September 30, 2009
Uh, That Should Be "Hams Across America"
They can claim to be a victim of State Farm all they want, but Hickory Farms has victimized
these morons far more.
Via Ace, who claims to be above such things.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:50 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 45 words, total size 1 kb.
1
That link should be titled "Hams Across America."
(And, no, I'm not above such things.)
Posted by: ECM at September 30, 2009 09:40 PM (q3V+C)
2
That was freakin' funny!
Posted by: Lipiwitz at October 01, 2009 03:36 AM (bhNGz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Crazy on the Left and Further Left
I don't often read
NewsMax. I don't have anything against them, I just have limited time and resources and rely a core group of news sites, blogs, and aggregators to gather information on a daily basis.
I rather wish I did read more frequently however, because if I did I might have been able to catch John L. Perry's column from yesterday, Obama Risks a Military 'Intervention' before it was sent down the memory hole. Clicking on that link will now redirect you to the NewsMax home page; Perry's column has also been scrubbed.
The scathing response from the blogosphere—based upon what I've been able to cobble together from quotes on several sites—seems warranted.
The simple fact of the matter is that author seems to have come unhinged, and for reasons perhaps structural to the site's editorial process, the column made it to print without a sanity check by the editors.
While the number of people dissatisfied with Obama's foundering Presidency continues to balloon and his popularity erodes on a seemingly daily basis, we are a nation of laws, not a nation of mob rule and coups by military strongmen. We will have out chance to remove President Obama in 2012 as we have always removed bad Presidents, at the ballot box.
There has only been one successful coup in American history, perpetrated by the Democratic Party and the Ku Klux Klan and allowed by a Democratic governor and President.
Advocating to repeat such a disgrace as Perry apparently did is utterly unacceptable. NewsMax was right to yank a column that never should have made it to print, and should reconsider their relationship with Perry and what that association now represents.
Update: It is also worth noting that Perry is not a conservative; his bio says he worked for both LBJ and Carter Administrations and Democratic Governor of Florida, LeRoy Collins.
From further on the left, Gore Vidal laments the "fact" that Americans are just too stupid to appreciate the genius of Obama, and also suggests that a military coup is in America's future.
Update: A statement from NewsMax:
Statement from Newsmax Regarding Blogger
In a blog posting to Newsmax John Perry wrote about a coup scenario involving the U.S. military.
He clearly stated that he was not advocating such a scenario but simply describing one.
After several reader complaints, Newsmax wanted to insure that this article was not misinterpreted. It was removed after a short period after being posted.
Newsmax strongly believes in the principles of Constitutional government and would never advocate or insinuate any suggestion of an activity that would undermine our democracy or democratic institutions.
Mr. Perry served as a political appointee in the Carter administration in HUD and FEMA. He has no official relationship with Newsmax other than as an unpaid blogger.
Here is the copy of the original Perry column in its entirety, as provided by a reader:
Obama Risks a Domestic Military 'Intervention'
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:35 AM
By: John L. Perry
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isnÂ’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
Officers swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to "obey the orders of the president of the United States."
Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as AmericaÂ’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
They can see the nation's safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.
So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?
Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and PakistanÂ’s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?
Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on IranÂ’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?
What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, "I'm not interested in victory"
that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?
Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?
Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of AmericaÂ’s military leadership is lost in a fool's fog.
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a "family intervention," with some form of limited, shared responsibility?
Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.
Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don't shrug and say, "We can always worry about that later."
In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.
John L. Perry, a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two presidents, is a regular columnist for Newsmax.com. Read John Perry's columns here.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:12 AM
| Comments (41)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1160 words, total size 8 kb.
1
There was at least one other successful coup: the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, in 1893.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overthrow_of_the_Hawaiian_Kingdom
Posted by: Jason Van Steenwyk at September 30, 2009 11:18 AM (+S8Kb)
2
The original article was removed from NewMax's site, but is preserved here:
http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/pdf/newsmax-20090929-perry_coup.pdf
Sedition is an act of terrorism.
Posted by: James at September 30, 2009 11:27 AM (/vYfr)
3
For the record, I renamed this post shortly after posting it.
Far too many people are swallowing the Perry and Vidal as coming from the right and left, when this coup talk is really coming from the left and further left. I wanted to make that clear.
Jason, Hawaii wasn't yet a part of the United States at the time. James, I have a copy from a reader that I just posted in the update.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 30, 2009 12:28 PM (gAi9Z)
4
The problem that we have is that Obama is trying as hard as possible to distroy the US and our futures. He is in no way addressing the economic problem which is far from being over and has a potential for being much more servere than the Depression of the 30's. He is trying to socialize every industry. His foreign policy stance is almost guaranteed to provoke war. So what do we do? Can we wait another year hoping to get Republican numbers up to counter this nut? Certainly in 4 years we will be in a despriate situation if he gets his social measures passed. Now I here he is trying to stack the judicary. It seems that he is a busy little man.
Posted by: David at September 30, 2009 01:55 PM (dccG2)
5
Yeash. The only place I can imagine that this MIGHT have come from, sanely, is folks looking worriedly at the Obama Patterns (IE: "ooh, dictators! I like!") and saying "don't worry, Obama can't possibly overthrow the US Constitution-- the military wouldn't allow it."
I have seen this in several places-- shoot, I've _pointed this out_ in several places, when (possible trollish) folks come through and post about how Obama will set himself up as a dictator.
Main problem I have with the article is that it seems to be saying "oh, the US military will run all over the Constitution to save the country! See, they swear to defend the Constitution and the country!" Seems a little...um... off-kiter.
Posted by: Foxfier at September 30, 2009 02:21 PM (OtIqW)
6
A correction: William McKinley, a Republican, was president when the Wilmington Insurrection took place in 1898.
Posted by: Don, the Rebel without a Blog at September 30, 2009 02:24 PM (tcrAf)
7
Gore Vidal believes the American people are too stupid to worship on the throne of Obama? Typical elitist mentality! Quite frankly I, and many like me, normal working class people, arrived at the conclusion that Obama is not particularly bright. His many teleprompter controlled speaches sounded very sophmoric and vague. His non prompted responses to questions
were not very well thought out or intelligent. He sounded more preachy than thoughtful and has
a lot to learn about the real world. Many very intelligent people like Gore Vidal believed in this fairy tale, so who is the dumb one?
Military coup?? Never happen. We the people will be Obama's undoing. Along with his pipe dream utopia influenced policies. Any of these policies which are passed into law, which I hope will be none, will be repealed.
Paul
Posted by: Paul Kanesky at September 30, 2009 03:17 PM (rCmYM)
8
I consider this, along with recent comments by Gore Vidal and Thomas Friedman, a fascinating and somewhat frightening insight into how the leftist mind is interpreting what is happening right now, and how the left continues to utterly fail to comprehend the source and nature of the opposition to their schemes. I'm not entirely sure that they are capable of understanding.
I am quite comfortable concluding that Perry is a leftist because he worked in the department of Health and Human Services under Carter.
In other words, I think it entirely possible that Perry is yet another agent provocateur.
Or, he could just be an idiot.
Posted by: filbert at September 30, 2009 03:19 PM (oVl3l)
9
I find your assertion that the man is a leftist based on the fact that 30 and 40 years ago he worked in a Democratic administration to be without merit. Mr. Perry has been writing for Newsmax, a conservative website, since 1999. The name of his column is "Right Angles." A brief scan of the titles of his columns indicates he is a conservative. Perhaps he was always so, or not, but there is a ton of evidence he espouses conservative thought. He has a column on Newsmax, which I don't think anyone here beleives is some sort of communist front.
Please, just disavow this traitor from your movement and return to rational debate. He insulted the servicemen and women of this country by stating that they would break their oath to uphold the constitution. That is his true sin.
Posted by: Rob W at September 30, 2009 03:40 PM (L009T)
10
By your logic, Reagan was still a liberal when he changed parties in 1962 because 30 years earlier he was a Democratic supporter of Roosevelt and the New Deal.
Posted by: barr at September 30, 2009 03:49 PM (5OEha)
11
I understand that conservatives want to distance themselves from like-minded nutjobs, but this Perry fellow is a conservative, a far-right one at that.
It's kind of facile to suggest that because he worked for a Democratic administration, oh, 40 years ago, that he is a liberal. He writes for a fringe right website and his column is entitled "Right Angles."
You are really insulting the intelligence of your regular readers and I know you don't really believe he is "left."
Posted by: John S. at September 30, 2009 04:14 PM (X1rqU)
12
I don't claim to know the first thing about Mr. Perry. I can only relate what he states in his own bio, where he was very active in state and national politics as a Democrat for much of his adult life in politics, and also belonged to a left wing think tank. I don't doubt that people can change, I just don't see any solid evidence that he has radically shifted, simply because he strongly opposes President Obama's continuing series of gaffes and missteps. Many Democrats dislike him, with Hillary Clinton supporters in particular being among Obama's most vehement enemies.
And for the record, merely writing for NewsMax is hardly proof of someone's political alliances. Dick Morris, Susan Estrich, Ed Koch, and Lanny Davis are all Democrats who write for NewsMax.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 30, 2009 04:42 PM (gAi9Z)
13
One last thought: if Perry really has completely shifted his political views, and now merely writes radical and dishonest propaganda to attack his former allies, doesn't that make him David Brock of Media Matters?
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 30, 2009 04:47 PM (gAi9Z)
14
OKÂ…I condemn this article.
ButÂ…he covers many points that are very high in the worries of many people in the U.S. some of them already proven true, some speculated at and others that are more worthy of being scare tactics than anything else.
But his premise of the Military being involved in or the method of salvation or revolution is wrong, and wrong-headed.
Now I can see ex-U.S. Military involved in coming back and running for office in their states or even national offices. I can see x-Mil joining organizations such as The Oath Keepers. I can see x-Mil coming back and setting up local militias, and going to Tea Parties and even speaking at them. I can see them going door to door getting out the vote to get Obama and the Democrats out of office.
I can also see as a last resort, mass resignations of Officers in our Military services.
But in the bitter end, if salvation or revolution is needed for the preservation and protection of this Republic, it will fall to each citizen to stand up, load up and march forward to do it.
Papa Ray
Central Texas
The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed - where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.
2009 Judge Alex Kozinski
Posted by: Papa Ray at September 30, 2009 04:49 PM (JpVJn)
15
Right, Confederate Yankee. A cursory glance at his archived articles from the past decade reveals the writings of a true blue liberal Democrat.
http://archive.newsmax.com/pundits/archives/John_L._Perry-archive.shtml
It's practically fit to print on the Daily Kos!
Posted by: John S. at September 30, 2009 04:54 PM (X1rqU)
16
"It's practically fit to print on the Daily Kos"
Really?
"So enough already of referring to the likes of Boxer, Pelosi et al as "liberals." That's the cover that Cold War communists operated under. It's the camouflage that today's inheritors of the Trotskyite philosophy relish.
How happy they must be making Joe McCarthy, posthumously.
It's time these Typhoid Mary carriers of this mutant virus of Trotskyism were understood for, and called, what they really are – leftover lefties who just can't say farewell to the Marxist god that failed the whole sorry lot of them."
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/11/10/130523.shtml
(I am not defending the guy, but he seems more blue dog than true blue...)
Posted by: jpeditor at September 30, 2009 05:17 PM (g5AOi)
17
Bob,
TPM has the full text.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/09/full_text_of_newsmax_column_suggesting_military_co.php
Posted by: Kathy Kattenburg at September 30, 2009 05:24 PM (Tdz5k)
18
Sounds like this Perry is a Dick Morris wannabe.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 30, 2009 05:33 PM (OX5qU)
19
This is the kind of stuff that helps despotism to take root. The fear of toppling the government brings on more repression.
Posted by: Neo at September 30, 2009 06:08 PM (tE8FB)
20
I have to agree with Neo.
Out of the thunderous madness comes a single voice:
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/09/29/silence-equals-assent-why-pointing-out-conservative-lunacy-must-be-done/
This is a great blog posting. I happen to agree and appreciate the two party system. It ain't perfect but it's what we got and it needs to work.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 30, 2009 06:34 PM (OX5qU)
21
>>"Out of the thunderous madness comes a single voice"
When will a single voice come from the thunderous madness on the left to attack the lefts insanity, including calls for Bush to be assasinated?
When will Lipshits decry Rep Greysons comments?
Rick Moran is the rights equivalent of John Perry.
Posted by: Steve at September 30, 2009 07:17 PM (2SRpL)
22
Damn, I was hoping he was right. If one understands what Ayers, Alinsky, Glen Jones and the other radicals Obama believes in, associates with and represents. His admiration for Hugo Chevez, Castro and other dictators, and the direction he seems to be taking the nation. The military option seems a bright light of hope.
Posted by: Zelsdorf Ragshaft III at September 30, 2009 07:53 PM (qEAEW)
23
>>"I understand that conservatives want to distance themselves from like-minded nutjobs"
When can we expct the LEFT to distance themselves from like-minded nutjobs?
This is why I don't approve of what CY is doing here. The left will gladly accept the rights condemnaton of this, while defending people like Bill Ayers or Van Jones. Or Jimmy Carter, for that matter. All of whom are a lot more central to the modern left than Perry is to the right.
