The sissy Illinois GOP is trying to prevent the opening of a prison here that would bring jobs and the pride of knowing thugs are being punished right here at home. They say it's a safety issue but the reality is that Republicans are sissies.
This isn't a particularly new development. Republicans have a history, especially since the Bush years for sissy behavior. While they loved to waterboard, let's get real. On the torture scale that's not nearly as impressive as the rack or thumb screws. The sissy republicans outsourced the badass torture to Egypt and Syria.
Republicans will try and look tough sometimes by taking credit for the abuses heaped on the prisoners at Abu Grahb, but that was done by rogues with no party affiliation. The republicans were caught in their pretense of trying to look tough and decided to save face they would send terror suspects and nasty dudes to Guantanamo in Cuba. While they played loud music and made guys stand up for a long time, the republicans were hoping Castro would offer to help in a new diplomatic initiative. Castro wasn't taking the bait though. He was not going to do the dirty work of torturing guys and let republicans take the credit.
Republicans show their sissiness in other ways also. They're fear of raising taxes to pay for their occupations and invasions of countries that were no threat like Iraq, (Another example of sissiness. Like Iraq was going to be able to fight back) shows the republican sissy aversion to sacrifice for a greater cause.
The republican party is indeed the party of greed and sissiness. They show their greed and selfishness by running up debt and never asking Americans to sacrifice a few more dollars in taxes to pay for their shit. Their corporate benefactors take government bailouts and largess in the billions of dollars, yet they fight minimum wage and union organizing efforts that would raise the standard of living for Working Americans. That would anger their corporate benefactors that take bailouts and government largess.
These sissy republicans fight national health care by trying to convince the masses not having health insurance is somehow an exercise in freedom. A few of the deluded among us buy into this horse shit and go to tea parties. But the silent majority realize that the rich republicans that control the party and the message are selfishly trying to protect their place in line at health care providers. If someone has to suffer that's too bad. And their suffering isn't that bad in the mind of the sissy republican, Dick Cheney elite. No worse than waterboarding anyway.
20 comments:
You're right, they are big sissies. Everyone has to have courage to bear the burdens of their tough policies. And they have big sissy people in their ranks like: G. W. (was he AWOL or not) Bush; Dick (5 deferments) Cheney; John (7 deferments) Ashcroft; Hot Tub Tom (did not serve) Delay; Karl(did not serve) Rove; Jack (bad knee) Kemp but continued to play in the NFL for 8 years: Paul (did not serve) Wolfowitz. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage, George Will all did not serve. The list is massive, I could clog your blog up with name after name. Yet those people are the ones who shout the loudest, are the most aggressive about what should be done militarily.
John McCain, Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart, Distinguished Flying Cross. is a notable exception.
despicable sissies, Holte is right, they ARE the ones who claim to be big and bad when it comes to sending others to war. "Ooooooooh please country men, protect my sorry ass!"
I bet they all hold out their pinkies when they sip their tea too!!
Nah. They are too wimpy to be able to hold their petite little tea cups unless they use all their fingers Sue.
Then they act all outraged when we call the "tea baggers." Panzies probably couldn't even lift a tea bag.
Yeah, poor John McCain...look how they talk about him now!
They even call him a RINO!
They may very well be sissies, but the real reason they're against the trial being held in NY is political. This would be a feather in the Obama Administration's cap. Libertarian Bob Barr agrees this is what's going on (I heard him say this today on Thom Hartmann's radio program).
3 Prominent Conservatives Slam GOP Scaremongering on KSM Trial.
Being against holding them in US prisons is just fearmongering.
Dick and Rummy ordered the torture but neither was actually there.
As for spending and not raising taxes to pay for it... it's called "The Two Santa Clauses Theory". Democrats spend money on social programs which gets them votes. The Repubicans decided when they controlled the White House they'd run up the debt and leave the mess for Democrats to clean up. Now Republicans spend the money and get the votes. Democrats are forced to raise taxes and so lose votes.
FYI I just put up a controversial new post titled "Best Friends George and Osama". I wrote it in response to the comment "J.D. Pendry" left in "response" to your "Sneaky Republicans Doublecross" post. He blames Carter and Clinton for 9/11. I place the blame elsewhere.
Come now, there are serious issues here.
What an unserious bunch most of the commenters are here. All that I hear is ranting about how Republicans are "sissies" and that anyone who opposes this is "spreading fear"
This from the global warming crowd, no less.
The despicable people, of course, are Obama and Holder.
The way the far left will look at this trial is not letting terrorists free, but pronouncing the United States guilty. They will do this because these five have no real defense. They're obviously guilty, and when you're obviously guilty you do one of or both of two things; tie up the court in legalisms, and/or put the government on trial. They will put the Bush Administration on trial for renditions, waterboarding, the whole thing.
