to you continues to be: “What evidence do you need to see before you will agree that the battle in Iraq was justified?”
I am pretty sure you will not be convinced no matter what the evidence. Kind’a like the DNA evidence in the OJ trial.
The evidence is there. Your analysis of the evidence, however, is pre-determined.
To understand why you are a Troll I suggest you troll around the other Right-wing sites that Frank links. You my find some enlightenment on the subject.
Sure Jim, happy to explain. You are a troll because this is a humor blog, that happens to use politics and world events as subject matter. You popped in here after seeing the movie comparison linked, got your dander up and started pissing all over the room.
If that floats your boat, fine. Nobody cares really. But it does make you a troll.
Me, I’d just as soon not. Let’s not argue and bicker about ‘oo killed ‘oo, this is supposed to be a ‘appy occasion!
Guys,
You know the problem with idiots is that they never understand that they are, in fact, idiots. Someone who doesn’t want to accept your evidence will continue to claim that your evidence is unconvincing, despite all reasonable assertions of truth.
I make a statement such as “if they can hide 40 MiG-25s, they could certainly hide WMD.” The troll then makes an idiotic statement like, “oh, so now we went to war for planes buried in the desert?”
That’s called deflection at best (assuming he’s somewhat intelligent) and just plain stupidity otherwise. I have a hard time believing that you are that stupid, JimE. Although, to take the standpoint you do must indicate something is rattling around loose in that noggin of yours. I can see why you like Michael Moore, though. You both use the same kind of “debating” style – ignore good points, misrepresent what your opponent says, disagree with reality staring you in the face, and argue with anything your opponent says, whether you believe it or not. You’re not teachable, because you are convinced you already have the answers, and yet in the deepest recesses of your heart, you know that something about your argument is not quite right.
I guess that’s the heart of a troll. Ahem.
Trucido,
You have no idea what you are talking about. The NY Times sells ad space, period. Yours is the most non-sensical argument I have ever seen trying to prove the liberal bias of the NY Times. Seeing political ads from two different candidates on the same TV station must make your head explode out of utter confusion as you wonder which candidate is favored by the network. Anyone else here think Trucido might not understand how paid advertising works?
tacberry,
I think OJ was/is guilty of double murder and believe(d) the DNA evidence that was presented at both the civil and criminal trials.
Dave,
Fair enough — I was directed over here after reading Andrew Sullivan’s blog and it took me awhile before I realized that it’s all fun and games here. Thanks for your response. That’s fine, but can you tell beo, Recovered Liberal, tacberry, and Maggie that they are trolls, too, because from where I sit they’re pretty straight-faced about all of this as well.
JimE,
In case you were wondering, I contacted them about posting ads before saying anything.
beo,
Um, what am I supposed to respond to? For the record, I am not a fan of Moore’s. Regarding the WMDs, at a certain point, to borrow part of a phrase from Rumsfeld, absence of evidence DOES indicate evidence of absence. The U.S. removed its WMD hunting teams months and months ago. Bush’s hand-picked weapons inspector, David Kay said “we were wrong” and that Iraq has no WMD. In case you didn’t notice, the president no longer brings up the WMD issue (or even WMD-program related activities, for that matter). Iraq has no WMDs.
OK, now Trucido is just plain lying. You should contact non-NY Times news media, Trucido, because in addition to having silver bullet info of the liberal bias of the NY Times, you have single-handedly uncovered a massive violation of campaign finance laws that could sink both Kerry and the NY Times. You would have the scoop of the month. Well, I will say this: I do appreciate Trucido’s humor. Perhaps he’s trying to lighten things up. So instead of lying, Trucido is just joking. So hilarious.
JimE, backtrack to the top of the comments. This is a humor web site. As Dave in T said “you got your dander up and started pissing all over the room.”