Posted by: Steve at September 30, 2009 08:33 PM (skt70)
24
>>"He insulted the servicemen and women of this country by stating that they would break their oath to uphold the constitution."
What happens if upholding the Constitution requires them to go against Americas politicians? That is no longer a mere theoretical question.
>>"Please, just disavow this traitor from your movement"
Your demand would sit better if you had been here disavowing ACORN and Van Jones recently. Both were and are far more influential than Perry.
Posted by: Steve at September 30, 2009 08:38 PM (skt70)
25
However remote the possibility of our military stepping in to remove an administration trashing the constitution, the fears by the Obama administration of just this possibility probably goes a long way to explain their immediate and continuing condemnation of the Honduran government's and military's removal of their own marxist usurper.
Posted by: Spartan79 at September 30, 2009 10:14 PM (0IRlO)
26
Not an official Newsmax max column. Set of by Gore Vidal's brain dead reasoning pointing out another form of massive right wing conspiracy as Clinton did a few days ago. "Scrubbed" as if sites like the Huffington Post do this almost daily to keep its kooks at bay. For sure with this one instance in hand, the leftist hounds will over abuse this try to portray it as mainstream "teabagger" thinking. However in the end leftists will see poll numbers for their side of the political equation fall as a result, by reason a new right leaning internet-Fox News network reaches the same number as the left wing-media-internet-Hollywood network. In addition conservatives outnumber rabid Liberals by a two to one margin, with 40% leaning independently in the middle, who are now becoming very aware how the left uses hyper inflated insult and feigned "concerns" to press what are mostly overreached nonsensical conspiracy theories.
Germane to this, military intervention is a very remote possibility. A trigger point being a much higher bar than what Obama has done so far. The Honduran situation a disturbing example of the leanings of our useful idiot in chief still does not mean he is going to invite Hugo Chavez to America to head the FBI, or take over Hillary Clinton's job. He "only" nationalized a few banks, two of the big three car manufacturers, don't hyperventilate...
What would trigger military intervention would be a direct attack on constitutional freedoms in the Bill of Rights, free speech, seizing private property, arresting individuals, all without due process under law for a citizen's political opinion. Maybe the bar would be as high as Administration officials ordering execution of Obama's opponents without using courts. Slightly less likely would have Obama leaving men in the field of battle without adequate support or defined mission for an extended time allowing US troops to be slaughtered on an altar of political sensibilities. A third reason maybe at 10% probability, looming, is Patrick Leahy's attempt to stack Federal courts with 60 odd new positions. That IS an attack on the constitutional checks and balances. Without State ok by 2/3rds majority I don't think this is constitutional. Unaccountable to anyone, appointed by radical progressives elected under a guise of being "moderate" this could trigger considerable angst in and out of the military.
It is important to remember all recent impost of this kind of government power on citizens stems from leftist socialist regimes, not right wing ones that support capitalism. It is also a point the author of this is not a well known mainstream proponent of right wing causes aka a Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh. One only has to look at what John Kerry said about Vietnam's "re-education camps" to know draconian methods of dealing with political opponents never far out of mainstream leftist thoughts.
It is clear now his book "Dreams of my Father" was ghost written by Bill Ayers, which tears it for me, I will never be voting at even the local level for a Democrat again. Nor will I listen to "reasoned debate" from people working for, or linked to places like CBS, except in the vein of taking note of the lie of the day. This Olympics fling an indicator we are now governed by a corrupt, not to bright, quasi marxist leaning President whose IQ is even probably the lowest of all Presidents since Cleveland.
I look forward now to the W recovery Obama is going to give us. The second recession will be worse than this one, and longer, starting as Greenspan estimates, by late next year. This will inform American voters once and for all the failings of socialist policies. No amount of media-White House spin will mask it, clear examples of Obama administration corruption on top of it. Look for a rout of Democrats over the next two elections. Obama a one term wonder, lovingly referred to by a Sarah Palin type populist conservative as Carter II.
Posted by: Pat at September 30, 2009 11:53 PM (9/6KL)
27
Steve, you kind of just make things up as you go along huh? There's not a snowball's chance in Hell I'll decry Grayson's comments until you decry Palin's death panel comments or Grassley's "pull the plug on Grandma" comments or Bachmann's death comments or any of the other death scare tactics and comments we've been bombarded with from Republicans for the past 3 months. Zero! Zilch! Nada! Dry hump squirt son! Damn proud of Grayson and it's about damn time a Democrat with a spine gave the Republicans a taste of their own medicine. And Steve, who the hell is Bill Ayers? Some ex-convict from like 40 years ago? Your obsession, not ours. And it's only your obsession because Jesus Palin told you to obsess over it. If it wasn't for her, you probably wouldn't know who he or any of the other names you mentioned. You're an obedient echo chamber Steve but your opinion generators are on new talking points now and you have to be a little quicker at indoctrinating yourself with them if you're gonna keep up.
Hey Pat, did Alex Jones send you? Wow, you are paranoid. It's quite "draconian" of you and people like you who refuse to recognize the American democratic process of the will of the American people. The will of the American people who have gladly embraced people who you categorize with your paranoid "Leftist" conspiracy theories. The American people who rejected you, period. I suggest you pack your bags and go live in a Socialist country for a while. When you return, you may have a better appreciation of your country you claim you're proud of and not be such a paranoid spoiled brat. Oh and for the record, Greenspan was one of the major factors as to why we have this recession so pick and choose who you idolize in your "Obama failure fantasies" more carefully. You and your right-wing draconian fascist GW worshipin' Palin idolizin' Glenn Beck followin' regimes may actually start winning elections again (if you manage to find someone who can actually lead).
Zelsdorf, you're always hoping "other" people are right. Can't think or take action yourself? You're not alone. In fact, most people like yourself are always waiting for "other" people. Keep waiting (but don't hold your breath). "The military option seems a bright light of hope" -- You're kidding me right? How about f##king DEMOCRACY as hope? How about finding somebody who can actually lead instead of whining about the Left and the mainstream media and all the other rants you throw thumb-sucking tantrums about? How about finding somebody who can win back the millions of votes you lost in the past 2 election cycles rather than obsessing over 70 year old "coup throwing" domestic terrorists and freakin' ACORN? How about having a leader that can win back the confidence of their supporters rather than a bunch of idiots on TV, radio and blogs? You talk a lot about revolutions and wanting to force some regime change but at least Ayers had the balls to do it.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at October 01, 2009 04:26 AM (bhNGz)
28
That's the sort of rant I've come to expect from Ayers wannabe Lipiwitz. It's hard to distill that much crazy in one comment, but you did it. Nicely done.
My favorite line is: "Dry hump squirt son!"
What a weirdo.
Posted by: brando at October 01, 2009 09:23 AM (IPGju)
29
Lippy's a loon.
But it says something about the other liberal readers here that they don't repudiate him, that they don't "disavow this traitor from {their} movement" as they want us to do with Perry.
Posted by: Steve at October 01, 2009 03:33 PM (rxQ0a)
30
Wellll, it seems to me that the reason that "The Left" has not disavowed Messrs. Carter's and Grayson's statements is that they are 100% true. And Mr. Perry is clearly a man of the Right. So, how is that it become's our fault that you rightwingers can't acknowledge that at least one of your writers is either batshit crazy or guilty of sedition? Welcome to what we like to call "Reality." And to the proprietor: there's a new invention called "Google" which would help your research efforts immensely.
Posted by: Epicurus at October 01, 2009 03:59 PM (4onRb)
31
Anybody got a clue where Mr. Perry is from?
http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com/neighbors.php?type=name&lname=Perry&fname=John
Posted by: Foxfier at October 01, 2009 04:50 PM (OtIqW)
32
>>"it seems to me that the reason that "The Left" has not disavowed Messrs. Carter's and Grayson's statements is that they are 100% true. ...Welcome to what we like to call "Reality.""
I notice that what you like to call "Reality" looks a lot like a really bad acid trip.
FYI, old people agree with the Republicans about the lefts health care plans. They must not have dropped the same acid you did.
Posted by: Steve at October 01, 2009 05:42 PM (50jiK)
33
Epicurus - I'm not too happy with your man Fred Phelps either.
Posted by: daleyrocks at October 01, 2009 06:28 PM (3O5/e)
34
Five corporations attempted a coup during FDR's presidency, but failed when one of the generals that they approached informed the proper authorities of the plan. Congress put on a dog and pony show, and no one was held accountable. Apparently, no one wanted to upset the superior humans who ran the corporations.
Posted by: gc_wall at October 01, 2009 11:05 PM (9NiSa)
35
Brando, Steve -- You're the Ayers wannabes talking all the Weatherman ideology of revolutions and coups and taking back the nation and secession. Step up like Ayers did. Heck, give him a call and he'll show you how it's done!
Disavow a traitor -- How about 60,000 batsh#t loonies who refuse to accept our democratically elected officials and keep talking Weatherman ideology of revolutions, coups and secession like...oh...lets say...tea-baggers and birthers? Round them all up and bring them before your death panels and make them pay the sentence of your right-wing ideology of justice. Just pretend they were all Liberals and then you'd care about treason.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at October 02, 2009 04:14 AM (bhNGz)
36
We are pretty sure Lipiwitz isn't a troll, right?
I mean, he's annoying, yes, and "trolling" for reactions, but seems to believe the garbage he throws......
Posted by: Foxfier at October 02, 2009 10:10 AM (OtIqW)
37
Confederate Yankee: "I don't claim to know the first thing about Mr. Perry."
Actually, you did know one initial fact, that this column was in Newsmax. A right-wing publication.
Posted by: Barry at October 02, 2009 03:15 PM (HaPIL)
38
Why is it that people who throw reasonable debate are called trolls? And why is it that debates are always won by having childish responses that consist of insults usually found in a playground? Foxfier, any idea or are you just gonna give me a noogie or a wedgie?
Posted by: Lipiwitz at October 02, 2009 06:49 PM (OX5qU)
39
"Why is it that people who throw reasonable debate are called trolls?"
Lippy - Why don't you alert CY when you plan on having a reasonable debate and stop throwing around childish insults and contentless comments? That would be fun to watch but I doubt you can do it - you haven't demonstrated the intellectual chops so far that I've seen.
Posted by: daleyrocks at October 02, 2009 08:04 PM (3O5/e)
40
Lipiwits-
Your debating skills are as dazzling as your English skills.
You might "throw
a reasonable debate," or "offer a reasonable debate" or several other ways of phrasing whatever you're trying to say-- as it stands, your question is incomprehensible without corrections that can greatly change the meaning.
Posted by: Foxfier at October 02, 2009 09:21 PM (OtIqW)
Posted by: Lipiwitz at October 03, 2009 12:14 AM (bhNGz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 29, 2009
Affiliate Partnership with FrontSight
You
may notice above that there is a banner ad to FrontSight Firearms Training Institute. After being approached by one of their staff last week about promoting a training package I decided to partner up with them, as FrontSight has a excellent reputation as a shooting school and the package they are promoting includes a
Springfield Armory XD that you get to take home.
I'll have more on this later tonight or tomorrow.
In the meantime, you can read up on some the links to articles about them they so graciously provided.
Front Sight
Ignatius Piazza in Small Arms Review
Ignatius Piazza
Ignatius Piazza Blog
Ignatius Piazza in Times Democrat
Front Sight in National Enquirer
Ignatius Piazza in Handvapen
Front Sight in Sierra Times
Ignatius Piazza in Forbes
Ignatius Piazza in Playboy Magazine German Edition
Or since seeing is believing:
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
05:39 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 148 words, total size 2 kb.
1
CY - What banner ad? Heh!
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 29, 2009 11:38 PM (3O5/e)
2
Please notice that I have blocked the blinking ad.
If I can't block the blinking ad, I block the blog.
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at September 30, 2009 11:00 AM (OmeRL)
3
Best quote of the video.
"Well, actually, I'm planning on joining the Navy Seals, so I'm trying to get some good handgun training before I go to basic training."
Yeah, you might want to spend at least one day in boot camp first, before you appoint yourself into the ranks of the Seals. I'm just saying.
Posted by: brando at September 30, 2009 12:09 PM (IPGju)
4
Springfield XD? What caliber?
I have an XD45 Compact and LOVE it. Good gun, easy to shoot and easy to clean.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at September 30, 2009 10:33 PM (n2wxa)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Last Surviving Kennedy in Office Likens Obamacare Opponents to George Wallace
Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) displays all the
class and sobriety of his late father, slyly attempting to tie opposition to Obamacare to a noted segregationist:
"It's very, very dangerous," Kennedy said in the interview. "We put a lot of people in jail around the world for threatening our country's security. But this atmosphere of attack that doesn't attack the issue, but attacks the people, is very disruptive to the institution of democracy, which relies on a respect for the opposition."
He continued: "George Wallace didn't need a gun to pull a trigger. We just need to be mindful of the wisdom of people ... who have been through these ugly periods in American history. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
I guess he forgot that segregationist Wallace was a Democrat to his dying day.
As for what he will do about the worst example of politically-motivated hate this far, there is no word on when Kennedy will push for MSNBC personality Ed Schultz to be fired for claiming that Republicans "want to see you dead. They'd rather make money off your dead corpse. They kind of like it when that woman has cancer and they don't have anything for her."