Also consider the entire issue of waterboarding and whatever else we did to Khalid Sheik Mohammed and the others. It will be discussed in excruciating detail ad nauseum in court, the objective being to make the Bush Administration, and by extension the United States, look as bad as possible. For our enemies overseas this will be a propaganda bonanza. The international left will use this as a justification to oppose everything else the United States does or wants to do. And the domestic left will salivate over the details, confirming as it will in their minds that the United States in general, and the Bush Administration in particular, is an evil, bad, nation.
The idea that "if we expose these guys the world will rally to our side" is ridiculous. Much of the world hates us and will rejoice in every revelation that embarrasses the U.S. Some of the Muslim world sympathizes with the terrorists. Certainly many Islamic leaders will loudly proclaim their support for them, and as is so often the case they'll intimidate many others into silence. They will use this as a forum to attack the U.S.
Just as when Holder announced the investigation of CIA agents, Obama was conveniently out of the country. The reason is that he wants to distance himself in case the thing explodes in their face. He'll throw Holder under the bus so fast it'll make your head spin.
There is no way you can hold this trial without revealing national security secrets. As such, it will prove a bonanza for our enemies. They will learn our methods and be able to deduce at least some of our sources, who themselves will face capture, torture, and execution.
So why are Obama and Holder doing this when they know the above will happen?
1) They hope the U.S. is embarrassed by the revelations. As do you commenters here on this blog. They, like you, hate the U.S.
2) They are hoping to prompt an international body or another country to issue arrest warrants for Busy, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Franks, Petraus, etc, and set up a war crimes trial.
To the Redhunter says:
"So why are Obama and Holder doing this when they know the above will happen?
1) They hope the U.S. is embarrassed by the revelations. As do you commenters here on this blog. They, like you, hate the U.S.
2) They are hoping to prompt an international body or another country to issue arrest warrants for Busy, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Franks, Petraus, etc, and set up a war crimes trial."
Tom: I've been on record as one of your biggest fans on the left since I started this blog. YOur posts are always high quality not withstanding if I agree with them or not.
Now c'mon man. None of us hate America. It is because we love America and the rule of law that we believe trial in a court of law is appropriate.
We're all in agreement that what KSM and his henchmen did is despicable. What Charles Manson and Jeffrey Dahmer did are despicable. Our legal system works. We cannot abandon it depending on the heinousness of the crimes being prosecuted. That my friend, would be a surrender to the backward nations of the world.
It will be discussed in excruciating detail ad nauseum in court, the objective being to make the Bush Administration, and by extension the United States,look as bad as possible.
I disagree with this statement.
The objective of all reasonable people is to bring those who perpetrated these heinous acts to justice.
The Bush administration had 7 years in which to do its duty. It neglected to bring these people to justice and left the mess to be cleaned up by another administration, so I believe it is unjust to say the goal is to make Mr. Bush and the US look bad.
What makes the US look bad is NOT following our Constitution and using torture on people in our custody. That, IMHO, is what makes us look like ordinary thugs.
Nice Thesis Tom....just one thing very obviously missing:
When we said that we were going into Afghanistan to destroy Al Qaeda and bring them to JUSTICE...
Exactly what was meant by Justice?
Try to leave the prior administration and protecting them out of the equation and answer the simple question, when we said we were going after these folks to bring them to justice exactly what did we mean?
Forget torture, forget national security, forget the CIA and go back to the day when GWB announced that we would seek justice for the terrorist attacks...
The point is that no one THOUGHT about what we were saying AT THAT TIME.
So, now we find ourselves with a new administration and having to deal with the concept of JUSTICE.
Yes, the real SISSIES are the neoconservatives of the last administration who did not resolve or could not resolve the issue during their tenure...
They passed the buck and now they want to sit and criticize this administration and how they are handling the problem.
If you meant to waste them after you had gotten all the information you could out of them then you should have wasted them.
You cannot try them in a military tribunal because then you have to deal with the Geneva Convention..which we did not follow.
Keep them locked up forever? Yeah, like that will work...
So, Tom...what did the prior administration mean when they said, "...bring these folks to justice."
Republicans claim to be the most victimized group ever, while also laying claim to be the toughest Sumbitches on the planet.
How do we rationalize these two opposed stances? Republicans, Conservatives and their frenzied supporters, the 9/12ers, Birtherites, Teabaggers, Get-a-Job Shouters are made up of 3 classes of people:
Bullies
Chicken Hawks
Punk Ass Bitches
So they next time you talk to a Republican try and figure out by their stilted ignorant speech pattern which of the 3 he is...