One thing about us good’ol boys in the VRWC – we like to joke and have fun – but if you get serious with us you find that we don’t back down. You may frame me as a “troll” (sic.) for using the cheating wife analogy. I’m sure if you visit some of the serious Right Wing Blogs you’ll really get your feelings hurt. But you still will not answer the question. Beo beat me to the deflection – The comment was not about OJ – Is there any piece of evidence short of Sadam writing a tell-all book on how he flew the plane into WTC2 that will convince you? Or, would you think Bush ghost wrote the book?
What deflection? I’ve already answered: I’d want to see evidence that Iraq posed a threat to the national security of the United States.
Adulterous Henry Hyde, pill-popping marriage-failure Rush Limbaugh, virtuous-gambler Bill Bennett are all fat! Ha!
Since that’s what passes for wit on this board, I just wanted to show that I can fit in.
Bad thing about having a job, I can’t respond fast enough to beat beo. JimE, do you see this mark “?” it is called a question mark. The question mark indicates a question. Your job when faced with one of these “?” is to respond to the statement with an answer. This “.” is a period. It indicates the end of a sentence. Any response to a sentence is optional.
What evidence can be shown to you that will make you think The War On Terror:Operation Iraq is justified?
You are asking for analysis of evidence. That was given to you. Evidence is an item that analysis is based upon.
tacberry,
Go f*** yourself.
Ah, I feel better!
He can’t talk like that to our pledges! Only we can talk like that to our pledges!
Anyway, what can you expect? That sums up every stinkin’ Dem right there. Applause please.
Jim E.: “I’d want to see evidence that Iraq posed a threat to the national security of the United States.”
LIAR LIAR LIAR. You do NOT want to see evidence that Iraq posed a threat to the national security of the U.S. You HAVE seen it, and you pretend you haven’t because you don’t want to see it. You phrase it like that, and tell me with a straight face you don’t believe they were a threat? For crying out loud, I can show you proof that FRANCE poses a threat to the national security of the U.S. You’re not even asking for proof of details, just evidence of a general threat to the U.S.? You are so blind you can’t even see the generalized threat? Wow, what kind of drugs are your moonbat friends providing you with?
I hereby declare Jim E. incompetent to stand trial, and move for a dismissal.
BTW, they did find WMD’s in Iraq, f***wad. I guess because they found more dead bodies than weapons at this point you choose to ignore it. Or like the f***wad that you are, you won’t believe the WMD’s are really WMD’s until a little of that Mustard/Nerve gas gets spilled in a neighborhood near you.
Go f*** yourself indeed!
Tacberry:
Of course I have a job. The kind of job that leaves me behind my desk in my office for long stretches of time now and then. 😉
Motion is denied, beo. The defendent, while an ass monkey idiot, is still entitled to his day in court.
Now where were we, ah yes….
Asshat Troll!!!!!
tacberry,
What evidence can be shown to you that will make you think The War On Terror:Operation Iraq was a mistake and not justified? A bunch of well-respected conservatives/Republicans have already conceded the point, so I’m wondering what’s holding you back.
Why is Rumsfeld smiling in this picture?
http://www.andrewhoog.com/justice/media/rumsfeld-saddam.jpg
Wolf’s Dusk,
So serious all of a sudden? Lighten up — we’re not supposed to be serious on this site. Besides, if such language can be used by that pale, unhealthy, draft-dodging Republican VP on the floor of the Senate, I hardly see how my using the exact same words “sums up every stinkin’ Dem.” Stop being such a major league asshole. Heh. Also, beo seems to agree with me that WMD have not been found in Iraq (he would add the word “yet”), so direct some of your outrage in his direction.
RTO Trainer,
The bi-partisan, Bush-appointed 9/11 commission, which has access to classified information, unlike Epstein, has come to a different conclusion on the Atta matter. And the Czechs do NOT stand by the claim.
Wow, I feel so special. Jim called me a troll. And that’s “recovering,” bucko, as in “still in the process of.”