Oh wait a minute... I forgot that those rules only apply to the opposition of liberals, not the liberal themselves who have initiated every act of violence that can directly be tied to protests over the health-care debate, from SEIU union thugs assaulting a man handing out flags, to MoveOn.Org agitators biting the finger of of a retiree in Calfornia.
It should also be noted that Kennedy made the comments in front of a hand-picked audience of just 75, afraid to meet with his own constituents openly.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
04:24 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 314 words, total size 2 kb.
1
"George Wallace didn't need a gun to pull a trigger...."
How insensitive. Kennedy probably forgot that Wallace, as bad as he was, was a leading presidential candidate in 1972 until an assassination attempt left Wallace paralyzed from the waist down.
Posted by: SouthernRoots at September 29, 2009 07:35 PM (FJRFk)
2
Is this the Kennedy who, in the old family tradition, was driving drunk and somehow avoided the consequences that usually go with that offense?
Posted by: Zelsdorf Ragshaft III at September 29, 2009 10:25 PM (0x4f6)
3
I can remember when Teddy Kennedy went down to Alabama to present George Wallace with an award praising his courage.
Posted by: Don, the Rebel without a Blog at September 30, 2009 02:51 AM (tcrAf)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
A Great Idea for 1993
Been there.
Done that.
And truth be told, the traffic wasn't overwhelming.
And while it is no doubt cool to see your mug shot on the page beside Charles Krauthammer (and to a lesser extent, Eugene Robinson), the idea of a pundit reality contest will be less than riveting entertainment for anyone not intimately involved.
As you may imagine, the folks in the blogosphere are having a field day tearing this apart.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
02:37 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 82 words, total size 1 kb.
The Leftosphere Strikes Back
After seething for weeks over the damage caused Roman Polanski's favorite activist group (ACORN), Think Progress has struck back against an organization as equally institutionally corrupt on the right, Kitty Werthmann.
Werthmann, an aged, suspiciously white woman who watched to Nazi rise to power in Austria as she was growing up, gave a speech telling a pimp and prostitute how to commit fraud against the federal government to support the trafficking of children for purposes of prostitution noting the similarities she saw between the cult of personality that propelled Hitler into power and those backing President Obama with similar unrestrained fervor.
But Think Progress' sting operation wasn't done just yet.
In the most damning bit of investigative journalism since Geraldo penetrated Al Capone's vault, an undercover Think Progress staffer actually got Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN)—who was speaking in a room somewhere at the same conference— to autograph a CD of Werthmann's speech.
Damning evidence
As a result of this travesty, Nancy Pelosi began working with the House of Representatives on a bill to immediately defund Minnesota.
President Obama could not be reached for comment as this article went to press, as he was pitching his health-care plan on Kathy Griffin: My Life on the D-List.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:10 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 213 words, total size 2 kb.
September 28, 2009
Moby or Maybe: The Real Extremists are on the Left
Over the weekend a person on Facebook
created a poll asking if President Obama should be assassinated. Results of the survey were unknown, and Facebook quickly closed the poll, suspended the user, and contacted the Secret Service.
Left wing blog such as the Huffington Post and the Political Carnival conveniently had screen captures of the poll before it was removed, and other left wing blogs and commenters are having a field day with the story, trumpeting this as existence of proof that Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, (insert conservative pundit here) is responsible of stirring up right wing violence.
They're only missing two things.
- Evidence that the person who posted the poll was serious, and not a Kilgore Trout-type moby looking to manufacture evidence of hate, and;
- if the person who posted created this poll was serious, that mainstream conservative television and radio show personalities are responsible for their views.
As is so often the case before facts as known, these liberals respond by making knee-jerk, emotional decisions, just as they did last week when the body of Census worker Bill Sparkman was found dead with the word "fed" scrawled on his chest in a remote area where illegal drug growth and manufacture is common.
The simple truth is that we don't know what we don't know.
We still don't know why Bill Sparkman was killed, and don't know the underlying reason behind it. That hasn't kept liberals from blaming conservatives. And now these same angry souls are claiming that conservative media are somehow behind this Facebook poll.
But we don't know who created this poll. We don't know if they are conservatives. We don't know if they are radical leftists attempting to find the sort of corruption on the right as James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles so easily uncovered on the left. We don't even know if the person who posted this poll is American, much less influenced by American conservative media figures, and it would not be beyond the ability of Canadian liberals to post such a poll as bait, knowing they would be immune from the Secret Service's reach (the "Kids in the Hall" defense).
What we do know is that history clearly shows that leftists are far more prone to violence than conservatives, and that the reactionary hatred on the political left runs far deeper than it does on the right.
CBS News blog Politcal Hotsheet captures this seething anger in just the second comment to their entry about the poll, as they capture a leftist hoping that the person who created the poll surrenders, and then is murdered by police.
The violence that leftists see is inferred; the violence they preach is explicit.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
06:06 PM
| Comments (27)
| Add Comment
Post contains 468 words, total size 3 kb.
1
There's a history of the left saying stupid things while pretending to be on the right. Not long ago a man was tracked down who was making racist threats to Obama online. He was a black lefty trying to make the right look bad.
Posted by: Steve at September 28, 2009 06:24 PM (9aMzN)
2
>>"We still don't know why Bill Sparkman was killed, and don't know the underlying reason behind it."
Or even if he was killed. The police say they have not ruled out suicide.
Posted by: Steve at September 28, 2009 06:26 PM (9aMzN)
3
I can't imagine anoyone serious about killing Obama, particularly a conservative. If Obama left office, it would result in a Biden presidency and the fact that Obama's agenda would surely pass through congress. If Biden could not be president for some reason (mental incompetence) then we would have Nancy P. So I would say that Obama is the safest man in the country from a conservative aspect.
Posted by: David at September 28, 2009 06:45 PM (QRHVt)
4
I was in grade school when the PA system suddenly interrupted class with the news that President Kennedy had been shot. I never want to see such as day in the U.S. again.
The left howls now about the incipient violence of their opponents, but repugnant fantasies about killing Bush surfaced often during the last 8 years, always with a quick disclaimer (from the UK Telegraph):
Nicholson Baker wishes to make one thing clear: if George W. Bush is shot dead tomorrow - or any other day - it won't be his fault. "I don't want to kill the President," he states simply, but with passion. "The thought of the assassination of the President, or even of his untimely death, makes me wince."
Few novelists feel obliged to defend themselves against charges of complicity in a possible murder, but the gentle, mild-mannered Baker has recently had no choice. In his latest novel, Checkpoint, a would- be assassin discusses with a friend the killing of George W. Bush.
Posted by: zhombre at September 28, 2009 07:07 PM (zzL++)
5
>>"I was in grade school when the PA system suddenly interrupted class with the news that President Kennedy had been shot."
Relevent to this discussion is the fact that he was shot by an ardent communist. And that the American left then nevertheless blamed his death on "right-wing extremists".
Posted by: Steve at September 28, 2009 08:55 PM (tJI4L)
6
Yep, people of a particular type are still blaming Kennedy's assassination on "Texas" for lack of a better word.
Posted by: ECM at September 28, 2009 09:00 PM (q3V+C)
7
Its a shame of what this country have come to god bless us all and may the lord protect us..
Posted by: Chris Brown at September 28, 2009 10:06 PM (Fhzt2)
8
Great Post CY.
Given many of the comments by Libs on this very blog, I think that the term 'Moby' doesn't quite sum up what the Left wants.
Liberals actually want to kill the President.
Posted by: brando at September 28, 2009 11:37 PM (LjEkE)
9
I actually disagree with some of these opinions on the Left over the Kentucky census worker. Obviously it wasn't a tea-bagger or birther who committed the murder because the word "fed" was spelled correctly.
But Dan Riehl over at Carnivorous Conservative showed typical true colors of sleaze by suggesting the murdered census worker was a child predator and that would explain his murder. NO!!! The Left have no reason to suspect people on the Right are this sleazy and capable of these things. Just paranoia.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 29, 2009 11:11 AM (OX5qU)
10
Zhombre,
To give another side to the Kennedy killing. I was in High School in Louisiana. Dallas is only a few hours away. When Kennedy was killed and they announced the fact, the whole school stood and cheered. There had actually been newspaper headlines warning the president not to come south as it would result in his death. The problem was the LBJ was much worse and was armed with enouth rightous indignation that he was able to push through his sociaization of the US and the Vietnam war.
Posted by: David at September 29, 2009 11:39 AM (dccG2)
11
"Relevent to this discussion is the fact that he was shot by an ardent communist. And that the American left then nevertheless blamed his death on "right-wing extremists"."
It tells you all you need to know about their perspective when they consider a communist "right-wing".
Lipiwitz -- shut up or at least attempt to make sense.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at September 29, 2009 11:52 AM (ZJ/un)
12
>>"Dan Riehl over at Carnivorous Conservative showed typical true colors of sleaze by suggesting the murdered census worker was a child predator and that would explain his murder."
Why do you object to this? You think that only people on the left are entitled to engage in speculation? You've been speculationg for a while that he was killed by extremist right wingers, without bothering yourself with your total lack of evidence.
Posted by: Steve at September 29, 2009 01:46 PM (xeP0T)
13
Good morning,
IÂ’ve read this blog for a number of years; enjoy both BobÂ’s posts and the comments. DonÂ’t think IÂ’ve ever commented before, but I just have to ask: What did you guys do to get saddled with an asshole troll like Lipiwitz?
Posted by: JBHood at September 29, 2009 02:42 PM (nN40A)
14
Obviously it wasn't a tea-bagger or birther who committed the murder because the word "fed" was spelled correctly.
Posted by Lipiwitz at September 29, 2009 11:11 AM
Well isn't that special. Our resident troll not only throws out a sexual reference but adds, an insult of stupidity to boot. Ha!
Ladies and Gentlemen I give you the modern day Democrat. Not your fathers Democrat party any longer.
Posted by: LH at September 29, 2009 06:12 PM (zwiyV)
15
JBHood, These are paid trolls via George Soros and Company. All right leaning blogs have them. We point and laugh, point and laugh. Whacked out nut jobs to be sure. Who are they convincing. No one.
Posted by: LH at September 29, 2009 06:15 PM (zwiyV)
16
Once again we are a totally divided nation. Many on the right are preparing for a conflict. The left is getting more and more zealous in their attacks. Many of them want a confrontation. I dont think enough of them realize how many on the right have military and law enforcement backgrounds. They seem to think that once it starts the military will squash the right and the left will inherit the nation. I wish I could see into the future. For now... Lock and load boys... it could get ugly.
Posted by: capt26thga at September 29, 2009 08:10 PM (bGS/L)
17
Obviously you're new here LH, I'm not a paid troll and most everybody here knows it. I'm just a dick and do it for free.
I don't know why you object to it Steve. You people have mastered the art of whining over the "Left's speculation". It has nothing to do with the Left. It has to do with disrespecting somebody who died tragically and his family in mourning over speculation without any level of substance to try to protect some racist paranoid idiot like Michelle Bachmann. Why would anybody throw that out there. How sick. People like you Steve have rubbed your privates raw over the ACORN hack videos and now everybody dead or alive must be child predators so people like you will drop your drawers and IQs on command. Quick, run and fetch a talking point.
And capt26thug -- the Left are in control of the World's most powerful military now. Bring your pea-shooters and misspelled "soshalist" signs. We'll be OK. If you can't even win elections, we don't think you can reload a gun quick enough to dodge the predator drones. Rest assured, the Left will have a pool going and somebody with $5 on the square will be rooting for ya!
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 29, 2009 08:26 PM (OX5qU)
18
Lipiwitz is an dick but he's right about the predator accusations, they're messed up
and David, what kind of effed place did you grow up in where they would celebrate a man's death?
Posted by: MAModerate at September 29, 2009 09:55 PM (5X+Ea)
19
"It has to do with disrespecting somebody who died tragically and his family in mourning"
Lipiwitz - Sort of like you and your buddies using that woman who just died in Boehner's district as a fresh trophy for need for health care reform? Hypocrisy, thy name is Lipsofshit.
The ACORN videos speak for themselves, thankfully, and the only ones in denial about them are the retards on the left. I'm wondering what Patrick Gaspard, Bertha Lewis' right hand man in the White House is thinking right about now. And Lippy, I thought you didn't care about ACORN, more lies from you tonight.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 29, 2009 11:48 PM (3O5/e)
20
>>"It has to do with disrespecting somebody who died tragically and his family in mourning over speculation without any level of substance to try to protect some racist paranoid idiot like Michelle Bachmann."
It's a good thing you're not doing any of that horrible "speculation" crap yourself. Oh, wait.... you are. You just happen to LIKE your own racist paranoid speculation and to dislike other peoples.
In others words, you're a raging hypocrite. Which is just another way of saying a lefty.
Posted by: Steve at September 29, 2009 11:55 PM (VeJvr)
21
Steve has special view on this things
Posted by: jessica at September 30, 2009 01:10 AM (E6tGG)
22
MayorDaleyRocks -- That wasn't disrespectful, it was fact. I don't recall anybody on the Left referring to this deceased girl from Boehner's district as a potential child molester.
And the whole Patrick Gaspard nonsense -- has anybody actually PROVED it? So far...NO! Just more BS from the opinion generators to the dimwitted echo chamber who can't spell Google.
