You wrote: So gays are actually helping to fulfill this same worldwide “sign” (and making the Bible even more believable!) and thus hurrying up the return of the Judge! They are accomplishing what many preachers haven’t accomplished! Gays couldn’t have accomplished this by just coming out of closets into bedrooms. Instead, they invented new architecture – you know, closets opening on to Main Streets where little kids would be able to watch naked men having sex with each other at festivals in places like San Francisco (where their underground saint – San Andreas – may soon get a big jolt out of what’s going on over his head!). Thanks, gays, for figuring out how to bring back our resurrected Saviour even quicker!

This is a joke, right?

(It’s still legal – and always God-honoring – to air messages like the following. See Ezekiel 3:18-19. In light of government backing of raunchy behavior (such offenders were even executed in early America!), maybe the separation we really need is the “separation of raunch and state”!)

In Luke 17 in the New Testament, Jesus said that one of the big “signs” that will happen shortly before His return to earth as Judge will be a repeat of the “days of Lot” (see Genesis 19 for details). So gays are actually helping to fulfill this same worldwide “sign” (and making the Bible even more believable!) and thus hurrying up the return of the Judge! They are accomplishing what many preachers haven’t accomplished! Gays couldn’t have accomplished this by just coming out of closets into bedrooms. Instead, they invented new architecture – you know, closets opening on to Main Streets where little kids would be able to watch naked men having sex with each other at festivals in places like San Francisco (where their underground saint – San Andreas – may soon get a big jolt out of what’s going on over his head!). Thanks, gays, for figuring out how to bring back our resurrected Saviour even quicker!

[If you would care to learn about the depraved human "pigpen" that regularly occurs in Nancy Pelosi's district in California, Google "Zombietime" and click on "Up Your Alley Fair" in the left column. And to think - horrors - that she is only two levels away from being President!]

You wrote: Weber was correct. There was a time in my life when I thought I’d make politics a career and then I grew, had a bit of therapy and came to see what a horrible job a politician has, certainly not one I wanted. The people who go into it are for the most part somewhat damaged emotionally and I think that has always been the case. **

I think of politicians as narcissists, the way I think of movie stars as narcissists. One has to have more than a touch of narcissism in order to launch a campaign, finance it and articulate some set of beliefs while under intense scrutiny. and for most politicians governance is something that happens in between elections and press conferences and forces the candidate to be always planning for the next campaign. Public service has gotten lost in the process.

I too thought of politics at one time but was in the middle of child-rearing and lots of other stuff and was pretty much unelectable anyway, having done many many things that I do not regret at all but at this point prefer to relegate to privacy. But now, since we have had 2 presidents who have inhaled, snorted and had sexual affairs outside the confines of marriage (yup. Bush did it too. it just wasn’t widely publicized — but there were a few months after Condi Rice called Bush her husband on Meet the Press when Laura moved out of the White House) and a First Lady with a vehicular manslaughter charge that was hushed up (Laura, again), it seems that almost anyone can buff one’s past to a nice shiny glow as long as you can answer the tough questions like “what kinds of things do you read?” and are content to wear the wardrobe than you can afford on your own.

btw, no need to apologize for the Nancy Pelosi thing.
While I did mention that I
Wile I live in CA now, I’ve lived in a bunch of other states and I never did, and probably never will mention exactly where I live now.

I think people forget that the Speaker was raised by politicians and that makes her unlike those who grew up in other settings.

I did, once long ago, live in the late Tom Lantos’s district. We belonged to the same synagogue and I admired him for many reasons including a shared family history. He walked out of the same ashes as the few remaining members of my family. he was one of those survivors whose resilience informed his wisdom about our obligations as members of a community that has a unique responsibility to future generations.

You wrote:

**It boils down to this. First, if the government had not embarked on a program of torture, there wouldn’t be any photographs lying around for Former Dem and other Bush apologists to go berserk over. Second, the belief that the executive branch can do no wrong continues to be the motto of those in Congress, Democrats and Republicans, who utterly failed to conduct any oversight and now cower at the prospect of investigations. **

Absolutely. If there is something to be discovered, lets get it done. Let the smoke and mirror show come to an end. Publish the pictures and the memos and call on all to answer for their actions and let’s settle this thing.

