Homophobes 'r Us!

[Cerbaho-WG]

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/enter...ent/6251351.htm

 

I really wouldn't mind if Savage got AIDS and died, to be honest. Not like the global community would lose someone intelligent.

[Bmr31]

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/enter...ent/6251351.htm

 

I really wouldn't mind if Savage got AIDS and died, to be honest. Not like the global community would lose someone intelligent.

Now THATS a homophobe.

[Guest wsc425]

Yeah, this is pretty bad. I'm ashamed of ppl like that.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Cerb, I would like to thank you for bringing this to my attention. It has made my day.

[Spiff]

now if they would only fire joe scarborough.

[1549]

Funny, I actually was watching that...as soon as he said it I thought it was a very dumb thing to say.

 

It is very sad that he can not learn to accept other kinds of people. I know sometimes we Republicans get a rap as being prejudiced towards different kinds of people, this is not the case at all. The New York Times Magazine had a large article about the growing number of 'new republicans' invading college campuses, and how they are just as diverse as liberal groups.

 

Michael Savage, is an arrogant jerk. He has no place on Television, or in the republican community. (though my brother did enjoy his book)

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Michael Savage, is an arrogant jerk.  He has no place on Television, or in the republican community. (though my brother did enjoy his book)

Savage's book...the topic moves so fast, it's like a toddler chasing after different shiny objects.

 

And I'm with Spiff...they need to get rid of dead intern having Joe Scarborough.

[1549]

And I'm with Spiff...they need to get rid of dead intern having Joe Scarborough.

 

I don't know why MSNBC wants these republican guys. We republicans want our news fair and balanced, so we won't watch that liberal scum network MSNBC anyway.

[Spiff]

I don't know why MSNBC wants these republican guys.  We republicans want our news fair and balanced, so we won't watch that liberal scum network MSNBC anyway.

they want to out-FOX ('scuse the pun) Fox News with their conservative lineup.

 

I don't know if Scarborough killed an intern but I know he's annoying as s***. After the MTV Movie Awards with the performance by the two lesbians from iceland or whatever he started his show off with a raving monologue worthy of a sunday morning. MTV IS BLATANTLY PROMOTING LESBIANISM TO TEENAGERS, WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN, etc. He is afraid of his own shadow.

 

It's a shame too because the show before him (Countdown with Olberman) is slowly becoming one of my favorites. It has the wit of the Daily Show without the skits, actual interviews, more concise in that way. If they could find something good to put on after it, they would have a stellar weeknight lineup.

[Heads22]

I would still rather watch the Daily Show.

 

The Iraqis are evil. Why didn't they use their weapons on mass destructionwhen the US invaded? Because they knew that that's what we wanted them to do. So they didn't do it. Those bastards.

[Mr. Showtime]

I don't know if Scarborough killed an intern but I know he's annoying as s***. After the MTV Movie Awards with the performance by the two lesbians from iceland or whatever he started his show off with a raving monologue worthy of a sunday morning. MTV IS BLATANTLY PROMOTING LESBIANISM TO TEENAGERS, WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN, etc. He is afraid of his own shadow.

Those girls are hot, so Joe can piss up a rope.

[cwsox]

We republicans want our news fair and balanced

that's the funniest post you ever made!

[LowerCaseRepublican]

I don't know if Scarborough killed an intern but I know he's annoying as s***. After the MTV Movie Awards with the performance by the two lesbians from iceland or whatever he started his show off with a raving monologue worthy of a sunday morning. MTV IS BLATANTLY PROMOTING LESBIANISM TO TEENAGERS, WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN, etc. He is afraid of his own shadow.

www.allhatnocattle.com has a s***load of links about the dead intern in Joe's office.

 

And lesbians rule!

 

Remember, lesbians and Clinton getting his cock sucked is bad according to Joe. But Dubya killing kids for reasons that have been found to be lies, that's PATRIOTIC!

[mreye]

Remember, lesbians and Clinton getting his cock sucked is bad according to Joe.  But Dubya killing kids for reasons that have been found to be lies, that's PATRIOTIC! 