And Steve, where am I paranoid and/or a racist. Because of the idiot Michelle Bachmann? She could be black, yellow, green, orange or polka-dot and she would STILL be an idiot. That's not racist. What, only white people are allowed to recognize idiots? You're probably white and think I'm an idiot. Racist.
Thanks MAModerate (I think). There were actually quite a few people who celebrated JFK's death because they were paranoid and thought he was a Communist. You get dumb people, add propaganda from highly paid opinion generators and you end up with an obedient echo chamber who will never stray too far into intelligent thought because it's "Liberal". Socialist, Communist, Fascist, Racist...it's all the same. Indoctrinated into believing Google, a library, encyclopedias, anything that proves truth is "Liberal" and must be ignored at all costs. What's the difference between ignorance and stupidity? Ignorance is CHOOSING to be stupid. There's a reason why Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin didn't go the the 9/12 rally is DC. They didn't want to be seen with them.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 30, 2009 01:31 AM (bhNGz)
23
"Lippy, I thought you didn't care about ACORN, more lies from you tonight." -- I don't! I'm just sick and tired of hearing about it. I have never in my life seen such an obsessive frenzy over something as what has been seen from the Right over ACORN. My GAWD!!! ACORN this and ACORN that and ACORN ACORN ACORN WAAH WAAH WAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!! We get it! You don't like ACORN! Now you get it...WE DON'T CARE!!!
Has anybody even bothered to do a little fact checking on ACORN since the two hacks became infamous? Probably not. Reality check time:
ACORN has not lost one single cent in federal funding. The Republicans put forth dueling legislation that are worded differently so now the Defund ACORN Act(s) have to go before a committee to get the wording corrected and agreed upon. Oopsie! And then there is this pesky little nuisance called the Constitution which strictly prohibits whats called a Bill Of Attainder which is legislation targeting one person or entity. If a group is guilty of corruption than legislation must be worded to apply to ALL groups guilty of corruption and not just one and according to the wording of the Defund ACORN Act(s), the Democrats have compiled a list of organizations that qualify to lose all federal funding (and plan on pursuing) including: Halliburton, KBR, McDonald/Douglas, Lockheed Martin, Blackwatere/Xe, Armor Group, Wackenhut, Boeing, Dynacorp. Titan, Bechtel, Aegis, etc. These are companies that have actually been found guilty of violations set forth in the Defund ACORN Act(s)and have had to pay massive fines and/or had employees convicted for crimes while acting in the capacity of a government contractor. Sounds like a pretty icky mess the Republicans face if they try to deny ACORN of funding. Your faith is ill placed.
Not to mention that despite the nuisance the hacks caused the housing division of ACORN, the voter registration division of ACORN is still strong and going. ALL voter registration investigations have ended with arrests of temp workers who broke the law but ACORN has operated 100% within the confines of the law. Nevada is the only one left. The voter registration investigations have caused the forced resignation of Alberto Gonzales and the behind closed doors testimony of Karl Rove and Harriet Myers which may lead to indictments over the firing of US Attorneys who found no wrong doing on behalf of ACORN.
Now your frenzy is getting so desperate and pathetic that your playing six degrees of separation with ACORN and White House staff. Pathetic. Funny but pathetic.
Not to mention we all know the truth about what you think about ACORN and why you're targeting them:
Activist Conservatives Opposing Registering Ni##ers.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 30, 2009 02:46 AM (bhNGz)
24
>>"where am I paranoid and/or a racist. Because of the idiot Michelle Bachmann?"
You are racist and paranoid where you attribute Sparkmans death to crazed white southern right-wing extremists. That's where.
And where you somehow manage to tie Bachmann to Sparkmans death.
Technically speaking, Lipshits, you're a loon.
You're also a pedophile who richly deserves to be behind bars.
Posted by: Steve at September 30, 2009 03:38 PM (x5n1r)
25
That is a bald faced lie Steve. I never linked Sparkman's death to crazy southern right-wing extremist (you). I originally posted in another CY blog that I believed it was the action of back woods type people similar to what you'd find in the movie "Deliverance. People who have no party affiliation, do not vote, couldn't tell you who the President and don't care. They're cut off from the outside World. That's who I believe killed Sparkman, not tea-baggers.
I never linked Bachmann to Sparkman's death. Who needs a dead census worker to establish Bachmann as a total tool?
And I'm not a pedophile, I'm a Democrat. 8>)
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 30, 2009 05:28 PM (OX5qU)
26
Posted by Lipiwitz at September 30, 2009 02:46 AM
You've got some weapons grade crazy in that comment right there, proving once again that liberalism is a mental disease.
Thanks for sharing! Do you need a license to be so stupid where you live?
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 30, 2009 06:33 PM (3O5/e)
27
"And the whole Patrick Gaspard nonsense -- has anybody actually PROVED it?"
Lippy - Has anyone disproved what was written at American Spectator or Red State? Now you also have Stanley Kurtz at NRO confirming details. Ben Smith's sophistry at Politico was meaningless and a distraction. You've got nothing and are in denial once again.
"MayorDaleyRocks -- That wasn't disrespectful, it was fact."
Holding her out as a symbol for healthcare reform while her family was grieving was flat out disrespectful and ghoulish. You have no moral compass.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 30, 2009 07:59 PM (3O5/e)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Silence! Do Not Speak Ill of Chicago!
A Chicago television station has been
forced to pull a story that many of Chicago's residents don't want the 2016 Olympics in their city. I'd be more worried about Chicago's residents if I was an Olympic athlete or spectator.
From 2000-2008 there were 4,855 homicides in Chicago, though there have been just 285 so far this year.
Hope and Change! And a more fitting logo:
"We'll send one of ours to the podium. We'll send one of yours to the morgue."
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:38 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.
1
With the out-of-control violence in that town right now, I don't see how they can expect to get the Olympics.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 28, 2009 02:08 PM (OX5qU)
2
Atlanta has a much higher homocide rate than Chicago.
And who among us can forget the carnage wreaked upon Olympic athletes when the games were held there?
Posted by: Alex at September 28, 2009 05:41 PM (TOox3)
3
Alex,
I live in Atlanta, and attended many events - it is escaping me what "carnage wrecked upon the Olympic athletes" you are referring to. Maby in your dreams, but not to the athletes.
If you are referring to the bombing at Centennial Park, that was horrible - but no olympic athletes experienced any "carnage." My son was in the park that night, and we had FBI guests in our home a week later. They were interviewing anyone that was in the park for clues. It was a very unfortunate incident - but did not detract from a great Olympics that helped Atlanta shine - the positive impact on Atlanta is still being felt today.
Sorry, but your revision of history is not accurate.
Yours truely,
Slimedog
Posted by: slimedog at September 28, 2009 09:18 PM (u/SHz)
4
"With the out-of-control violence in that town right now, I don't see how they can expect to get the Olympics."
Lipiwitz - Why couldn't that putz Obama do anything about the violence when he was a State Senator and a U.S. Senator from Illinois? He has been perpetually ineffective.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 28, 2009 09:47 PM (3O5/e)
5
daleyrocks -- apparently you're a huge fan of Mayor Daley from Chicago. Why don't you ask him?
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 29, 2009 08:17 AM (OX5qU)
6
With the out-of-control violence in that town is right.
Posted by: jessic at September 30, 2009 12:01 AM (E6tGG)
7
Ya think, Lippy? What has Obama ever done to actually reduce crime? You got anything? He pushed those anti-profiling bills the cops hate which don't make sense, so he's got that going for him, which is nice. He's also for strict gin control so the criminals can prey on innocent citizens at will, so he's got that too.
You got anything?
Posted by: daleyrocks at October 01, 2009 11:07 PM (3O5/e)
8
I hear Munich is a peaceful city.
Wait ...
Posted by: DoorHold at October 04, 2009 11:47 AM (EeTHH)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 26, 2009
You Can't Prevent Stupid
With all the class you've come to expect from left-wing sensationalists, Think Progress bellows:
Uninsured 22-Year-Old Boehner Constituent Dies From Swine Flu.
And like the majority of issues presented through blinders of opportunistic hatred, the actual reality of the situation is a bit different than the community-based reality would like to cobble together.
As a more credible account notes, 22-year-old Kimberly Young died because she made the decision not to seek care until it was too late to save her life. Friends claim the proximate cause of decision not to seek care was because she did not have health insurance, but that is a fig leaf, at best.
Young knew she did not feel well, and she knew this for almost two weeks. Like every American, she's been inundated with doom-pronouncing news stories about H1N1, its symptoms, and what it can lead to if not treated. She made the choice to ignore her symptoms.
As a recently-graduated double major, Young presumably had the intelligence to use both telephones and computers, but she made the choice not to find out what sort of free or low-cost options were available for her in her area. And rather obviously, she chose to ignore the signs of distress her body was issuing until it was too late for even the best medical care in the world to save her life.
Kimberly Young didn't die because she didn't have health insurance. Kimberly Young died because she made a series of bad decisions.
While Think Progress and other liberal blogs can speculate that Young would have gone to the doctor if she had the kind of government-run healthcare they would force upon America, the simple fact of the matter is that their words are, well, just words.
People make horrible decisions detrimental to their health every single day. They eat too much. They drink to much. They smoke too much. They don't exercise. They don't get enough sleep. And shockingly, many people—regardless of whether or not they have insurance—absolutely hate going to the doctor, and will not go until they are in absolute misery or fear for their lives.
There is no reason whatsoever to think a poorly-thought-out, paper-work impeded, fine-driven bureaucratic nightmare like Obamacare would save the late Kimberly Young or any other American.
The simple fact of the matter is that the aggravation and pain government-run healthcare will add to the already unpleasant stress of the doctor's office will make people that more resistant to seeking care.
Let's be honest, especiall since Think Progress is incapable of it.
John Boehner's opposition to the fiasco that is Obamacare didn't kill Kimberly Young. Widespread Republican and Democratic opposition to a fatally-flawed bill offered up by radicals unwilling to compromise didn't kill her, either. Her own bad decisions led her not to seek care. Her own bad decisions put Kimberly Young in the morgue, when all she had to do was take advantage of existing health care right in front of her.
But something else is also true.
The one-size-fits-all, join-us-or-we'll-fine-you approach favored by the radical left will make men and women already disinclined to seek healthcare even more resistant to going to doctors. There is little doubt that further government intrusion will make the experience even more bureaucratic, impersonal, and unpleasant.
It is perhaps more credible to claim that the additional pain Obamacare will cause will create more cautionary tales—more Kimberly Youngs—that it will save.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:00 PM
| Comments (37)
| Add Comment
Post contains 577 words, total size 4 kb.
1
She did not even need health insurance. All she had to do was walk into a hospital emergency room, where they are required by law to treat her, insurance or no.
Posted by: Steve at September 26, 2009 08:16 PM (6sELJ)
2
indeed. I am one of those who felt ill for a bit too long, and walked into an emergency room, told them I had no coverage, was able to pay an up front fee(or I'd have been forced to ***gasp*** wait. . . . .5 more minutes. . . for them to get a social worker). I guess that means, as I am still alive (last I checked) that I am alive because I had no insurance. Hey, makes as much sense as their claims.
Posted by: JP at September 26, 2009 08:44 PM (VxiFL)
3
Yeah, Steve! She could go into that ER and be bankrupt in no time....with no job, student loans, etc.
Jesus, Steve, have you ever even seen a hospital bill? That trip you tell her take for the flu would run her between 500 to a 1000 dollars. Gee, I wonder why someone in her condition would have waited.
Between the times you people are rude and discourteous and the times you just plain don't know what you're talking about, I sometimes wonder how you manage to wipe your own rears without Ayn Rand's instructions.
Posted by: timb at September 26, 2009 09:21 PM (iVFbj)
4
Reading the article, she 'eventually went to an urgent care facility in Hamilton where she was given pain medication and then sent home.' This was apparently after she had been ill for some time but before she became critically ill.
It is possible that, if she had waited one more day to see a doctor, her condition would have been a bit more serious and would have gotten better attention. It is hard to conclude that she would have gotten more aggressive treatment if she had sought medical care earlier.
Sometimes, sick people die even with medical care.
Posted by: MikeInOhio at September 26, 2009 09:22 PM (mnCO0)
5
I don't know what kind of idiot Think Progress takes their readers for, but even with health insurance, it is very likely that Kimberly would have had to pay for a doctor's visit, and for the prescription for Tamiflu, that together would have probably saved her life. Total: probably less than $200. My health insurance, a pretty good BC/BS plan, does not cover doctor's visits or prescriptions, and neither does that of many other Amnericans.
While what happened to Kimberly is of course very sad, you are absolutely correct: her death was very likely caused by her own bad decisions. It would be interesting to learn what kind of car she drove. Was it a late model car which saddled her with $4-500 dollar a month payments? Did an expensive iPhone rest on her badside table, and a recently purchased HDTV flat-screen TV grace her living room? Perhaps not, but many people have stretched their budget to the limit with purchases of things they could have probably done without, and when the need arises to spend a couple of hundred dollars for a doctors visit and some medicine, find that their checking account is empty and their credit cards are maxed out.