No one, ever, is or should be above the law.

Wasn’t it John Marshall who wrote ” ours is a government of laws and not men” in Marbury?

I am nothing if not a simple creature. If torture is against the law then we should be investigating the men and women who made it okay to torture.

I don’t know that any words are worth fighting over. When it comes to armed conflict, I am a strict pacifist. No good has ever come out of any war and while some may disagree, that’s just the way I see it. The losers outnumber the winners and while this nation was founded on an idea that has lit the world for over 200 years, it is not an idea that can be forced on other nations because it is right here, right for us.

Just consider what the result of popular election did for those poor palestinians in gaza when they elected hamas. that one election pretty much made sure that there would be zero advancement toward legitimate statehood, improvement in infrastructure, elevation in standard of living, education or delivery of basic social services for people who deserve better but who stand on principles that are not only outdated but will always assure continued strife.

The people got what they wanted by standing on principle. Who won? What does winning look like for the palestinians? the israelis?

What does it mean for us when our president latches on to some abstraction like “looking to the future” instead of doing right by the people and the constitution he swore to uphold?

If Gingrich wants hearings let him have them. It forces everyone’s hand… open all the windows… I can’t wait.

GWLSM,

Weber was correct. There was a time in my life when I thought I’d make politics a career and then I grew, had a bit of therapy and came to see what a horrible job a politician has, certainly not one I wanted. The people who go into it are for the most part somewhat damaged emotionally and I think that has always been the case.

Here though is the problem as I see it. Humans have always organized themselves as does a band of gorillas. The toughest one is in charge and gets all the females, who are little more than sperm receptacles and baby raisers. Because of our larger brain some humans, at first a small percentage, began to realize that this was not the best way to organize society and that females were every bit as smart (if not smarter) than males and so should have a say in running things.

This belief did not endear itself to the powers that be and so began humanity’s age old struggle to evolve into a better species. The battle has gone back and forth with those for the status quo usually on top, because by their natures they were willing to act with more ruthlessness. Gradually the side for a humane humanity has inched all humans forward, but progress is measured in decades and centuries. There will never be any instant gratification for our side, but eventually, long beyond our lives we will prevail. While we always must howl in protest at evils perpetrated, we must realize that many humans choose to stand on the sidelines and be led. Given that realization all I can say is that the struggle continues and we must continue to fight.

PS: I owe you an apology for thinking you lived in Nancy P’s district and disliked her. I confused you with another poster so I am sorry for the mistake.

I know a LOT of words. These words are unlike any other EVER put together. The Declaration of Independence is unique in all of jurisprudence if not all of human history.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

Those are the only words I’ve ever read worth fighting for. The Declaration has been used to correct the Constitution without overthrowing it before (see Lincoln). As it stands now, our checks and balances have been severely compromised by graft and political demagoguery.

Now is the time to correct the system. It is designed to be self-correcting, but that does not mean it is self-correcting without effort and/or sacrifice. But the issue before us today is simple: Either this is a country of laws living under the rule of law or ALL of government becomes illegitimate. I swore an oath to protect the Constitution from enemies foreign AND domestic. This includes the Neocon GOP and any and all of their enablers in the DNC (Senate, looking in your obstructionist direction). We have enemies inside the gate. If we don’t stand now, there will be severe negative social and legal consequences.

To sit aside is a choice, I’ll admit. But I’ll also admonish and caution that Edmund Burke was right when he said, “All that’s necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.”

So those who value liberty are not just battling against the Neocon Nazis who’ve stolen some of our governmental mechanisms, the real enemies who did attack us (Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia), but against American apathy as well. It is the battle against apathy that may prove the hardest battle to win absent the government doing something (once again) truly horrible to the people in the name of “national security”. Are we going to play like Germany and pretend it’s all okay until we see the camps going up here at home for citizens who disagree with the policy of Never Ending War for Exxon’s P/L Statement?

I certainly hope not.

Bring it on. this is the best thing that could possibly happen — a republican -led investigation of Nancy Pelosi complete with a special prosecutor? its genius and we should be emailing Gingrich with our support.

