Open Thread

18 Comments

1. 

   Ga6thDem on February 6, 2006 at 9:53 pm

   No, there’s no such thing as a “moderate fundamentalist.” So I guess ollie must be assuming that all muslims are fundamentalists?

   • 

     BooMan on February 6, 2006 at 10:04 pm

     Ollie North is a man who counts many moderate Muslim arms merchants as his closest friends.  So, he ought to know better.

     • 

       chocolate ink on February 6, 2006 at 10:42 pm

       and a fine one to talk about moderates as he’s another whacko fundie evengelical..with his prayer groups and his speeches that are almost like sermons…of the James Dobson mindset. Another lying crooked scumbag from the word go hiding behind his patriotic bullshit persona.  One that unfortunately a lot of the country fell for during the whole Iran/Contra hearings.

   • 

     Emma Anne on February 7, 2006 at 12:24 am

     There is no such thing as a moderate Republican.

     A truer statement than Ollie’s.

2. 

   spiderleaf on February 6, 2006 at 10:06 pm

   Or an impolite Canuck.

   I am living proof of that stereotype.

3. 

   Street Kid on February 6, 2006 at 10:30 pm

   Medicare D: Beneficiary Stability and Political Liability

   Also budget info and rep response to possible concealment of true costs(?)

4. 

   Arminius on February 6, 2006 at 11:00 pm

   And there is no such thing as an honest lawyer!

5. 

   sbj on February 6, 2006 at 11:07 pm

   Who let Oliver out of the Coulter/Savage/O’Reilly/Malkin wing of the insane asylum.

   Where’s the tranquilizer dart gun when you need it?

6. 

   boran2 on February 6, 2006 at 11:26 pm

   And all of us New Yawkers are sooo polite.  

7. 

   Janet Strange on February 6, 2006 at 11:53 pm

   EXCELLENT post by SusanG across the street at the orange place. House on fire/firefighters/arson prevention metaphor is one that would be a good one to use when trying to reason with anyone buying the “we have to surrender our freedoms to stay safe” bullshit.

   I love this:

   . . . when your house is on fire, you grant privileges to the rescue personnel you would never allow under any other circumstances: permission for total strangers to enter your house, whisk your baby out of sight to safety, toss your belongings out the window, hose down your Reniors, hustle you off to the nearest Red Cross center. . . .

   But we are now in a preventive phase and have been for several years. The questions we’re grappling with as a country now are not about putting out a current fire; rather, they focus on any and all ways to avert another one. To carry out the fire metaphor: We know there is an arsonist in the neighborhood who wishes us ill. The powers we granted to the rescue workers during the fire are no longer appropriate, and at any rate would not yield the results we need. After all, four years after a home fire, we don’t allow firefighters to roust us from our beds at 3 AM, to kick down our doors, to destroy our property in the name of “rescuing” us when there are only rumors of planned flames some vague time in the future.

   [bf mine. And what are Reniors? Did she mean Renoirs? or am I missing something?]

8. 

   Janet Strange on February 7, 2006 at 12:05 am

   President Carter today on Abu G and FISA;

   The former president also rebuked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for telling Congress that the spying program is authorized under Article 2 of the Constitution and does not violate the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act passed during Carter’s administration. Gonzales made the assertions in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which began investigating the eavesdropping program Monday.

   “It’s a ridiculous argument, not only bad, it’s ridiculous. Obviously, the attorney general who said it’s all right to torture prisoners and so forth is going to support the person who put him in office. But he’s a very partisan attorney general and there’s no doubt that he would say that,” Carter said. “I hope that eventually the case will go to the Supreme Court. I have no doubt that when it’s over, the Supreme Court will rule that Bush has violated the law.”

   The former president said he would testify before the Judiciary Committee if asked.

   “If my voice is important to point of the intent of the law that was passed when I was president, I know all about that because it was one of the most important decisions I had to make.”

   • 

     maryb2004 on February 7, 2006 at 12:19 am

     I second that wow.

     Jimmy Carter was the first person I ever voted for in a presidential election.  It was 1980 and he lost, of course.  For years people made fun of me for voting for such a loser. Especially during the Reagan years when even sane people seemed to have the wool pulled over their eyes.  

     But I always saw him as a man of integrity who may not have been the best president ever, but certainly wasn’t the worst (we have that now).  I never denied I voted for him, like some people did. Over the years I’ve grown prouder and prouder of that vote.  

     • 

       mlk19569 on February 7, 2006 at 8:54 am

       He’s the best former President we ever had.  

       I don’t recall any former President as active and involved in world affairs as Carter is.  Plus his work with Habitat for Humanity.

       Clinton is trying his best with his African AIDS relief project, but there’s no coming close to Carter.

9. 

   James Benjamin on February 7, 2006 at 12:29 am

   Or an Irishman who doesn’t love beer. Now where did I put that Guinness?

10. 

    Kamakhya on February 7, 2006 at 12:58 am

    I regularly go over to Freeperville to check out the daily pulse and I am routinely shocked at their complete unabashed rascism there.  For instance, it was recently reported that according to a big poll that most Australian kids are ignorant and fearful of Muslims.  The press reported that maybe these kids should get some further education and multiculturalism in their classes.  The freepers responded by saying how smart the kids were and that what they really needed was sharpshooting lessons.

    We are being taught to demonize an entire religious and ethnic heritage for the sake of continuing an illegal war.  We are being given a common “enemy” so that we will continue to allow our government to commit atrocities in our name.  What is so scary is that so few really realize how badly they are being played.  When you go to places like Free Republic and Little Green Footballs, it becomes readily obvious how they have gotten sucked into the memes and fantasy worlds being created for them.  They honestly do not believe in global warming (they have some wacky ideas about why our planet is warming) and they do believe that we found WMDs (complete with types and numbers).

    But what really scares me is not that these extremists exist, but that the media is creating more of them.

    • 

      keirdubois on February 7, 2006 at 1:18 am

      Hell, this country has done it for our entire existence.

      We’ve also been at war, officially or otherwise, for pretty much the whole time too.

      • 

        Kamakhya on February 7, 2006 at 1:34 am

        Not just this country, but all of human existence, practically.  It is always an “us vs. them” mentality.  The definition of “us” and “them” changes, but the sentiment is the same.  

        As a supposedly intelligent species, shouldn’t we get over this shit sometime?  If the U.S., a symbol for multiculturalism and acceptance (Give us your tired and poor) will not do it, who will?  

11. 

    Militarytracy on February 7, 2006 at 9:39 am

    person who has studied the middle east confronted him?  I think it is all part of the Republican ramp up to how dangerous this world is now.  It is dangerous that we need an asshole for a president who needs to do all sorts of secret things to protect us all.