That's the dumbest post I've ever seen. If you want to go there, then how many kids did Clinton kill when blowing up that aspirin factory?

[LowerCaseRepublican]

That's the dumbest post I've ever seen. If you want to go there, then how many kids did Clinton kill when blowing up that aspirin factory?

You don't have to tell me that Clinton was an evil bastard, bombing a medicine factory in Sudan, launching cruise missiles in Iraq killing 6 civilians, bombing Serbians on trains, the Chinese Embassy...but that is NOT what they impeached him for.

 

They had the Puritanical witch hunt because Clinton went out and got head from an intern. So please, spare me the "Clinton did it too" argument because it doesn't justify Bush's killing spree.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

That's the dumbest post I've ever seen. If you want to go there, then how many kids did Clinton kill when blowing up that aspirin factory?

I was referring to the mentality of Joe Scarborough on Scarborough Country [hence the according to Joe] in that post too Not my political belief.

[mreye]

They had the Puritanical witch hunt because Clinton went out and got head from an intern.  So please, spare me the "Clinton did it too" argument because it doesn't justify Bush's killing spree.

I didn't even bring up him getting blown in the Oval Office. And, "Killing Spree"???? Huh?

 

Bush claimed WMD as a reason to attack. Clinton also claimed WMD as a reason to bomb Iraq. Where's the difference?

 

Do I think Clinton wanted to bomb an aspirin factory? Hell no, but I'm a reasonable person. Apparently you are not if you're going to call Bush a baby killer and say he's on a killing spree. Give me a break - honestly.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

I didn't even bring up him getting blown in the Oval Office. And, "Killing Spree"???? Huh?

 

Bush claimed WMD as a reason to attack. Clinton also claimed WMD as a reason to bomb Iraq. Where's the difference?

 

Do I think Clinton wanted to bomb an aspirin factory? Hell no, but I'm a reasonable person. Apparently you are not if you're going to call Bush a baby killer and say he's on a killing spree. Give me a break - honestly.

Actually the reason Clinton shot cruise missiles into Iraq was that he and America found out that there was a supposed plan by Iraq to assassinate George HW Bush...which ended up being a lie. Speaking of lies, let's look at the Dubya reasons for war...

 

http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl=fc&cid=34&in...=world&cat=iraq

(NY Times) - The White House acknowledged for the first time today that President Bush was relying on incomplete and perhaps inaccurate information from American intelligence agencies when he declared, in his State of the Union speech, that Saddam Hussein had tried to purchase uranium from Africa. The White House statement appeared to undercut one of the key pieces of evidence that President Bush and his aides had cited to back their claims made prior to launching an attack against Iraq in March that Mr. Hussein was "reconstituting" his nuclear weapons program

 

http://www.msnbc.com/news/883164.asp?cp1=1

MSNBC: "They have been the closest of allies. But under the intense pressure of a diplomatic crisis at the United Nations and an imminent war in Iraq, the friendship between the United States and Britain is beginning to fray. The most recent strain emerged when U.N. nuclear inspectors concluded last week that U.S. and British claims about Iraq's secret nuclear program were based on forged documents. The fake letters supposedly laid out how Iraqi agents had tried to purchase uranium from officials in Niger, central Africa."

 

Iraq Getting Uranium from Africa to Make Nukes = LIE

 

http://asia.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/02/07...irq.uk.dossier/

CNN: Large chunks of the 19-page report -- highlighted by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell at the U.N. as a " fine paper ... which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities" -- contains large chunks lifted from other sources, according to several academics. " The British government's dossier is 19 pages long and most of pages 6 to 16 are copied directly from that document word for word, even the grammatical errors and typographical mistakes," Rangwala said. Al-Marashi's article, published last September, was based on information obtained at the time of the 1991 Gulf War, Rangwala said. " The information he was using is 12 years old and he acknowledges this in his article. The British government, when it transplants that information into its own dossier, does not make that acknowledgement. " So it is presented as current information about Iraq, when really the information it is using is 12 years old."