Once the genie is let out of the bottle on who knew what about torture memos and when they knew it the rest of it comes into play. the whole torture enchilada is served up publicly. The CIA, Cheney, Gitmo, water boarding.

oh and if there were democrats involved in this, let their heads roll too.

I can’t recall, exactly, but I think it was Max Weber who wrote and I paraphrase that politics is the “slow boring of hard boards” and anyone who chooses it risks losing their soul.

I want to know this:
what does winning look like?

The extreme right wing republicans have no idea what winning looks like.After 8 years of republican majorities in both houses of Congress, a republican president and a pretty conservative court they did not accomplish a single item on the social agenda wish list. Not one.

Now we have an overwhelming democratic majority in congress and a democrat in the white house and at least one seat on the bench up for grabs and I’m not sure that a single one of our agenda items will be fulfilled. Okay, so we got stem cell research. That doesn’t matter since the real work is being done elsewhere anyway.
We thought we’d get Gitmo closed. We thought that there would be an end to closed military tribunals. We thought that BushCo would be investigated for starting a was based on lies and ordering torture.

Do all politicians lose their way? become nothing more than fodder for lobbyists? Are elections really a choice between the most and least telegenic with better or worse speech writers and prep teams? The evil of two lessers?

I feel like the atheist sitting in a house of worship watching all the believers, unsure of whether it is better to be like them or not.

you give me the capitalism/free markets you can have the rest. Just keep taxes under 20% for all taxes and dont make it progressive. You do that and we could fund all the social programs you want and still have enough left over for defense.

Just call me an extremely progressive socialist. I want to make the golden goose lay more eggs and I know it can but you have to treat it nice.

Many third party proponents think that political organization is like a Mickey Rooney/Judy Garland musical. Mickey shouts let’s put on a show and the next thing you know they’re on Broadway. Political life doesn’t work that way, it works slowly via building organizations on the ground. That in itself, even in this electronic age, would need a minimum of a decade. This would be true if you could get people to compromise on their political beliefs enough to form a viable coalition. Yet I know that some on this site see me as their enemy, because I don’t believe as they do, despite the fact that we are in 80% agreement most of the time. I’ve found common cause with FFLEO and Bron who differ from me politically to a great degree. I don’t think we’ll be joining the same party soon, but we are able to recognize each`other as good people and wish each other well.
In the years I’ve been politically active though, I have found the most bad feeling coming from people whose side I am on, but who doubt my politics because I don’t fully adhere to their particular party line.

Third party’s are not created merely out of wish fulfillment and usually end up with the law of unintended consequence holding sway.

“My goodness, so many self-proclaimed former Republicans expousing left wing ideas with left wingers on a left wing blog. This must be bizarro world – oops, it is!”

This was the ending to his most amazing post above, in which he projects onto people writing here his own disingenuous and I truly believe is totally unaware of the irony. My guess is that he is to be ignored, rather than encouraged.

By his/her bilge ye shall know him/her as an unrepentant, pathetic Dupe, if not (and perhaps more likely) a self-absorbed, contemptible, genuine plutocrat active in the Plutocratic Party (masking itself through the label Republican Party).

If this character is indeed a former Democrat, then one can visualize the conversion through deception of “Former Dem” sitting slack-jawed with a drool, being mesmerized by the propangandist bilge being spewed over all the mindless Dupes in the audience by the gang at Fox News and by the crackpots of rightwinger talk radio. Ultimately, “Former Dem” will have been worked into a bulging-eyed, foaming-mouth frenzy on the warpath for those “loons on the left” and quickly into a frenetic Dupe with flag-waving cheers both for the Plutocrats and for their Stooges in Congress assembled.

Yeah, we have bowling here. Most of us have indoor plumbing too. Actually, KC is very metropolitan. The rest of the state not so much, but KC does quite well in that department. In fact, for a city this size, it has one of the best (per capita, IMHO) art museums in the country. Better than anything in Dallas. The only museums I’ve seen that I enjoy more are in Chicago, LA and New York. There’s a decent but very small natural history museum in Lawrence (@ KU), but to get a real natural history museum it’s just a short transport to Chicago and the Field.