Anyway, lets pray for Kimberly and her family, and condemn Think Progress for trying to make political hay out of her tragic and unnecessary early death.
Posted by: Spartan79 at September 26, 2009 09:24 PM (7icJM)
6
I'd much rather live in a free nation where citizens die of the choices they made, rather than in a nation where citizen die of choices made for them by the state. Think Progress evidently thinks otherwise Live has no risk free options. Does the ieft think Obamacare will make us immortal?
Posted by: DavidL at September 26, 2009 09:51 PM (AK8DM)
7
The Dayton Daily News is reporting that her parents have been told she did not have swine flu/HINU. She died of complications from pneumonia, which is what she apparently had contracted. See the article currently on the www.daytondailynews.com website.
Posted by: Armitage at September 27, 2009 12:04 AM (tO7WO)
8
@Timb 9:21. I've worked in insolvency for 18 years and have never seen anybody bankrupt from a visit to the ER. And I've never seen anybody who was dead declare bankruptcy though many of them look as if they have to work at casting a shadow. And for all that, the "studies" routinely cited that attribute 60 percent of bankruptcy filings to unpaid medical bills are wildly, and I think deliberately, over stated and distorted. This is a blatant use of science to advance a political agenda and the primary author of that original Harvard study, Elizabeth Warren, now is employed by the Obama administration.
Posted by: zhombre at September 27, 2009 12:11 AM (zzL++)
9
Jesus, Steve, have you ever even seen a hospital bill? That trip you tell her take for the flu would run her between 500 to a 1000 dollars. Gee, I wonder why someone in her condition would have waited.
Let's say all of what you said is true: is it better to be bankrupt or dead? I'm no legal or financial expert, but I'm going to, generally, go with being bankrupt + alive rather than solvent + dead.
Posted by: ECM at September 27, 2009 12:19 AM (q3V+C)
10
>>"Jesus, Steve, have you ever even seen a hospital bill? That trip you tell her take for the flu would run her between 500 to a 1000 dollars."
They don't require payment.
Posted by: Steve at September 27, 2009 12:49 AM (A+qpW)
11
>>"Between the times you people are rude and discourteous.."
I guess we can't all match the civility and courtesy of lefty trolls.
Don't you have a Bush doll you should be sticking pins in?
Posted by: Steve at September 27, 2009 12:52 AM (A+qpW)
12
Last time I was here, I wrote about the nonsense that the right-wing terrorists were whining about at their little "town hall" meetings and the only defense you rednecks gave was something like "You lefties spent 8 yrs badmouthing Bush so now we get a chance to badmouth Obama blah blah blah," and that was your only defense.
Now, as typical redneck dropouts, you go back to blaming the victim in this swine flu case.
For christ sake, you all think that anyone who doesn't have insurance "chooses" not to have it? You've been living in the right-wing nut echo chamber for too long and now it's too late for you. So go ahead, blame the victim. You'll all feel better until someone you love dies from lack of insurance, by then you'll be blaming Obama for your loss.
Posted by: gustav at September 27, 2009 02:10 AM (NZLoi)
13
Steve wrote in response to his nonsense about going to an emergency room and telling us they are required to treat you there and...
"They don't require payment."
This is an absolute lie. They will bill you and if you don't pay they will hire a collection agency to call you constantly insisting that you pay up. Don't listen to this Steve re emergency room care. He doesn't have a clue.
Posted by: gustav at September 27, 2009 02:18 AM (NZLoi)
14
For christ sake, you all think that anyone who doesn't have insurance "chooses" not to have it?
No. But if this young lady claimed she couldn't afford health insurance, she was badly mistaken.
See this article:
http://bacn.me/cer
$55 a month.
Posted by: XBradTC at September 27, 2009 03:04 AM (NimeM)
15
gustav - People here aren't trying to blame the poor woman here who died, they're taking issue with the brainless loons over at Think Progress, Washington Monthly and other fringe lefty sites who are trying to make political hay out of her death by somehow making a miraculous connection between it and Boehner's opposition to ObamaCare. Can you explain the connection please other than just a desire of the left to ghoulishly publicize this woman's death?
Boehner isn't against health care reform. He's just against the version floated by Democrats in the House, which the fringe left dishonestly trumpets as him being for the status quo. They also complain about Republicans not participating in the process - remind me about Pelosi shutting them out and trying to ram it through before the summer recess. Republicans can't block this, it's the Democrats who can't get out of their own way and get a bill passed, such is the popularity of their own proposals.
Gustav - Even with Obama's reform bill in place, can you guarantee me this woman would have sought medical care or would not have died. Absolutely not. Given that ObamaCare would not even take effect until 2013, the dishonesty of the Think Progress piece is astounding, but dishonesty is a hallmark of that place.
How much extra would you have paid out of your own pocket to pay for medical care for this woman in addition to your own medical insurance costs gustav? That is in effect what ObamaCare will have us do - engage in massive cost shifting. What's your price tag gustav?
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 27, 2009 03:07 AM (3O5/e)
16
far from resistant about going to seek care if obamacare passes. i personally will go to the doctors at a drop of the hat. I hope others like me will do the same thing and explode the cost of the healthcare to levels never imagined. It seems like the only way to stop these socialists is the Reagan way. bankrupt them. and I will ensure I do my part in this regards. Free healthcare...what could go wrong. What if the millions of people against this bill do the same and flood the hospitals, emercengy rooms, doctor offices for months until the system fails?
Posted by: unseen at September 27, 2009 03:14 AM (aVGmX)
17
The broken American health care system that Think Progress attempted to make Kimberly a martyr for really appears to have come through and done its job with heroic efforts to save her life when she finally sought to utilize it. She didn't need insurance either!
Epic fail on the martyrdom attempt.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 27, 2009 03:36 AM (3O5/e)
18
45,001 that have died this year due to lack of insurance. Glen Beck was right last year when he said "getting well in America could kill you!"
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/PainManagement/story?id=4101741&page=1
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 27, 2009 08:48 AM (OX5qU)
19
"45,001 that have died this year due to lack of insurance."
Lipiwitz - Prove the causation. Go!
Why can't your party get its act together to pass a bill that won't go into effect until 2013?
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 27, 2009 11:44 AM (3O5/e)
20
Yeah, how many free clinics are out there besides county hospitals and any other hospital that accepts federal funds in return for treating the poor and old.
This is a Darwin Award.
Posted by: Federale at September 27, 2009 12:01 PM (I6UoW)
21
Hmmm...
I wonder if she had a cell phone and an internet connection. If she did she had enough money to purchase health care insurance-she chose the toys over her own health.
Also, if everyone without insurance goes "bankrupt" if the visit the ER why is it that millions of illegals/"poor people" (liberal code word for blacks) could get credit to buy houses, cars and other stuff? Perhaps it is because of racism on the part of the leftard liberals and their Corruptocrat party.
Posted by: Nahanni at September 27, 2009 01:08 PM (S4wMM)
22
i do have health insurance and i think it is expensive but i slipped on a wet spot in my carport and i was able to see a doctor at an urgent care clinic, i did wait 2 days hoping to self heal, after treatment i owed 0(zero)in co-pay, i am on bedrest until wednesday when the doc will check my arm again, i pay for insurance and i think all should do the same.
Posted by: duncan at September 27, 2009 01:09 PM (c7vU0)
23
"45,001 that have died this year due to lack of insurance."
I'm not familiar with the study that reached this conclusion but I know its author was collaborator with Elizabeth Warren on the medical expense leading to bankruptcy study I cited earlier. For that reason, I have to be skeptical. I suspect a lot of alleged science is being manipulated to back up political agendas. Global warming is the primary example.
Posted by: zhombre at September 27, 2009 01:19 PM (zzL++)
24
"Let's have an honest debate!"
President Obama keeps saying that, but he and his acolytes, Liposhitz being a prime example, keep proving incapable of the task.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 27, 2009 02:16 PM (3O5/e)
25
Depends how you define debate. The Stepford Libs define debate as compliance with what they say.
Posted by: zhombre at September 27, 2009 04:16 PM (zzL++)
26
If the Great One passes his massive change in medical care. This woman would still die. The fact is that all she had to do was go to the doctor. You don't have to have insurance. A visit to the doctor with the appropriate lab and X-ray would cost between $100 and $150(slightly more than going to the movie, why don't we socialize the movie industry?). I know because I am a physician and I recently went for a check-up. If she was terribly ill, then the ER would take her and she would be hospitalized. Social workers would assist her with the bill and arranging payment. The fact is that a large number of people could have Medicaid or Medicare but are too lazy to sign up.
Consider this. Obama killed this woman. He has been in office for 8 months and has done absolutely nothing to get the economy back. Instead he keeps trying to pass big ticket items like socialized medicine and energy taxes that are dragging us down. If he was concentrating on the one issue that matters (the economy stupid), then this woman would have had a job and thus insurance.
I The Great One passes any of his measures, the subsequent economic impact will make the Great Depression look trivial.
Posted by: David C at September 27, 2009 05:21 PM (QRHVt)
27
Gustav
She was no victim, she was a young very sick woman who made some deliberate choices that proved to fatal for her. She could have gone to an ER and with her symptoms, she would be admitted and treated and she would be very much alive to received those dreaded hospital bills AFTER her hospitalization. Hospital ERs from all 50 states will treat anybody regardless of pay source. How do I know, I work in a Cardiac unit and we get non-insured patients all the time .
And gustav, my dad has no damn insurance and he got treated and my parents contacted help from their alderman and their hospital bill was resolved . FYI, when I checked the hospital bill, you can pay it in manageable installments and I have no doubt that her parents would had help her pay those bills and her friends might do a little bit of fund raising for her to pay her bills .
There is no such thing as free Health care and no amount of Obama Care or public option or taxes is ever enough to pay for free health care and no amount of assurances or statements made by you or the President or any elected official and academics will ever change that fact. The UK had drastically reduced their military expenditures and they still have financial problems as well as rationing within their health care system. Look at the disastrous examples in Tennessee and Massachusetts, see how their state budgets strain to fund their state sponsored health plans and how successful were they .
Gustav, theories are nice, problem is, reality trumps academia and government sponsored experts.
Posted by: Will at September 27, 2009 07:04 PM (4sHuN)
28
>>"the only defense you rednecks gave was something like "You lefties spent 8 yrs badmouthing Bush so now we get a chance to badmouth Obama blah blah blah," and that was your only defense."
Boy, you really slapped us down there! What makes you think we need a "defense" to criticize Obama and what's wrong with that one?
Posted by: Steve at September 27, 2009 07:26 PM (DJ/fs)
29
>>"They will bill you and if you don't pay they will hire a collection agency to call you constantly insisting that you pay up. Don't listen to this Steve re emergency room care. He doesn't have a clue."
Then you will have no objection if Congress and the states stop allocating money to reimburse the hospitals for treating people with no insurance, since that money is not needed according to you.
Posted by: Steve at September 27, 2009 07:30 PM (DJ/fs)
30
The US taxes`paid to hospitals to cover emergency room treatment is for people without means. The hospital can seek to recover charges from ER patients.
You liberals out there may be interested, but probably not, to know that The First Lady's hospital was, and is, in receipt of millions of our tax dollars to provide ER care. The First Lady wisely devised a scheme whereby the hospital shunted off its non paying, or poor, to other facilities before treatment. They kept the millions of our tax dollars. It is really good to know that the First Lady and her her husband forgoed the millions available in the private marketplace so the could concentrate on helping people.
Posted by: davod at September 27, 2009 09:38 PM (GUZAT)
31
"Then you will have no objection if Congress and the states stop allocating money to reimburse the hospitals for treating people with no insurance, since that money is not needed according to you."
Steve - Can you point out where the other Steve said Congressional and state allocation of funds to hospitals to fund the care of nonpaying patients was not needed? I'm not finding in this thread, but perhaps you're having a Maureen Dowd moment.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 27, 2009 10:25 PM (3O5/e)
32
"They don't require payment."
This is an absolute lie. They will bill you and if you don't pay they will hire a collection agency to call you constantly insisting that you pay up. Don't listen to this Steve re emergency room care. He doesn't have a clue.
Posted by gustav at September 27, 2009 02:18 AM
No, it absolutely is not. They don't require payment before they'll deliver care. Do they want to get paid? Sure, they do. And they'll come looking for their money. But they don't require it in order to save a life.
Posted by: Pablo at September 27, 2009 11:50 PM (yTndK)
33
45,001 that have died this year due to lack of insurance. Glen Beck was right last year when he said "getting well in America could kill you!"
I was unaware that lack of insurance was a fatal condition. I suppose I should consider myself lucky to have lived through it, repeatedly. Why, the first few times, I didn't think anything of it. If only I'd have known that my lack of a premium bill to pay endangered my very life, I'd have insisted that the government force me to buy insurance.
Posted by: Pablo at September 27, 2009 11:59 PM (yTndK)
34
Too bad she wasn't searching out an abortion, she would have got a free one quite easily. Take that libtards.
Posted by: Federale at September 28, 2009 11:49 AM (ev309)
35
>>"Steve - Can you point out where the other Steve said .."
Not sure what you mean, I'm the only Steve commenting on this thread.
Posted by: Steve at September 28, 2009 05:01 PM (kp8i6)
36
"Steve - Can you point out where the other Steve said .."