Before I get started I wish to make it perfectly clear I am not a republican. Nor am I a democrat so if you wish to know guess yo'll just need to visit my blog.
WW I - Woodrow Wilson
WW II - Franklin Roosevelt
Vietnam - John Kennedy
Gulf War - G.H.W.Bush
Afghanistan - G.W Bush
Iraq - G.W.Bush
Pretty even I would say.
Lets talk about just the 2 unjustifiable wars. Vietnam - JFK Democrat -- Iraq - GWB - Republican
Again pretty even.
As to the sissy toss, well ; lets just say I know some Democrat pacifistic sissies as well. Both on the foreign and domestic front.
Not being knowledgeable of the specifics with respect to the prison in Illinois I will not comment on it other than I remember being in a town, quite liberal and democratic that shared the same concerns.
As to greed and selfishness lets start with the definition of selfishness.
Selfishness - concern for ones rational self interest. I would love a discussion on that one. Because everyone I know fits that description. At least the rational ones.
Greed, I agree is not desirable nor is it good. And those who choose to be charitable and can afford it should.
However, forcing any individual to do so by burdensome taxation looking down the barrel of a rifle is unethical, immoral and results in eventually creating the victim mentality so prevalent in todays society.
I am sure I have said enough, and probably more than you'all cared to hear.
But hey, I fear not opposing views being bandied about. I assume you'all don't either.
And I tried to do it with out rancor.
PS: I could clog the blos with plenty of liberals who also did not serve.
A big difference between GWB and JFK is JFK fought in a war. And Vietnam was escalated under LBJ so perhaps the comparison isn't as fair as it could be.
I also draw a distinction between liberals that never fought that call for diplomacy, and conservatives that never fought, who call for invasions.
Thanks for your visit Rational Nation Man.
To Rational Nation USA:
From what every US Marine learns about Vietnam in Boot Camp:
US Marine Corps Green Book of Knowledge, 2-35 (d):
As early as 1952, Americans were involved in South Vietnam. On 2 August 1954, LtCol Victor J. Croizat, USMC arrived in Vietnam to be assigned to the United States Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG). This was the beginning of the Marines involvement in Vietnam.
So let's talk about unjustifiable wars and responsibility again...
Rational-
I assume by your comment that you are in favor of taxation as long as it is not burdensome. The problem is what is burdensome to me might not be burdensome to you.
Rational,
The only difference between selfishness, self interests, and greed is a matter of degrees...
Inregards to the concept of 'rational' well, we only seem to be able to determine what is rational after the fact...
Rational is kind of like 'in the eye of the beholder' and along the lines of "...not too hot and not too cold but just right..."
So, who gets to decide what is rational and what is not?
One of the key strengths of capitalism has always been the balance that exists between supply and demand....and that is what made supply side economics so irrational...it threw the balance out the window and caused the destruction of capitalism...
The whole concept of free markets is irrational also unless of course you are for the concept of one world government because the reality is money will go where labor is cheap and that is why European countries are so protective...where is the benefit of free markets to the vast majority of Americans?
If rationality is to be a real concept then the only way it can be real is in some sense that which benefits the most people...
As far as charity goes...well, lets be truthful, if it wasn't a tax write off it would dry up in a heart beat...
If people were truthfully charitable then economic conditions would not matter in regards to giving but charitable giving always declines in rough economic times (the times it is most needed) and it does so because it is a personal inconvenience to the giver...thus without the tax deduction, or without the personal benefit, there would be no charity...
As far as wars go...
It is hard to argue that someone like Dick Cheney is a leader when he had no qualms about taking 5 deferments and exclaiming that he had better things to do...
Dick Cheney always has better things to do...and that is enriching himself. Its like his criticism of Obama...if he is against closing GITMO or having trials then he should have taken care of things before he left office...
Like shoot everyone left in GITMO or transfer them all to Egypt and or Syria...
Wow - Guess I generated some commentary. Which is, after all, good for the generating party as it gets boring hearing and reading only thoughts you agree with.
By far to many comments to respond to in a short space or period of time. But I will say there where several points made worth considering.
And that is what a true modern day independent conservative does. Sort of akin to a true classical liberal of a time long past.
Thanks for allowing me to comment on your blog Truth. Please feel free to comment on mine anytime.
With the highest regard,
I bid farewell for now.
Look, Obama and socialism has struck:
"Eggo waffle shortage leads to rationing"
The Republicans have a huge number of people who can dish it out but not take it, and, like most loudmouthed big talkers, they are basically cowards at heart.
Imagine that, a collection of panty waists trying to defend the incredibly stupid decisions of a commie clown...
Absolutely hilarious...
Still delusional and still whining are the hallmarks of the libtards here on supposed truth 101...
Thanks for the chuckles...
Post a Comment