Plus, I kinda like you AY. I wouldn’t set you up with the Ex or anyone who would claim to be her friend. She’s pathologically incapable of being unselfish so she doesn’t have real friends – doctor assisted diagnosis that, not just opinion. Merely being an a-hole isn’t enough to merit that kind of punishment.

But if Dick Cheney is looking for a woman, have I got a hook up for him!

Bron,

I once had a very wise man as a biology teacher. He had been held captive by the Japanese during WWII so he knew a lot about suffering. He said, “The two worst things in the world are boredom and unrequited love.” While I don’t think his list was all inclusive, it is a good start.

If you want to split what you gave her.
Maybe we can set her up for a Domestic.

Nah, would not be kosher.

So you all have bowling in Kansas? Wow, guess its flat enough. Is it indoors or out?

Disclaimer.

Lucy.

Lucy van Pelt was the annoying one in Peanuts.

She was the one who’d have taken your football.

Peppermint Patty was the lesbian. And very nice by comparison to that vile Lucy. Helpful. Congenial. Always had the gal worshiping, er, following her around and calling her “Sir”.

Lucy would say you are such an assh**e you can’t even get your comic strip insults straight. And she’d say it right after she took your football and you are laying flat on your back.

I think she and my Ex go bowling once a week if you’d like an introduction. Some guys like two dimensional sadists. Watch out though. If she’s like my Ex, and bird’s of a feather and all of that, then that Lucy is a mean drunk.

I get educated all the time. Thank you. I might have though, nod, nod, wink, wink.

See FF LEO

is a different person than I. I am indeed 50. What are you profiling me? LOL.

Witty I am not. An Ass***e, I can be. I have appreciated this site, it has given me the opportunity to reawaken the inner child.

I did not think you and Anon the same person, I was pointing out that “someone” might think that because of the way you both write sometimes.

AnonY and I are not the same person. Sometimes our wit might overlap but hisn’ is a bit more witty than mine.

I am in my 6th decade of life and I guess that AnonY in 45-50 and you in your late 30s early 40s.

The CIA proposed the methods. The Justice Department gave its advice.

By VICTORIA TOENSING

Sen. Patrick Leahy wants an independent commission to investigate them. Rep. John Conyers wants the Obama Justice Department to prosecute them. Liberal lawyers want to disbar them, and the media maligns them.

What did the Justice Department attorneys at George W. Bush’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) — John Yoo and Jay Bybee — do to garner such scorn? They analyzed a 1994 criminal statute prohibiting torture when the CIA asked for legal guidance on interrogation techniques for a high-level al Qaeda detainee (Abu Zubaydah).

In the mid-1980s, when I supervised the legality of apprehending terrorists to stand trial, I relied on a decades-old Supreme Court standard: Our capture and treatment could not “shock the conscience” of the court. The OLC lawyers, however, were not asked what treatment was legal to preserve a prosecution. They were asked what treatment was legal for a detainee who they were told had knowledge of future attacks on Americans.

The 1994 law was passed pursuant to an international treaty, the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment. The law’s definition of torture is circular. Torture under that law means “severe physical or mental pain or suffering,” which in turn means “prolonged mental harm,” which must be caused by one of four prohibited acts. The only relevant one to the CIA inquiry was threatening or inflicting “severe physical pain or suffering.” What is “prolonged mental suffering”? The term appears nowhere else in the U.S. Code.

Congress required, in order for there to be a violation of the law, that an interrogator specifically intend that the detainee suffer prolonged physical or mental suffering as a result of the prohibited conduct. Just knowing a person could be injured from the interrogation method is not a violation under Supreme Court rulings interpreting “specific intent” in other criminal statutes.

In the summer of 2002, the CIA outlined 10 interrogation methods that would be used only on Abu Zubaydah, who it told the lawyers was “one of the highest ranking members of” al Qaeda, serving as “Usama Bin Laden’s senior lieutenant.” According to the CIA, Zubaydah had “been involved in every major” al Qaeda terrorist operation including 9/11, and was “planning future terrorist attacks” against U.S. interests.