Steve - Nevermind. Mixed up who was talking to who. Sorry.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 28, 2009 09:53 PM (3O5/e)
37
How many constituents of Nancy Peelousy and Barney Frankfurter died of AIDS? Was that the fault of Nancy and Barny?
Posted by: eaglewingz08 at September 29, 2009 02:55 PM (dv8zz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 25, 2009
Drudge's Easy Libel of the Military
Earlier today I noted that Drudge's link to the use of LRADs as "acoustic weapons" was
over the top, which he would have easily recognized on his own if he had simply applied logic to the very video he linked. Put simply, if an LRAD is being used as a weapon, various people would not be walking or standing
directly in front of it.
It's common sense.
But Matt Drudge is after headlines and eyeballs, not accuracy, and that is why his inflammatory link that screams SEE U.S. MILITARY SNATCH PROTESTER... is so detestable.
It simply does no show what he claims it shows.
Look at the very image Drudge uses as his screen capture.
How many things immediately jump out at you that scream Drudge is wrong? Don't see it? Watch the video, and then I'll go over it in detail:
You should have noticed right off the bat that neither of the uniforms shown in this clip by the men that jumped out of the Crown Victoria are those currently being worn by our military.
See the officer on the left? He's wearing woodland BDUs. No active duty American soldiers wears BDUs, they wear ACUs, which are an entirely different style of uniform with a radically different camouflage pattern. Oh, and you might want to take a look at his shoulder, where you can see what appears to be a muted version of a Pennsylvania State Police shoulder patch.
The second Officer apprehending the protestor is also wearing a camouflage pattern that is not military issue. The same with the driver.
Any semi-competent national media figure should be able to tell the difference between a military uniform and a police tactical uniform, and I strongly suspect Matt Drudge does.
I just don't think he gives a damn whether he accuses the military of snatching Americans in broad daylight if that helps his bottom line.
Update: For reasons I'll never be able to understand, some of my conservative blogging peers have decided that the video is staged... faked by the protesters themselves.
The reasons they cite are similar to mine—that the uniforms are wrong for the modern military and mis-matched—but for some reason, they assume it was a staged event or "performance art" instead of Drudge simply being wrong about a very real event.
These were police officers, carrying out a real arrest, probably at the behest of the riot police 20 feet away we see at the end of the video.
And if the shoulder patch doesn't convince you they were cops, the gun should.
Dead-center in the middle of the frame you can see the bottom of a duty holster and the handgun itself printing through the uniform.
This was a police arrest, not an illegal abduction of an American citizen by the military on U.S. soil as Matt Drudge would mislead you, nor a staged event by the protesters.
Update: Via email Lawhawk notes a story that has a photo of PA State Police wearing woodland BDUs.
And in an update at Hot Air, Ed has the photo that should settle this for once and for all.
Law enforcement confirms a police arrest.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:55 AM
| Comments (37)
| Add Comment
Post contains 539 words, total size 5 kb.
1
I doubt very many national media figures know the difference between a military uniform and a police tactical uniform; I know I don't. Isn't it more likely that Drudge just doesn't know what he's taking about than that he's lying to get viewers? He certainly should be faulted for interpreting what he was seeing before knowing what the facts really are.
Posted by: John at September 25, 2009 11:38 AM (n6ipG)
2
The Air Force and especially Navy operator types are still using the older woodland and 3 color desert BDUs for use in areas where the pattern works better than say ACU, or the new airman pattern or woodland digital uniforms.
You are correct about the ID of the "troops" in the video as cops vs. military personnel.
The question is why are we letting leos on the street dress as paramilitary troops. It leads to this type of confusion for the average person.
Posted by: toaster802 at September 25, 2009 11:52 AM (vGjNf)
3
The question is why are we letting leos on the street dress as paramilitary troops.
And why would we have them wearing camo, and wearing it badly? Why would PA State troopers be doing a snatch and grab on this kid? If that's PA cops, there'd better be a damned good reason. And I can't think of one that explains 1) Why they didn't cuff the guy and 2) why they had so much trouble getting the guy into the car.
Posted by: Pablo at September 25, 2009 12:03 PM (yTndK)
4
Do I see an orange tip on the Police Officers gun at 24 secs in?
Posted by: Just asking at September 25, 2009 12:11 PM (zwiyV)
5
Just asking, yes, you probably did see orange markings. Many agencies do that to make sure there is not a mix-up between shotguns filled with non-lethals and shotguns filled with a lethal payload. I saw several officers so armed yesterday.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 25, 2009 12:16 PM (gAi9Z)
6
Jus for grins n giggles: The pattern that the dudes on the right are wearing is Crye Multicam www.cryeprecision.com
Used > mostly < by SF and some uberwannabe SWAT teams. Also in use surprisingly y the Latvian and Estonian Military here in Iraq. More than likely State Police in the 'Bdoos' trying to look hardcore... the lack of any other tactical gear and the placement of the sidearm (damned near impossible to get at in a 'stresstime environ') sez this 'snatch' was planned for a specific target, probably someone with an outstanding warrant. Just my 2 cents.....
Posted by: Big Country at September 25, 2009 12:29 PM (Z8fIq)
7
OK Try number two w/out accidental HTML
Just for grins n giggles: The pattern that the dudes on the right are wearing is Crye Multicam www.cryeprecision.com
Used -mostly- by SF and some uberwannabe SWAT teams. Also in use surprisingly by the Latvian and Estonian Military here in Iraq. More than likely State Police in the 'Bdoos' trying to look hardcore... the lack of any other tactical gear and the placement of the sidearm (damned near impossible to get at in a 'stresstime environ') sez this 'snatch' was planned for a specific target, probably someone with an outstanding warrant. Just my 2 cents.....
Posted by: Big Country at September 25, 2009 12:30 PM (Z8fIq)
8
I do not know who these guys are. I doubt if anybody here watching the video does either. The haircuts and military style uniforms indicate a tactical squad of some kind.
It should be noted that part of crowd control is snatching protesters from the crowd. Well done, it is a surgical procedure from which there is no way the target can escape. It should also be noted that BOTH the police AND military practice this technique. I would guess that it's probably police just because they shoved the targets head down to get him into the car. If you've watched the foreign services make a snatch they don't mind banging a struggling target around a little to help things go a little smoother.
I've never personally witnessed a real snatch, but have been volunteered to act as the snatchee in several practice sessions.
It must be kind of a scary thing, one minute all your buds are surrounding you in this one big EVENT, the next you're head down in the back seat of a vehicle under restraint. The more you struggle the more banged around you get. (Which is probably more of a feature than a bug.)
Posted by: Barney at September 25, 2009 12:42 PM (LcPv7)
9
It's hard to tell on the patch, but you may be right. As for the printing side arm, that would be your basic no-brainer. I'm pretty convinced, though I'm troubled by the need of police officers to put on their turkey hunting gear for a protest.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at September 25, 2009 12:47 PM (5aa4z)
10
Did any one used any handcuffs or arm restraints on the suspect? I can not actually see the video, but many refer to the lack of hand or arm restraints as a big pointer for being fake. That is SOP for all police.
Posted by: Picric at September 25, 2009 12:54 PM (oKOn9)
11
This seems real to me. If you look towards the end of the video, it looks like a kid puts his hands up in a manner to back away or back off. It seems because he is being directed to do this by a riot control officer. This officer is in the upper left of the video as the car takes off. He has a helmet w/ visor, beefed up with a heavy vest and it looks like he has flex cuffs hanging from his uniform ready to be used.
I say real. I worked at a PD department where we were given old cammies of different varieties that are swat teams used for all different things. So it isn't odd to see different uniform styles being worn by pd officers.
Posted by: Alex at September 25, 2009 12:54 PM (DqPEX)
12
The suspect isn't cuffed prior to being put in the vehicle. However LE may have changed tactics for the protest. It does make sense when you are arresting someone in a crowd that outnumbers you and is hostile to get the person out of there as quickly as possible.
You have two big guys get in the vehicle with him so there isn't to much of a danger of escaping until they can cuff and frisk.
The other thing that makes me think it's real is the gas. Looks like the car leaves through a cloud of tear gas. If the police were firing gas to break up the crowd the street would be closed to civilian traffic. So doubt it was performance art as some have stated in other threads.
Posted by: Waste93 at September 25, 2009 01:05 PM (KHM8y)
13
Picric, you are thinking about normal circumstances. Riots aren't normal, and if cops did the normal cuff-frisk-Miranda in front of a mob, it increases the risk of things getting out of hand. A law enforcement veteran at Hot Air says that what we witnessed was a "Scoop and run," which isn't unusual for these circumstances.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 25, 2009 01:06 PM (gAi9Z)
14
Isn't it common practice (I hope so) for law enforcement to place agents undercover in these types of protests/riots, to monitor for particularly violent elements?
I wonder if the "protester" being "arrested" wasn't undercover... and was in fact simply being extracted because the tear gas cloud was approaching and/or some other police action was about to take place that they didn't want to subject him to... but without blowing his cover.
No proof; just speculation.
Posted by: David at September 25, 2009 01:07 PM (ONWQS)
15
Wear of the ABU in Airforce is not mandatory until 2011. We are still allowed to wear the woodland BDU. However, besides this small correction I believe your conclusion on the matter is correct.
Posted by: Jay at September 25, 2009 01:07 PM (L8r/r)
16
I have personal experience with the people that perpetrated this. Last year the SDS (Anarchists)from the area were planning on attacking the Marine Corps recruiting station in Pittsburgh. Gathering of Eagles and others were on hand to form a barrier in front of the building. The local police were there and they were telling us all about how they have seen this before. It is street theatre, nothing more. The cops didn't react because they knew it was staged...plain and simple.
BTW...the USAF still wears the woodland BDU but would not have been involved in something like this.
Posted by: jnc1991 at September 25, 2009 01:14 PM (rJsAM)
17
Anyone suggesting this is real due to military or police like tactics being used...have you considered these guys may have had this type of training in the past. What about IVAW? There are plenty of libtards out there who hate our military enough to create propagand like this.
Has anyone bothered attempting to find out who the guy was being snatched? How about his friends? Wouldn't they be vocal about his status? If that were my buddy I would be calling the police station, his cell phone, his mother!
This is yet another attempt by Alex Jones to generate traffic to his conspiracy ministry....$$$ Good luck, Alex!
Posted by: jnc1991 at September 25, 2009 01:23 PM (rJsAM)
18
How about emailing the PA State Police to try to confirm? It's all over Drudge. Not like they don't know if it's their guys.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at September 25, 2009 01:32 PM (5aa4z)
19
While you are probably right about it being the cops judging by frame freezes on patch and holster, the idea that protesters would stage it isn't as outlandish and absurd as you paint it. They did the very exact thing several times in both Denver and St. Paul last year at the conventions. I saw it with my own eyes. After they finished the fake arrests they'd come back out and tell the crowd it was a demonstration.
Posted by: Caleb Howe at September 25, 2009 01:42 PM (VyIhp)
20
If you look at the other videos these armored riot police are in Alleghenny Port Authority vehicles
http://www.portauthority.org/PAAC/CompanyInfo/PoliceandSafety/PortAuthorityPolice/tabid/131/Default.aspx (reverse search the phone number on the side of suburbans). They maintain a fleet of unmarked vehicles and my guess is that is who owns the Crown Vic. My conclusions is this was performed by poorly trained (not a single scratch on ANY of their riot gear and brand new equipment) and poorly supervised (stuffing an unrestrained suspect in the back of a vehicle) Port Authority officers or even rented security officers. I believe the photo of the suspect on the ground is after the abduction judging by the tired look of the 'officer' their unkept clothes (bloused trousers) and the suspect in plastic cuffs (a white ziptie, all temporary cuffs I've ever seen were black). I think this is authentic and the Port Authority of Alleghenny COunty has a heck of a lot of explaining to do.
Posted by: Stan Redmond at September 25, 2009 01:51 PM (Lcbav)
21
I find it somewhat bizarre that anyone, whether military or police, would wear woodland camo in the middle of *Pittsburgh*.
Posted by: mwl at September 25, 2009 02:24 PM (DSeW+)
22
Don't know what the USAF wears, but i think CY is calling this right, for the above reasons. I also saw, at the end of the video, the vehicle drives between the riot unit. If this was a fake, no way would the protesters get a car through the riot unit without being fired upon.
Posted by: Penfold at September 25, 2009 03:06 PM (lF2Kk)
23
Re: "Any semi-competent national media figure should be able to tell the difference between a military uniform and a police tactical uniform"
why?
and, perhaps more importantly, why should urban police be wearing camo to demonstrations on city public streets in the first place? perhaps they want the demonstrators to think what Drudge jumped to . . . or perhaps they're idiots who don't understand the PR of demonstrations. chalk another one up for the militarization of the nation's police forces.
Posted by: po at September 25, 2009 03:15 PM (WZ/Yc)
24
Actually, I have a big problem with this that no one has brought up. Except for and extremely muted patch, none of these officers appears to be wearing anything that identifies them as the police. Part of the reason of a uniform is to identify the person of authority.
I don't particularly like the idea of the police becoming so militarized, particularly the wearing of bdu's. However, I think the use of military-style faded patches makes absolutely no sense. They are civilian police and should be self-identified as such.