Jim says I am unaware of any heads of state making grand pronouncements on the basis of that one NY Times article. There is no evidence of a collaborative relationship between AQ and Iraq.
Actually, some heads of state — oh, say, like Bush and Allawi (check my previous posts) — have made statements that coincided with the contents of the document cited in the article.
I didn’t say that they made “grand pronouncements on the basis of” that one article. I pointed out that they’ve been saying the very things that the document proves, a document of which you do not doubt its veracity (check your previous posts).
I called you a troll based on the definition given to why I was called a troll, bucko. I don’t give a flying f*** about what you are or aren’t recovering from, bucko — this ain’t Oprah, bucko.
Tell me what the NY Times article “proves.” From what I read it proved the following:
1. there were contacts made between Saddam’s Iraq and AQ in the mid-1990s
2. there is an indication that Saddam re-aired some anti-Saudi speeches
3. that’s it
I can “prove” not only contacts, but collaboration, between the U.S. and Saddam’s Iraq, including the transfer of money as well as weapons. So color me unimpressed about the NY Times article, bucko.
“bucko”
WTF?
Oh, and 92nd.
I’d just like to clarify that it is the 9/11 commission, not the Iraq-Bin laden commission. So, not they aren’t going to go on a tangent about other collaborations they may have had.
…or was that 93rd????
Crap…..one, two, three, four…….
Boy, that’ll teach me to leave the office for an hour. I would much rather read insults in real time. What got under your skin JimE? Was it the grammer lesson or the actual point? Snapping ugly for a reason?
JimE, why don’t you tell us about yourself? You seem like an interesting sort. Start with where you live (San Fran, NYC, Palm Beach County -exact address not necessary but appreciated). E-mail address (most of us don’t hide ours). How have you come to be so liberal? Public school? Abusive parents? Military experience (John Kerry served in Vietnam)? Religious belief (ideology/gaia worshiper/atheist)? What makes someone like you tick?
Did you take a look at my above link? You know, the testimony from the 9/11 commission?
Jim E Sez: “The bi-partisan, Bush-appointed 9/11 commission, which has access to classified information, unlike Epstein, has come to a different conclusion on the Atta matter. And the Czechs do NOT stand by the claim.”
You’ll have to show me something to back that up. Come on, now, Maggie and I have been good about giving you material to check out.
So far as the Commission goes, I’ll wait for the actual report to come out on the 26th. You might want to chew on this statement from one of the Commissioners though. I think you’ll recognize the name.
Commissioner Lee Hamilton: I’ve looked at these statements quite carefully from the administration — they are not claiming that there was a collaborative relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, with regard to the attacks on the United States . Now all must understand that when you begin to use words like relationship, and ties, and connections and contacts, everybody has a little different view of what those words mean. But if you look at the core statements that we made in the staff statement I don’t think that there’s a difference of opinion with regard to those statements.
Hey asshat, how’s this for proof:
NEWS TRANSCRIPT: Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Roger Hedgecock, Newsradio 600 KOGO. Wednesday, June 30, 2004:
“….. Now what’s actually happened? Right now you have the Iraqi Survey Group, which is a multinational group that’s out there reviewing documentation and looking at suspect WMD sites. I was with the Polish minister of defense this weekend in Istanbul, Turkey at the NATO Summit. And in the course of that, he pointed out that his troops in Iraq had recently come across — I’ve forgotten the number, but something like 16 or 17 — warheads that contained sarin and mustard gas.
Now these are weapons that we always knew Saddam Hussein had that he had not declared and they have tested them and I have not seen them and I have not tested them, but they believe that they are correct that these, in fact, were undeclared chemical weapons — sarin and mustard gas — quite lethal and that is a discovery that just occurred within the last period of days. …”
#1: You just wish you could be as sexy as Dick.
#2: May 17, 2004 Brig.Gen. Mark Kimmitt confirmed that a US convoy discovered a 155-milimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent. It has also been confirmed that mustard gas has been found in another location.