Most importantly, the lawyers were told that Zubaydah — who was well-versed in American interrogation techniques, having written al Qaeda’s manual on the subject — “displays no signs of willingness” to provide information and “has come to expect that no physical harm will be done to him.” When the usual interrogation methods were used, he had maintained his “unabated desire to kill Americans and Jews.”

The CIA and Department of Justice lawyers had two options: continue questioning Zubaydah by a process that had not worked or escalate the interrogation techniques in compliance with U.S. law. They chose the latter.

The Justice Department lawyers wrote two opinions totaling 54 pages. One went to White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, the other to the CIA general counsel.

Both memos noted that the legislative history of the 1994 torture statute was “scant.” Neither house of Congress had hearings, debates or amendments, or provided clarification about terms such as “severe” or “prolonged mental harm.” There is no record of Rep. Jerrold Nadler — who now calls for impeachment and a criminal investigation of the lawyers — trying to make any act (e.g., waterboarding) illegal, or attempting to lessen the specific intent standard.

The Gonzales memo analyzed “torture” under American and international law. It noted that our courts, under a civil statute, have interpreted “severe” physical or mental pain or suffering to require extreme acts: The person had to be shot, beaten or raped, threatened with death or removal of extremities, or denied medical care. One federal court distinguished between torture and acts that were “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.” So have international courts. The European Court of Human Rights in the case of Ireland v. United Kingdom (1978) specifically found that wall standing (to produce muscle fatigue), hooding, and sleep and food deprivation were not torture.

The U.N. treaty defined torture as “severe pain and suffering.” The Justice Department witness for the Senate treaty hearings testified that “[t]orture is understood to be barbaric cruelty . . . the mere mention of which sends chills down one’s spine.” He gave examples of “the needle under the fingernail, the application of electrical shock to the genital area, the piercing of eyeballs. . . .” Mental torture was an act “designed to damage and destroy the human personality.”

The treaty had a specific provision stating that nothing, not even war, justifies torture. Congress removed that provision when drafting the 1994 law against torture, thereby permitting someone accused of violating the statute to invoke the long-established defense of necessity.

The memo to the CIA discussed 10 requested interrogation techniques and how each should be limited so as not to violate the statute. The lawyers warned that no procedure could be used that “interferes with the proper healing of Zubaydah’s wound,” which he incurred during capture. They observed that all the techniques, including waterboarding, were used on our military trainees, and that the CIA had conducted an “extensive inquiry” with experts and psychologists.

But now, safe in ivory towers eight years removed from 9/11, critics demand criminalization of the techniques and the prosecution or disbarment of the lawyers who advised the CIA. Contrary to columnist Frank Rich’s uninformed accusation in the New York Times that the lawyers “proposed using” the techniques, they did no such thing. They were asked to provide legal guidance on whether the CIA’s proposed methods violated the law.

Then there is Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, who declared that “waterboarding will almost certainly be deemed illegal if put under judicial scrutiny,” depending on which “of several possibly applicable legal standards” apply. Does he know the Senate rejected a bill in 2006 to make waterboarding illegal? That fact alone negates criminalization of the act. So quick to condemn, Mr. Robinson later replied to a TV interview question that he did not know how long sleep deprivation could go before it was “immoral.” It is “a nuance,” he said.

Yet the CIA asked those OLC lawyers to figure out exactly where that nuance stopped in the context of preventing another attack. There should be a rule that all persons proposing investigation, prosecution or disbarment must read the two memos and all underlying documents and then draft a dissenting analysis.

Ms. Toensing was chief counsel for the Senate Intelligence Committee and deputy assistant attorney general in the Reagan administration.

I think it was Lucy, Peppermint Patty was the other one. And wasnt it Pig Pen with the cloud? But you knew that.

Here I am, relatively misinformed, uneducated, I rarely have an original thought, I am just following orders and I am unintelligent person arguing with one schizophrenic guy with many different personalities (Myself) with a blog with a lot of alter egos that goes on Countdown 1) because I get paid and 2) because he has nothing better to do.”

*********************************************************

I thought so. I cannot disagree with you at all.