 

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/sto...,892069,00.html

UK Guardian: Downing Street was last night plunged into acute international embarrassment after it emerged that large parts of the British government's latest dossier on Iraq - allegedly based on "intelligence material" - were taken from published academic articles, some of them several years old. Amid charges of "scandalous" plagiarism on the night when Tony Blair attempted to rally support for the US-led campaign against Saddam Hussein, Whitehall's dismay was compounded by the knowledge that the disputed document was singled out for praise by the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, in his speech to the UN security council on Wednesday.

 

Powell's UN Speech = LIE

 

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/...a/index_np.html

Salon.com: War, lies and audiotape If truth is the first casualty of war, then this war's second casualty is the credibility of Colin Powell. Yesterday morning he insisted that the new tape from Osama bin Laden would show a "partnership" between al-Qaida and Iraq. He told the nation that he had a transcript of bin Laden's remarks. Understandably, however, the secretary of state didn't read from the transcript he claimed to have in his possession -- because it so clearly contradicted the headlines he was trying to create.

 

Philadelphia Daily News: But if bin Laden was trying to show personal solidarity with Saddam himself, he had a strange way of doing so. He denounced Saddam's secular, socialist al-Baath party as "infidels." What's more, the statement said that Iraq's rulers had "lost their credibility long ago" and that "socialists are infidels wherever they are." He didn't even mention Saddam by name.

 

Saddam and Osama are tied and work together = LIE

 

And here are a few more too numerous to type out.

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/artic...2/12_lying.html

 

Bush is a lying boozehound cokehead coldblooded murderer. What else do you call somebody who uses lies as the truth in order to boost his own popularity ratings and get peoples' minds off domestic issues?

[cwsox]

That's the dumbest post I've ever seen. If you want to go there, then how many kids did Clinton kill when blowing up that aspirin factory?

the answer to that, I believe, is 0.

 

 

That was an attack launched to get bin Laden.

 

 

Bush killed Canadian soldiers - or was that an error in combat - Bush killed that Afghan wedding party - or was that an error in combat - Bush killed that Iraqi family, 10 of the 12 chiuldren, who had nothing to do with Saddam - or was that an error in combat

 

so either Bush is a Canadian soldier killer, or get the f*** off the Clinton bombed children in an attack on an aspirin factory., or the Chinese embassy thing, etc.

 

Errors happen - one of the factors I weigh in assessing the futility and evil of war. But to throw s*** at Clinton for things that just happen, and have happened in the past two years - either be fair or be prepared.

 

(And how the Republicans laughed at Clinton because the couple attempts to get bin laden failed. The chimp has had what, since September 11 2001, almost 2 years of non stop war, and has failed to get bin laden. So whose mocking who now? Whose zooming who? Of course Bush can't find weapons of mass destruction, the nuclear fuel rods he swore in the state of the Union address were there - or that was a forgery and the White House staff knew it but threw it in anyway - and he can't find Saddam Hussein. All the charges tossed at Clinton - what bulls***. By the standards dished, Bush is the biggest f***ing incompetent around.)

[cwsox]

Bush claimed WMD as a reason to attack. Clinton also claimed WMD as a reason to bomb Iraq. Where's the difference?

Clinton used force necessary to enforce the no fly zone. Clinton did not bomb Iraq.

 

I suggest that you read the 30 June 2003 issue of the New Yorker which details the anger that is rising in the Army because of the politicalization of the army under Bush and Rumsfeld and how a lot of officers are leaving - in the ongoing atempt to politicize the military the new Armey chief is a man who enevr sderved a moment in the Army, he's a former Navy guy, every Amry general was passed over so that Bush could isntall a puppet in his place in the systematic attempt to politicize the military. Read the articvle - taht's why I gave you the date of the issue before you deny that is going on. And doubt still? Go to the MLB boards - Sat46, who is the polar opposite of me politically, is posting on the anger of a lot of military people with what Bush is doing. Now when Sat46 and I are saying the same thing...

[1549]

I didn't even bring up him getting blown in the Oval Office. And, "Killing Spree"???? Huh?

 

Bush claimed WMD as a reason to attack. Clinton also claimed WMD as a reason to bomb Iraq. Where's the difference?