#3. I reiterate, since it was not a stockpile of WMD’s and because that little shell didn’t make it into your neighborhood you won’t believe it. So just bury your head in the sand and wait for your f***in’ prom.
Oh and I love how you caught the coverage of Bad Ass Dick using the f-word but you missed the whole WMD story. Libuck. (Cross between a liberal and a f***wad)
Jim,
1. I pointed out my name because you used it incorrectly in a previous post. If yer gonna be less than polite and call names, then you should refer to folks by their correct names, si?
2. The NY Times article proves that documentation by the Iraqi intelligence service exists.
3. The article says: The Iraqi document itself states that “cooperation between the two organizations should be allowed to develop freely through discussion and agreement.” Is it illogical to think that more documentation — with more proof of contacts and a willingness to collaborate — exists but has not been found and verified?
I took a few to find out about Jime. He’s an obnoxious little prick on capitolpundit and washington monthly’s comment boards. Again, the man with not address.
BTW, I appologize for refering to your partner as a “wife”. I will use your “mother” for the next illustration.
Ah, Wolf’s Dawn thinks Dick Cheney is “sexy.” I see. Well, this is the same group of people that find nothing odd about Ann Coulter having an Adam’s apple.
Oh, and Rush Limbaugh is fat. With a cyst on his ass that kept him out of Vietnam. Hoo-boy, now THAT’s funny! Agreed? Agreed.
Bucko (aka Recovering Liberal),
So you’re admitting YOUR argument of contacts and collaboration between Iraq and AQ is based on evidence that hasn’t been found, much less verified? I see. Once again, I find myself almost, but not quite, speechless at yet another supposed debating point that bolsters my side of the argument.
I am aware of the mustard gas shells that were left over from before the 1991 Persian Gulf war — when Iraq was the ally of the U.S. No one credibly equates those discoveries with the WMD that we bandied about before the war. I notice how while I am treated as an exotic animal (a real live liberal!), no one has dared deal with the conservatives who think the war was a mistake and who don’t think (depleted chemical munitions notwithstanding) we’ve found WMD. Knowing now what we have and haven’t found in Iraq, here’s what William F. Buckley said his opinion of the war would have been last year: “I would have opposed the war.” Tell me how Buckley is not an asshat, but I am.
I’d be glad to Jim E. Buckley’s not a asshat. Well, yeah he is, but you’re a bigger one. “depleted chemical munitions notwithstanding” my ass. If they’re so depleted, go pick one of them up. When you’re done choking to death, we’ll see what’s depleted.
Hey Tacberry, he’s an obnoxious little prick on IMAO too! Meh.
No one was hurt, injured, or even sick from the munitions. The insurgenets who had them, according to our own military, didn’t even know the armaments had chemicals in them. That’s why we went to war?
I’d like to point out that we have our first person who has declared that William F. Buckley is an “asshat.” For real conservatives, those should be fightin’ words. I guess I’m dealing with psuedo-conservatives.
No one’s asked, but yes, I plan on voting for the presidential candidate that has personally killed communists in defense of his country. Laura Bush has killed a guy, it is true, but I don’t think he was a communist, she didn’t kill him with a gun, and, in any case, she’s not on the ballot.
Of course, you’re right Jim E. I should have seen it all along. Iraq posed absolutely no threat to us. We had no right, did we, to invade their country. It’s all about the oil. Damn, how could I’ve been so blinded by the right, swept up like a ….oh sorry.
BTW, tell me who this commie-killer candidate is. Maybe I should consider voting for him. Dirty commies. Oh wait, if he’s so good, how come there are still commies. If he was worthwhile, he shoulda kilt them all! Or maybe he didn’t kill them before he did kill them. I keep getting so confused. Help me Jimmie E!!!!!!
I’ve never once said here, or anywhere else, that is was a war for oil. Ever.