Nah, we are not one in the same. He does write better than I. I think he is in AZ if memory serves me correctly, they used to have some fairly good smoke. Buttons were not to bad either. But on this list I would never admit to anything like that and if I did the SOL has clearly run.

No not a troll, you and FFLEO write sometimes like Mark Twain, i.e., tat ole houn dawg musn be qwite lazie jusn sitn upn tat tare ole pouch

rule of law in my case pertaining to constitutional principles. hopefully there are still enough people to actually believe in an objective set of standards by which to run our civilization.

That I can agree with. I just want to make sure we are on the same page. It is the rule of construction that defines and defies interpretation at times. Scalia proves that so many time.
*****************************

“by the way what is it with you and FFLEO and PattyC? She is a little eccentric”

You have to have money or power to be eccentric or you are just plain crazy. That I can see as well.
*****************************

“I can picture her working in her garden with a broad brim hat and a long flowing peasant dress hands stained brown from that good New England loam. And telling the tomatoes grow, grow, grow and become what you are meant to become. And encouraging the Trillium’s to multiply and spread their dainty flowers.

This I can see as well but does not make you crazy in my book or even eccentric.

****************************
I may as well sign off as Waynebro, Cromagnon, Bartlebee and someone else I cant remember. To her I am the trinity of Trolldom.

You post here as well as a lot of others and I either respond or not. This is my choice. Attacks are neither warranted or desired unless you assail someone for a differing point of view. I leave it alone. Some feel as they have a self appointed role. special relationship with the owner of this blawg and tend to spout it off. That is where I came up with teh word Fashionation.
*****************************
I am amazed she hasn’t accused you and FFLEO as being one and the same.

I assure you sir it is only a matter of time, a matter of time. She has blasted some misspelled words that I have had. I search the blog and low and behold she has typos too, so does the professor.

******************************
You actually might be as FFLEO writes in the vernacular sometime and you do too, hmm connection?

I need clarification. If you are asking if I am a Troll, not that I am aware of. Please explain.

rule of law in my case pertaining to constitutional principles. hopefully there are still enough people to actually believe in an objective set of standards by which to run our civilization.

by the way what is it with you and FFLEO and PattyC? She is a little eccentric, I can picture her working in her garden with a broad brim hat and a long flowing peasant dress hands stained brown from that good New England loam. And telling the tomatoes grow, grow, grow and become what you are meant to become. And encouraging the Trillium’s to multiply and spread their dainty flowers.

I may as well sign off as Waynebro, Cromagnon, Bartlebee and someone else I cant remember. To her I am the trinity of Trolldom. I am amazed she hasn’t accused you and FFLEO as being one and the same. You actually might be as FFLEO writes in the vernacular sometime and you do too, hmm connection?

What were her annoying friend that always had the dark cloud over his head? Dang.

Just can’t not think about that gum on the sole of your shoe until you either scrap it off or get it filled up with the grunge off of the street and then its annoying because its stuck on your sole, so its better to just scrap it off to start with.

But whats that annoying girls name in Charlie Brown?

AnonY:

Catch 22, let us agree to ignore and forget, for now—

—-

Unlike you two AND Jill, I am very direct.

Grow up or leave me alone AND leave my success out of the equation. I will not apologize for my ability to do more than just ‘survive’.

The Rule of Law? Does that not depend on the person enforcing the same?

What have you been doing? Love finally snagged you?

Hope all is well in your world.

Mapley goodness is hanging over both sides of the aisle this night. I must say I am a bit excited about the possibility of a new day in Washington. this may actually throw all the rascals out.

I have a feeling that Prof. Turley’s invitations to cocktail parties has declined somewhat in the last few days. I hope he is able to see this through to completion, then maybe we really can get some people devouted to the rule of law running things.

Thank you sir.

Please tell me what a blue dog Democrat is….

The definition of a Blue Dog Democrat is one who adheres to the philosphy that they would “…sooner vote for a blue dog than vote for a Republican…”
———
No, those are Yellow Dog Democrats. I kid you not. I come from a family of Yellow Dog Democrats. The links are entertaining on the subjet of Yello v Blue:

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

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

Welcome back. Maple syrpel I’ll have you know. Dang me, Dang me. They ought to take a rope and hang me, High from the Highest Tree….