The fact that we have a hard-time identifying who these gentlemen are is telling. I think the car is a big give away, as well as the armed guy in armor on the far left at the very end of the video.
(if you catch me in a really grumpy mood, I let you know what I think of the poor uniform policy that allows some police to wear long-sleeve t-shirts [with the word 'Police'] and jeans. Slobby all the way)
Posted by: ElamBend at September 25, 2009 04:18 PM (UAiWm)
25
FOX News:
Authorities, Wary of Violent Protests, Beef Up Security in Pittsburgh
Ahead of G-20 Summit
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
 By Joshua Rhett Miller
=====
So, there are military units in the area. Two battalions is a lot of firepower...
Plus, even if they are civilian police officers, why are civilian cops wearing military uniforms? (No, in a free nation, there is no rational excuse.)
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at September 25, 2009 04:51 PM (2idn5)
26
also: Google: "Beyond Conspiracy: Police State America." More than seventy references. Government websites, laws, etc.
Do some actual research - facts, evidence, proofs, references and resources - and you'll find that things don't look as rainbowie and warm fuzzy as many of you wish to believe.
All politicians are corrupt power-mad autocrats, except for the ones you like and support? Such corrupt and power-mad men and women would never turn America into a police state, especially the politicians you know and love??
Really?
Why does the objective evidence prove that you're wrong?
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at September 25, 2009 05:01 PM (2idn5)
27
Let's face it. No matter what way this was going to turn out, it couldn't be good for the left. Either this was a.) a hoax perpetrated by the nutroots or b.) it's the government. We now know it wasn't a.). It is b.) The local government in PGH is liberal. The state government in PA is run by liberals and the national government is run by Obama. So, it's Hope and Change in action.
Posted by: bemusedinPGH at September 25, 2009 05:17 PM (5iv1T)
28
If this guy was a double amputee and was repeatedly tased I might believe that they were cops. They should have tried to knock out his front teeth on the pavement too.
Do they have any duty to identify themselves before they stuff the dude in the car? Just wondering.
Posted by: Pinandpuller at September 25, 2009 05:38 PM (aRm4V)
29
I find it incredible that any police officer, much less multiple police officers, would stuff a perp into the back of their patrol car with out cuffs on.
Plus, the guy hasn't been searched and is still wearing his backpack.
What's in his pockets?
What's in the backpack?
Those are important questions to ask because he's got both hands free if he decides to dig out a weapon, etc.
That's not normal is it?
Posted by: Aye Chihuahua at September 25, 2009 05:58 PM (y0/M3)
30
My opinion is that all police forces should NOT be wearing military-style camouflage uniforms. It sends the wrong impression to the American public that the US military is somehow involved in local or state police operations or arresting procedures. Something has to be done with the police force community having its officers wearing military-style uniform.
Posted by: Bob at September 25, 2009 07:29 PM (SLEq7)
31
1) Yes, any moron should be able to fact-check that those outfits don't fit anything actual military is likely to be wearing. Basic common sense says "oh, look, there's several different patterns and styles-- I should research before making a huge accusation, especially since I know that tactical-type cops like to wear cammies. Oh, and it looks like the guy on the far side is wearing a standard, blue police shirt." (Now, if they'd driven up in a white van or some sort of military vehicle, slightly more reasonable to jump to conclusions....)
2) They'd better be ready to explain this, because the action is looking pretty dang stupid.
Posted by: Foxfier at September 25, 2009 11:58 PM (PVayi)
32
maybe the simplest explanation, if your going to be doing quik strikes at the protestors and your going to be getting rough and tumble you want cloths that are loose fitting and flexible and iron tough.
bdu's fit the bill.
if you have a list of fast objectives to carry out like santching potential worst offenders getting ready to do something really ignorant, or your on the look out for numbnuts with existing warrants you want to look identifiable to your comrades but not stand out so much you look like helmeted padded riot police.
but the fact that they didnt take away his back pack at a minimum is odd to me as well as not zip tying his wrists.
Posted by: rumcrook® at September 26, 2009 12:55 PM (60WiD)
33
I agree that the uniforms do not conform to military code. But look at the men, they do not look like cops. Most cops that I see are considerably overweight and not near the physical shape of these guys. Also, look at their faces. They appear intelligent which is not a prerequisite for cops at the ordinary level. You see these types hanging around the FBI building and the President lawn.
Either way it gives you the creeps with the type of power that The One is trying to weild.
Posted by: David C at September 26, 2009 04:11 PM (FacGW)
34
There are several places that I DO NOT look at when I want reliable information.
In no particular order, some of them are:
Drudge
Andrew Sullivan
The Washington Post
Drudge
Andrew Sullivan
The New York Times
Andrew Sullivan
Drudge
The Huffington Post
Drudge
The Daily KOS
Andrew Sullivan
MSNBC
CBS
ABC
did I mention Drudge? Sullivan?
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at September 26, 2009 07:21 PM (OmeRL)
35
Why do we let police wear military uniforms?
So they can do their thing in the War On Drugs, the War On Jaywalkers, the War on peaceful people, the War on (fillintheblank).
Not peace officers anymore.
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at September 26, 2009 07:24 PM (OmeRL)
36
How do we know they're not military? Simple. Among the first things any member of any branch of the military is taught is to keep their hands out of their pockets and to always--ALWAYS--wear a hat outdoors. No hats? No military.
Posted by: mikemcdaniel at September 27, 2009 07:42 PM (orefC)
37
Hmm, still not convinced. PSP have a duty uniform and there is no uniformity between the alleged officers. A uniform but only a small patch. No webgear, body armor, etc. Usually in riots they wear exterior body armor with big yellow letters that say police. No lights or siren on the Crown Vic. But most of all no complaint from the guy arrested.
And, by the way, why was he arrested from among all the rioters, usually the black bloc leads the violence and they wear masks and all black.
Posted by: Federale at September 28, 2009 11:54 AM (ev309)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
A Picture is Worth a Thousand Sounds
G20 protesters are complaining that they have come under the attack from LRADs, or Long Range Acoustic Devices. LRADs are capable of directing sound at extremely high decibels, and can be used to project a warning over distances in a focused "sonic beam," or can be used to cause pain through extremely loud sounds. Using LRADs in the latter manner would classify them as a less-than-lethal weapon, though one capable of causing permanent hearing loss.
The Drudge Report has a link this morning, "Video of 'Acoustic Weapons' Deployed on American Soil" that links to the following clip on YouTube.
But do you notice something about the way the "acoustic weapon" is being deployed? If you look at the video, it is clearly not being used as a weapon.
How do we know this?
Because if you watch the video, people cross back and forth in front the LRAD the entire time it is being used, and some even slow down or stop directly in front of it from mere yards away to shoot video, as this guy did.
The LRAD is the large gray disk mounted on the back of the black truck in the left of the frame. Moments before, a pair of young women wandered across the shot to no apparent ill effect, and seconds after, another videographer passed in front of the same device in the foot steps of the first.
I will readily agree that an LRAD can be used as a weapon. But I'd submit this very video as evidence it was not being used that way in Pittsburgh yesterday, at least now when captured on camera.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:56 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 286 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Saw a clip on one of the networks last night showing the LRAD in use at the demonstrations, anarchists covering their ears while "shreiking" in pain and running away, meanwhile as you've pointed out others are in the vicinity showing no ill effects. It reminded me of the time Michelle Kosinski decided to go canoeing.
Posted by: wowbagger the infinitely prolonged at September 25, 2009 09:06 AM (cFGyS)
2
Maybe it is like a dog whistle, at a range only the truly insane can hear. Of course, that theory means some of the G-20 protesters are sane so I may have some bugs to work out yet.
Or maybe half of the protesters have ruined their hearing through years of loud music. See? Your mother TOLD you to turn it down.
Posted by: Silhouette at September 25, 2009 10:26 AM (+ZT5h)
3
What would be the big deal if it WERE being used as a weapon? It seems like a much friendlier device than a pistol, and all cops 'deploy' those in America.
Posted by: Kevin at September 25, 2009 12:38 PM (hNk8s)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 24, 2009
Dead KY Census Worker Not Hung
Officials now claim earlier AP reports that he was fund hung from a tree were inaccurate. When
discovered "his body was in contact with the ground."
But he did die of asphyxiation. And they have been unable to rule out whether this was an accident, homicide or suicide.
I'm beginning to wonder what would have killed Bill.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
06:10 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Probably an erotic asphyxiation game gone horribly wrong.
Either that, or he was knockin' 'em dead with his David Carradine impersonation.
Posted by: Zeek at September 24, 2009 06:50 PM (Wg06P)
2
Did he have his pants on?
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at September 24, 2009 06:59 PM (OmeRL)
3
He was bound with duct-tape & naked.
Posted by: scalefree at September 26, 2009 01:31 AM (IbRA6)
4
He was naked except for his socks, hands & feet were bound with duct tape, his mouth was gagged, duct tape put over his eyes to blind him & also around his neck, the word "fed" was written across his chest in marker & his ID was taped to his shoulder. His clothes were found folded in his pickup truck some yards away. Anybody have a joke to make about that?
Posted by: scalefree at September 26, 2009 03:35 PM (IbRA6)
5
He could have had clogged sinuses and died simply from being gagged, or died of monoxide poisoning while being tranported in a car trunk. Neither of which would make it any less of a murder, if it happened during the commission of a felony.
Posted by: Tully at September 26, 2009 07:39 PM (tUyDE)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
More than 40 Drug Dealers Arrested Near Site of Census Worker's Hanging in Past Month
A fact
underplayed even in those news sites that chose to report it.
Part-time census worker Bill Sparkman was found hanged in the Daniel Boone National Forest in Kentucky on September 12. Contrarys to what multiple news sites and left wing blogs have erroneously reported, Sparkman's body was recovered on the 12th in an advanced state of decomposition; he was not killed on the 12th.
Left wing media have eagerly posited that Sparkman's death was purposefully done on the 12th to coincide with the Tea Party Protest held in Washington, DC on that date. This is categorically false, and local police chief suspects that Sparkman may have stumbled across a meth lab:
However, the local police also consider it possible that Sparkman was killed because he came across illegal activity. A local police chief, Jeff Culver, said the area has a history of methamphetamine manufacturing and other drug trading.
"That part of the county, it has its ups and downs. We'll get a lot of complaints of drug activity. They'll whittle away, then flourish back up," he said.
Officially, authorities have not yet determined if the death was a homicide or a suicide.
9/25 Update: This account says Sparkman died early on 9/11, casting previous media accounts of the condition of his body at the time of recovery into question.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
02:50 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 250 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Apparently his friend who is a former State Trooper warned him that this is an extremely rural area with not much of phones or communication. Basically people that are somewhat "cut off" from the outside world kind of like the movie "Deliverance". Democrat, Republican, Socialist, Utopian...doesn't matter. Wander inside some of these territories and you're as good as dead.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 24, 2009 08:16 PM (OX5qU)
2
Where are you reading that he was killed earlier than the twelfth?
Posted by: sandbagger at September 24, 2009 09:10 PM (qmjUI)
3
Hey, sandbagger...figure it out for yourself...his body was FOUND on 9/12 in an ADVANCED state of decomposition. There is no way he was killed on the 12th.
Posted by: Mr_Write at September 24, 2009 10:19 PM (tmJek)
4
Sparkman was missing no later than the 10th as one of his friends couldn't locate him and then called the police on the 11th. I don't think it's been established exactly when he died, but it seems almost certain it was before the 12th. And yes, reports say the body was decomposed.
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20090924/NEWS01/909240361/Census+worker+s+mysterious+death+probed
Posted by: Sav at September 25, 2009 02:02 AM (r9pKB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Creepy Obot Video Replaces Jesus With Obama
According to Michelle Malkin, the school is B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington Township, NJ, and the person responsible for posting the video originally was Charisse Carney-Nunes, author of I Am Barack Obama.
Children should not be signing songs filled with campaign propaganda that sounds more appropriate in totalitarian states, nor should Obama-worshipping drones be ripping off Christian spirituals and replacing references to Jesus with "Barack Hussein Obama."
The cult of personality that surrounds our incompetent President seems more desperate and unhinged every day.
Update Video replaced. Original removed due to terms of use violation by Youtube.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:45 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 112 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I'm a retired elementary music teacher in Arkansas (Yea, Huckabee!), and I am HORRIFIED @ this!!
Posted by: Linda Barretth at September 24, 2009 06:52 PM (xifkj)
2
The tune was "Battle Hymn of the Republic"
Posted by: Linda Barrett at September 24, 2009 07:04 PM (xifkj)
3
open your eyes american; they are brainwashing our kids and some one needs to stop them while we still can.