But I’m glad to see you admit that Iraq posed no threat to us. Well, given what we now know, that’s obvious for all to see. Some just choose not to.
NOT! What a muckadoo.
This has been fun in a repelling sort of way, but I have to go now. I’m taking my honking big RV out to Gettysburg to celebrate our country’s birthday. Are you sure you’re not a Rage Against The Machine fan, Jymmie E?
Adios amigos. Keep playing with the troll, but put him away when you’re through. If you don’t, Runsfield will crawl out from under your bed tonight and take him, and then what will you have to play with?????
I always find real men sexy. You’ve probably never seen one. And what if Ann Coulter has an adams apple? Now your a homophobe? Please, explain how there is something wrong with her? Are you saying that if she used to be a man then she is ________?
Jim says So you’re admitting YOUR argument of contacts and collaboration between Iraq and AQ is based on evidence that hasn’t been found, much less verified?
No, I’m saying that my argument of contacts and collaboration already has been bolstered by the recently found and verified document. That same argument could be bolstered EVEN MORE when we find similar documents.
LEAVE THE FACTS OUT OF THIS. KERRY IS THE BETTER CANDIDATE! HE WAS IS VIETNAM DAMNIT!!
Have a safe and happy Independence Day! I intend to shoot insane quantities of surplus military ammo out of my evil pre-ban rifles using 40 round clips to celebrate Liberty.
JimE, choke on a tofu burger. When a good Samaritan tries to help you, deny there is reason for intervention.
Greywolf,
You know the North won that war, right?
tacberry,
I must have missed all the FACTS you presented amidst all of the links and direct quotes I have provided. Thanks for the kind words, but I hate tofu. I’m more a meat and potatoes guy, so I’ll politely pass on your vegan menu offerings. Did you just want me to choke a little, or choke to death? What would Jesus want you to say? (Actually what WOULD Jesus say about this website which laughing calls for the murder and extermination of liberals? Would Jesus laugh? Or would Jesus be sad? Since tacberry is offer to the organic grocer, I’ll open this one up to everyone. Jesus, death to liberals: discuss.)
beo,
Did you read the part where I wrote about voting for the candidate who had “personally killed.” Apparently not. Laura Bush has personally killed more people (one) than Georgie, but like I said, she’s not running for anything so I couldn’t vote for her even if I wanted to. (Plus, she didn’t use a gun, which is a bit of a turn-off.) I want a born killer in office, you damn William F. Buckley-dissing pussies. I don’t want a guy who specifically avoided Vietnam, dresses up as a soldier and prances around an aircraft carrier (and then cuts veterans benefits as he sends soldiers off to battle). I want a guy who specifically signed up for the war and killed damn commies.
Wolf’s Dawn,
So you notice Ann Coulter’s Adam’s apple, too? I’m not as sure as you are that s/he’s completed the operation, yet. Anyone else care to comment on Ann Coulter’s Adam’s apple?
SHOW ME THE NUMBER OF COMMIES HE “PERSONALLY” KILLED.
Or are you merely speculating (i.e. shooting your mouth off?)
libuck says: No one was hurt, injured, or even sick from the munitions.
That is bullshit. The US convoy that discovered the “munitions” got sick. Just because the insurgents didn’t know what they had doesn’t change the fact that they were in Iraq and the Republican Guard and Saddam sure as shit knew what they were.
Then libuck has some blah,blah,blah then he says,”This is why we went to war?”
DUH!!!!!!!!! Call it “munitions” all you want, it doesn’t change the fact that it is a WMD. Like I said before, you won’t believe until it’s dropped in your own neighborhood. Or when Michael Moore says, “Go ahead little sheep, you can believe.”
Hey, Jim E. – remember saying this?
Can someone please explain to me why I’m a troll (other than the fact that I’ve dared to enter this echo chamber)? I haven’t changed the subject, I’ve actually answered questions posed to me, and I’ve made an effort to be polite.