They do have a couple of shuttered Prison in Michigan’s UP, I am sure the state would let then go for a song.

Maple syrup everywhere.

Gingrich going after those far enough up the food chain to be a threat instead of passing the blame off on soldiers shows me one thing and one thing only.

Neocon Fear.

They know it’s going to be hot time for Dick and they are attempting to deflect as much as possible. Bad news. There’s plenty of prison space left for traitors and torturers from either side of the aisle.

I am for the second amendment, for low taxes, against abortion, don’t believe in income redistribution and I am probably more conservative than you are.

But you cannot have the state sanctioning morality. It is none of their business what someone does in their private life. And please, I am talking about consenting adults.

If you are against abortion educate people and offer them options for adoption. The state cannot be involved, as much as I would like to wave a magic wand and have abortions stop today it cannot be done by the state. Look what they do in China-the state makes you have abortions, it is the other side of the same coin.

You must be a recent convert to either Christianity or the republican party or both.
If you say it enough times you will believe it. Are you trying to evangelize the people on this web site? You aren’t doing a very good job.

Tell me why we should not have gay marriage, give me more than its against Gods law. Why do we have a second amendment, or why is income redistribution bad, do you even know the philosophical arguments against wealth redistribution other than it is bad?

Most of your stuff is just parroting of other peoples works, you don’t really know why you believe the way you do, you take it on faith that income redistribution is bad but you like most republicans cannot articulate an argument against it other than “it bad”. Now that I think about it you and your type are why I left the party, no depth of thought and the lefties clean your clock all day long because they know what they believe and why or at least the old style lefties did. Neo-Con + Neo-Lib equals Neo-Bullshit.

Go read some good books and come back in about 5 years when you can think about what you believe and not parrot other peoples works.

I am sorry. It just felt good, you impeccable immortal imbecile. lol

As Lincoln stated “a house divided will not stand.” And that ain’t a redneck solution for a divorce settlement, where you saw the mobile home in half. She get hers and I get mine. It did happen in Tennessee though.

Catch 22, let us agree to ignore and forget, for now.

The Turley blog appears to be with “FORMER GOP”:

Rcampbell claims to be a former Republican

Bron98 claims to be a former Republican

Former Federal LEO claims to be a former Republican

and of course I am sure pretty much everybody else would claim to be a former Republican who says the party abandoned them also here…..!!! As those “former GOP” would say: “Good Grief, no gay marriage, no abortion at will, no gun control, no income redistribution, no blaming America first! Why, I am LEAVING the GOP!”

LOL!

My goodness, so many self-proclaimed former Republicans expousing left wing ideas with left wingers on a left wing blog. This must be bizarro world – oops, it is!

Evangelical christians are a threat, they may not even understand themselves, but religious extremisism is a threat to individual liberty. And the fact that republicans are so willing to embrace them is not a good thing. You may think oh they are christian so they will be good and kind and they wont trounce liberty. They will, it is a foregone conclusion. Philosophically they can do nothing else, the seeds of totalitarianism are in their beleif system. If you think the Muslims are different they are not and the outcome will be the same if evangelical christians ever come to power.

God is not a threat to liberty but humans that believe they are doing Gods will, will trounce your rights.

You really must think some of the things you say through to their logical conclusions.

I may not agree with the left on many issues but they at least have it right on this one.

Former Dem, Bush was a bad president but not for the reasons you think I mean.

1. his just war theory lead to untold number of American deaths for no good reason.
2. his compassionate conservatism was a joke.
3. he single handedly gave Obama moral coverage for the massive spending he has embarked upon.
4. his decision to torture is going to cause our country more polarization.

And that leads to the reason he had to torture in the first place-his just war theory. By not totaly destroying Islamic fundamentalism and brining these people to their knees he created the need to even have to use torture. Bush believed that all religions and all people and all countries were/are morally equivalent. His relgious philosophy required the sacrifice of American lives to this tenant.

Those Poppy fields were pleasant though.

FF LEO, Jill. I guess its my turn. Oh well.

Poof, you are gone. Better watch that bucket of water.