 

Do I think Clinton wanted to bomb an aspirin factory? Hell no, but I'm a reasonable person. Apparently you are not if you're going to call Bush a baby killer and say he's on a killing spree. Give me a break - honestly.

Actually the reason Clinton shot cruise missiles into Iraq was that he and America found out that there was a supposed plan by Iraq to assassinate George HW Bush...which ended up being a lie. Speaking of lies, let's look at the Dubya reasons for war...

 

http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl=fc&cid=34&in...=world&cat=iraq

 

 

http://www.msnbc.com/news/883164.asp?cp1=1

 

 

Iraq Getting Uranium from Africa to Make Nukes = LIE

 

http://asia.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/02/07...irq.uk.dossier/

 

 

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/sto...,892069,00.html

 

 

Powell's UN Speech = LIE

 

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/...a/index_np.html

 

 

 

 

Saddam and Osama are tied and work together = LIE

 

And here are a few more too numerous to type out.

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/artic...2/12_lying.html

 

Bush is a lying boozehound cokehead coldblooded murderer. What else do you call somebody who uses lies as the truth in order to boost his own popularity ratings and get peoples' minds off domestic issues?

great, and guess what, all the points you just brought up are stictly academic now.

 

Funny you didn't mention the benefits, the humanitarian aid, the captured militants, the saved prisoners, the horror revealed.

 

odd that someone like yourself, someone who is against mischevious governments would rather see Hussein's reign of terror in Iraq.

[Spiff]

What else do you call somebody who uses lies as the truth in order to boost his own popularity ratings and get peoples' minds off domestic issues?

a politician.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

the answer to that, I believe, is 0.

 

 

That was an attack launched to get bin Laden. 

 

 

Bush killed Canadian soldiers - or was that an error in combat - Bush killed that Afghan wedding party - or was that an error in combat - Bush killed that Iraqi family, 10 of the 12 chiuldren, who had nothing to do with Saddam - or was that an error in combat

 

so either Bush is a Canadian soldier killer, or get the f*** off the Clinton bombed children in an attack on an aspirin factory., or the Chinese embassy thing, etc.

 

Errors happen - one of the factors I weigh in assessing the futility and evil of war.  But to throw s*** at Clinton for things that just happen, and have happened in the past two years - either be fair or be prepared.

 

(And how the Republicans laughed at Clinton because the couple attempts to get bin laden failed.  The chimp has had what, since September 11 2001, almost 2 years of non stop war, and has failed to get bin laden.  So whose mocking who now?  Whose zooming who?  Of course Bush can't find weapons of mass destruction, the nuclear fuel rods he swore in the state of the Union address were there - or that was a forgery and the White House staff knew it but threw it in anyway - and he can't find Saddam Hussein.  All the charges tossed at Clinton - what bulls***.  By the standards dished, Bush is the biggest f***ing incompetent around.)

CW, You French loving commie scum!

 

 

Ashcroft is gonna come get us! [And in that photo, there are two boobs shown ]

[LowerCaseRepublican]

great, and guess what, all the points you just brought up are stictly academic now. 

 

Funny you didn't mention the benefits, the humanitarian aid, the captured militants, the saved prisoners, the horror revealed. 

 

odd that someone like yourself, someone who is against mischevious governments would rather see Hussein's reign of terror in Iraq.

They are not just academic. The Chimpy war criminal can still be held accountable.

 

Benefits? Benefits for who?

The fact that we pumped OIL before pumping water? The fact that there are still riots because people are without food, water and electricity because those who had it lost it during the "shock and awe" bombings? We are bringing "suspected terrorists" to Pakistan to torture them, so the US cannot claim a higher moral ground about ending torture. The benefit that we protected the Ministry of Oil while allowing looting and violence to create anarchy there? The benefit that the Washington Post is reporting US forces are stopping local elections and installing their own men to lead in Iraq?

 

Saddam was evil. But the fact remains that NONE OF THE REASONS Bush gave to justify war have been realized. If he wanted to go to war with Saddam, he should have built the case on FACTS and not lies.

 

Support the troops: Let the President kill them in Iraq for lies!

[Spiff]

wtf why do you have to turn everything into a political crusade.