Is Ann Coulter the subject of this post? Have you answered my question about how many commies John Kerry killed? Were you being polite when you flung the F-word around at people?
No score on all three counts. You don’t even escape your own definition of troll.
SMACKDOWN (Thank you, thank you very much…)
Britney Spears will have gotten married TWICE in 2004 and Rush Limbaugh, the pill-popper, has just admitted failure in his THIRD marriage. How can we blame the gays (or the Clintons) for this? Discuss.
Wolf,
The convoy that discovered the munitions (if we’re talking about the same one) didn’t get sick. They were observed for a few hours and let go. For non-pussies, getting a mild headache doesn’t mean you’re sick. At least you concede no one — and here we are over a year into the war — has been killed or injured due to WMD. (Do you know what WMD stands for?? Plain ol’ bullets and guns are more of a worry than those munitions. WMD, my ass.)
George Bush’s brother got herpes from whores in Tailand and just got divorced. How come the liberal media gave us all those funny reports on Billy Carter and Roger Clinton (which were then duly joked about on late night TV), but not Bush’s infected bro (whom I’m willing most of you have never heard about)? Liberal media, indeed. Discuss.
beo,
Here’s a link. I suppose a few grains of salt are in order as you read it, though, what with the liberal bias of the military and all:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/kerry/articles/2004/04/21/kerry_military_records____high_praise_combat_kills/
Also, I was wondering when I’d get called for it. beo’s totally correct. After being called a troll so many times (incorrectly), I’ve embraced it and become one. Score one for beo!! But, man, with all due respect, you guys are sloooooooooooow. I should have been called out on this awhile ago, NOT when I was actually sticking to the topic at hand. You mouth-breathers need to step it up!
Was Dick Cheney being polite when he told Leahy to go f*** himself on the Senate floor. That was the reference. The major league asshole comment — which you ignored — was in reference to Dubya’s line in 2000. Are Dubya and Cheney polite? Are they changing the tone in Washington?
Just another quick question. Does whether or not we should go to war really matter once we do? It appears to be a bit of a moot point. We have gone to war. It’s a done deal. Accept that it happened, short of a time machine there’s really no way to prevent it. Perhaps a better/more productive argument would be in regards to what should be done in the current situation. I swear, the dead horse has to have beaten into a pile of muck by now.
Jim,
True, during the Iran-Iraq war, the US decided the lesser of two evils was Iraq, and we did sell some weapons. Please apply some scope. If you remember or have studied the period at all, you’ll know why we had real concerns about Iran. We stopped all sales in 1988.
I refer you to the SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Reseach Institute) reports on weapons sold to Iraq by other nations. Look waaaaay down on the list to find the US. It’s after Brazil. You can combine the US and UK sales and they total less than Brazil. Top three providers, accounting for almost 80%? No surprise here: Russia, China, France.
Not trying to convince you of anything. Debate is about scoring points with the audience by defending your position or refuting points raised by your opponent.
Knock me over with a feather. Jenno raises the most — and, no, I’m sincerely serious — relevant point of all. It’s thoughtful, complicated, and totally on freakin’ point. I would quibble a bit — I do think the past matters a great deal when evaluating, say, competancy of leaders — but for the most part she raised a point much too mature for this unworthy website.
Also, hat tip to Dave, who actually brings some subtlty and FACTS to the table. This stuff actually should be a little complicated to talk about, but becoming a troll has been totally awesome!
If this website had more people like Dave and Jenna — rather than never ending jokes about the murder and extermination of liberals — I’d add it to my favorites list. I’ve yet to find a normal, non-hateful conservative website with comments for actual (polite) political conversation and debate. I came over here from Andrew Sullivan and was slow to figure out the similarity to Free Republic. Any suggestions for sane websites? (Tacitus has been a disappointment, but I’m eager to know of others.)
Until I get bored and leave for good, I’ll be mean and off-point again.
Durn. And here I thought I was offering facts (with URLs) and being polite (until called by the wrong name).
Silly me. Must be a matter of perception.
What name did I call you? Seriously, bucko, I have no idea what you’re talking about. I’ll be happy to apologize; just give me the date and time of the post. Oh, and that was a remarkable NY Times article. Wow. How could I forget. So much meaningful evidence in that, yep. Totally on-point.
But I am serious about the apology, A Recovering Liberal, if you indicate where I should look. (It’s too much to re-read.)
Hey, “Bucko” – I smacked you down. Don’t forget it, troll. In case anyone missed it, check above. Jim E. was smacked down.
It appears that Jim doesn’t want to talk to me anymore. It is because he can’t provide any support for his position?
Hey Troll,
Cry me a river over your desire for a nice place to spew liberalism. Here’s a novel, free market kind of idea:
Start your own dam website!
You seem to believe that you have the answers to our knuckle dragging view point. Go for it. Hell, you can even control the debate – every time someone posts a comment that fisks your content you can delete.
Just make sure to include your e-mail address.
Damn
I feel so dirty.
Frank, of course you should give ’em the Limey treatment.
By the way, imao.us is #2 on Google for “muckadoo.”
#2 for muckadoo?!? What could be #1?
I’m really trying to understand how people like JimE function in the real world where the rest of us live-it’s just as exhausting as trying to explain things to teenagers who “know” how things “really are”…hmmmm.
BTW- I have stood next to Ann Coulter and had a few words with her. She is (and always has been) entirely female, is even more beautiful “in person”, and is devastatingly witty and intelligent. What you call an “adams apple” may well be a “larger than usual” thyroid which really shows on her swanlike neck–and she doesn’t have those telltale large wrists (see, I’ve seen more than the usual share of “converts”.)
–oh, Ollie North was there too—and he is definitely ALL MAN! (… and wasn’t he in Vietnam?)
No one on this thread gave an inch about anything, so I thought I’d provide a few updates that will go to show how uninformed people on this website are. (Well, there was not one, but TWO of you who agreed with me that Ann Coulter has an Adam’s apple, but I was completely, totally, and utterly joking, so I’ll chalk that one up to more stupidity on your collective part. The idea that I unintentionally got a few of you to agree with me on a joke isn’t something I take much pride in. Idiots. Ann Coulter is not, and never was a man — unless, that is, you guys know something I don’t?)
First up, the Bush appointed bi-partisan 9/11 commission isn’t looking at just what happened on one day. It HAS documented the ENTIRE history between Al Quada and Iraq. They’ve determined there was not a collaborative relationship and have also diplomatically hinted that Cheney is a lying bastard:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040706/D83LJLSO0.html
Second, Tony Blair, the head of England, the U.S.’s best ally in Iraq, concedes that WMD have NOT been found in Iraq and may never be found:
http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/413233|top|07-06-2004::07:47|reuters.html
And third — this one is for Greywolf and his gas-guzzling RV — the supposed chemical shells found by the Polish troops that Rummy yapped about — and which incited Greywolf to call me an “asshat” — tested negative. So much for your “evidence,” Greywolf. Try again.
Finally, by the time you losers read this, Moore’s movie will have passed the total take of “Jackass” in less than three weeks.
Thank you. Thank you very much.
P.S. Beo, I’m not “bucko.” Recovering Liberal is “bucko.”
P.P.S. Yeah, I know this is an old thread, but I also know you folks are checking back here every so often, so enjoy these relevant facts. (I know you’re reading this. I know you couldn’t resist scrolling down the page to see if I’d return. Don’t worry, you don’t have to leave a comment — I’ll know most of you will have read this. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-haaaaaa!)
Rush: right wing druggy
Bill: right wing Sex whore
Bush: idiot right out of the box
IMAO- right wing nut jobs with a passion, although i did like the monkey thing