Posted by: maddog 42 at September 24, 2009 09:42 PM (U0uJI)
4
Well referencing Obama to Jesus is kind of half right...you'd all love to crucify him.
lol
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 12:37 AM (bhNGz)
5
This is the most craziest thing I have ever heard. I cannot believe that the teachers stoop so low as to having children being heard to praise O'bama. I am not a fan but I am not a hater. I believe in giving a person a chance, so far he hasn't made the change he always talked about. Yes its true our country was in a mess with Bush but now I believe we are up to our necks in crap. You take someone who has been in office no more than a couple of months and has already broke our country in more ways than one. He is still having our federal tax dollars going to places of business that is still playing the bankruptcy card. He has spent more of our tax dollars in several months than Bush spent in all of his terms serving our country. You hear so much about his nationality, still haven't seen proof on that yet either. It seems that if you have nothing to hide then come forward. Be a man and be honest with the American Citizens and do make a change for the best not the worst. I tell you what is sad, take a child who cannot afford or find the support to go to college because she has not got out and got pregnant or she is a single parent, It seems there are no standards set for the ones who go out and mess their lives up. What about the ones who really need and want to go because their parents can't afford it or they get some kind of accuse as to say "do you have any children" or "are you a single mother " or based on your color. There should be funding for children who need and want to achieve and build a better future for themselves. I am one of those parents, my daughter has tried many times to apply for student aid, she wants very much to become a doctor. She has been put off so many times and all she hears is "are you pregnant, do you have any children and etc. She has voiced to me many times, that if she ever gets in and becomes a doctor, that she is going to set a fund up for the many girls who have done the right thing, meaning drug free, pregnant free, single free. The girls who want something for themselves and not have to be discriminated against your morals that you set in life for yourself....
Posted by: penny at September 25, 2009 01:23 AM (IlWst)
6
Ahhh Penny...the lost voice of the middle class that slip through the cracks on a daily basis. You either have to be super-poor or super-rich to get any breaks in this country. Personally, you should go for the super-rich category since organizations that help the super-poor are being attacked by hacks with video cameras disguised as pimps and whores. Just a suggestion.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 04:40 AM (bhNGz)
7
The teacher and the kids must be right-wing fanatics: did you notice how they use Obama's middle name?
Posted by: metoo at September 25, 2009 06:40 AM (gwieR)
8
This is CREEPY~! And these poor parents think their kids are learning math and spelling!
Posted by: Frank at September 25, 2009 06:45 AM (R80G6)
9
Speaking if indoctrination, anybody remember this little treat:
http://firedoglake.com/2009/09/25/flashback-stockton-california-elementary-students-forced-to-hero-worship-george-w-bush-in-2002/
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 04:06 PM (OX5qU)
10
Posted by Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 04:06 PM
Creepy as well. Stupid and creepy. To me, forcing children to sing praises to Obama as if he (Obama) were a reincarnation of Kim Jong-il creeps me out even more. But that is just me.
both are stupid. both are creepy.
Or did you mean to excuse this because some fools did something related? Like some sort of giant race to the bottom of the pit....
Posted by: iconoclast at September 25, 2009 07:44 PM (O8ebz)
11
lipi is inventing straws to grab at again. #1 the only way you can defend this gross mental abuse of children by an Obamabot is to try to say Bush did it too. and #2 you totally lie = the correlation is not the same at all. Your dumba** link is to a story about a school being named after Bush, not kids being forced to "hero worship" him.
Posted by: Jayne at September 26, 2009 12:05 AM (dwIL0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Census Worker Found Hanged in KY
The state, not the lube.
The AP report states that Bill Sparkman, a 51-year-old part-time Census field worker, was found hanged from a tree with the word "fed" written on his chest in a remote corner of Daniel Boone National Forest.
Predictably, the usual suspects are suggesting that Rush Limbaugh threw the rope over the branch and Glenn Beck tied the knot.
The only problems with that theory is:
- lack of evidence
- lack of evidence, and
- lack of evidence
And while liberals are quick to blame the vast right wing conspiracy for Mr. Sparkman's death, they had to overlook this part of the story to do so:
Appalachia scholar Roy Silver, a New York City native now living in Harlan County, Ky., said he doesn't sense an outpouring of anti-government sentiment in the region as has been exhibited in town hall meetings in other parts of the country.
"I don't think distrust of government is any more or less here than anywhere else in the country," said Silver, a sociology professor at Southeast Community College.
Hopefully the investigation into Mr. Sparkman's death will lead to the arrest, prosecution, and conviction of the person or persons responsible for his death. And I rather suspect that when they do find a motive, it will have very little to do with politics and quite a bit to do with him stumbling across marijuana farming, meth labs, or moonshining.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:54 AM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.
1
"The state, not the lube" lol
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 24, 2009 01:10 AM (bhNGz)
2
americablog specifcally says it is too early to link this to a political motive yet you say the usual suspects are blaming Limbaugh and Beck and link there. You might want to fix that. I'll go ahead and hold my breath.
Posted by: John at September 24, 2009 06:08 AM (RPIBb)
3
I'd suspect a moonshining rig in that area.
Posted by: Lord Nazh at September 24, 2009 07:18 AM (sBNzZ)
4
"americablog specifcally says it is too early to link this to a political motive"
You're as dishonest as americablog. What they say is -
"It's too early in the investigation to link this to the Republican demonization of the Census in particular (ACORN) and the US government in general (suggesting that the Obama administration was full of communists bent on destroying our country)."
In other words they say it's too early to link it to a political motive at the exact same time as they link it to a political motive.
But I'm touched that the left suddenly thinks that demonizing the government is a bad thing, now that BusHitler and his reichwinger SS no longer run it.
Posted by: Steve at September 24, 2009 08:24 AM (PN3VA)
5
Typically pot farmers and meth cookers don't murder federal employees and display their bodies in a provocative manner that essentially guarantees a thorough investigation. As a rule, they really like to keep a lower profile than that. This is the type of crime that usually turns out be politically motivated. If so, people pushing insane theories about the census or the federal government in general will indeed bear some moral, if not legal, responsibility for this murder.
Please note the various qualifiers.
Posted by: MS at September 24, 2009 08:38 AM (5SZ5z)
6
>>"people pushing insane theories about the census or the federal government in general will indeed bear some moral, if not legal, responsibility for this murder."
When you accept moral responsibility for the murder of JFK, get back to me on this. Until that time, can it.
Posted by: Steve at September 24, 2009 08:46 AM (PN3VA)
7
One has to remember the folks in eastern Ky dont like people askin questions and when the questions are from a Fed worker it will make matters worse. With all the coal miners, and coal haulers out of work in eastern Ky I dont think I would go around saying "Hi, I'm from the Federal Government and I would like to ask you a few questions"....Paw get your shotgun would be the next thing the Fed worker would hear.
Posted by: Joe at September 24, 2009 09:21 AM (3u/pA)
8
Better stay away from Copperhead Road.
Posted by: Tully at September 24, 2009 09:31 AM (tUyDE)
9
Could Steve possibly explain his total non-sequitur to me? I have no idea what point he's trying to make. While I was alive (although in elementary school) when JFK was killed, I wasn't going around spouting nonsensical theories about the White House being secretly run by the Vatican, or controlled by the Kremlin, so I don't think I bear any responsibility, moral or legal, for his death.
And for the record, yes, I think Bill O'Reilly bears some moral, although probably not legal, responsibility for the murder of Dr. Tiller.
Posted by: MS at September 24, 2009 09:40 AM (5SZ5z)
10
Bill O'Reilly? How so?
Posted by: Calumet7 at September 24, 2009 11:07 AM (arVyR)
11
Calumet7-
they claim that because O'Reilly pointed out that Tiller killed kids older than my niephew was at birth, he's responsible for Tiller being killed in some fashion.
Because, y'know, pointing out facts is horrifically biased.
This crime sounds to me like someone trying to disguise a murder, and doing a piss-poor job of it.
Posted by: Foxfier at September 24, 2009 12:36 PM (OtIqW)
12
Yeah, what sort of crazy idjit would think that a census-worker being murdered right when the 9/12 protests were happening, with the word "FED" on his chest, & right after nice people like Glenn Beck told millions of Americans that he & people like him were the enemy - to be resisted at any cost, by any means necessary - has anything whatsoever to do with those same nice people repeatedly comparing census-workers to the Gestapo &/or Stalinist Commissars? The NERVE!
It's good to know that the finest minds at FreeRepublic have already blown the whistle on the obvious perps ... ACORN! This false-flag lynching will surely not go unpunished for long: I'm sure that his volunteer school-aid work made Sparkman many enemies in this nefarious crypto-socialist cabal, & they had to silence him before he revealed the truth about their mandatory blood-oath to serve Lucifer (& Kylie Minogue).
Congratulations on taking the responsible route & not jumping to unwarranted conclusions over what is plainly a politically sensational crime-story (*cough cough* Ashley Todd *cough*).
Posted by: jim at September 24, 2009 02:24 PM (2TjV9)
13
>>"what sort of crazy idjit would think that a census-worker being murdered right when the 9/12 protests were happening ..."
A crazy idjit like you, as he was NOT murdered on 9/12. Facts and liberals don't mix.
Posted by: Steve at September 24, 2009 03:05 PM (QnU4y)
14
>>"Could Steve possibly explain his total non-sequitur to me?"
It's no non-sequiter. It's your own stupid thought procesess reflected back at you. You're a man of the left. So was JFK's killer. Hence you bear some "moral responsibility" for what the left does, including kill JFK.
If that sort of thinkng bothers you in others, then stop engaging in it yourself.
Posted by: Steve at September 24, 2009 03:09 PM (QnU4y)
15
Typically pot farmers and meth cookers don't murder federal employees and display their bodies in a provocative manner that essentially guarantees a thorough investigation.
Really?
Just how well versed are you in the 'typical' murder of informants/federales by the Appalachian narco mountain boyz?
Because I work all through eastern KY and travel that area every month (Harlan up through to Hazard.) I'm willing to bet that they don't play by
anybodies rules.
That CSM article quotes a guy talking about 'roads that have never been paved' and he's not kidding.
Posted by: ThomasD at September 24, 2009 03:54 PM (21H5U)
16
That CSM article quotes a guy talking about 'roads that have never been paved' and he's not kidding.
I grew up (partly) in such an area. Some "warning" killings happened around Modoc county, when folks got too nosy in...uh...unofficial import areas. All the locals know that if you come over a hill and there's a camper and evidence of folks being there, but they're not showing themselves, you get your cows and get the heck out without even looking like you were looking.
Posted by: Foxfier at September 24, 2009 07:36 PM (OtIqW)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 23, 2009
ACORN Commits Suicide
They've
decided to sue James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles in Maryland.
How will they do that and avoid making their records available through discovery?
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
05:49 PM
| Comments (45)
| Add Comment
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I am not a lawyer, and I have not seen the filings, but I am going to guess that the filings are very carefully worded to mention only the fact of the allegedly illegal voice recordings, with no mention of why the recordings were made, just that they were.
I think that will limit discovery to pretty much safe territory.
As usual, public safeguards will work against us.
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at September 23, 2009 06:34 PM (OmeRL)
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at September 23, 2009 06:36 PM (MxQFN)
3
>>"The liberal activist group contends that the audio portion of the video was obtained illegally because Maryland requires two-party consent to create sound recordings."
Maryland does not require two-party consent for sound recordings.
Posted by: Steve at September 23, 2009 06:48 PM (O/V6T)
4
What the hell is ACORN?
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 23, 2009 06:59 PM (OX5qU)
5
ACORN is an organization that helps poor people and for that reason it's been targeted by Republican operatives. Don't you listen to NPR? You would know these things.
Posted by: zhombre at September 23, 2009 07:32 PM (zzL++)
6
Steve,
These folks (ACORN)need to be put out of business, but I'm afraid you are mistaken about the Maryland law...
Under Maryland’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act, it is unlawful to tape record a conversation without the permission of all the parties. See Bodoy v. North Arundel Hosp., 945 F.Supp. 890 (D. Md. 1996). Additionally, recording with criminal or tortuous purpose is illegal, regardless of consent. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 10-402.
Disclosing the contents of intercepted communications with reason to know they were obtained unlawfully is a crime as well.
Violations of the law are felonies punishable by imprisonment for not more than five years and a fine of not more than $10,000. Civil liability for violations can include the greater of actual damages, $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, along with punitive damages, attorney fees and litigation costs. To recover civil damages, however, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant knew it was illegal to tape the communication without consent from all participants. MD. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 10-410.
This is from http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/maryland.html The Reporters committee for freedom of the press.
All that being said, if what they did is indeed illegal, how is it that the tv stations get away with 'ambush interviews'?
PeterT
Posted by: PeterT at September 23, 2009 08:29 PM (4I9p+)
7
PeterT,
All that is well and good, but you're talking about criminal law, and APORN is bringing a civil case.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 23, 2009 08:43 PM (WjpSC)
8
Actually it's a civil case based on criminal complaints. The AG refused to pursue it and decided the best avenue would be to file criminal complaints for further litigation. There could actually be prison sentences involved with it. Unfortunately these videos prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Giles and O'Keefe broke the law. Little bit of irony if you like that sort of thing, ha.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 23, 2009 08:54 PM (OX5qU)
9
RICORN:
Racketeering-Influenced Corrupt Organization for Radical Non-Whites.
Posted by: Zeek at September 23, 2009 09:31 PM (HQn1a)
10
Everyone keep an eye out for a link for a defense fund.
I plan on giving as much as I can to them.
After Acorn loses, I hope they counter sue the bastards.
Papa Ray
Central Texas
Posted by: Papa Ray at September 23, 2009 09:46 PM (JpVJn)
11
Maryland does not require two-party consent for sound recordings.
Note that for a civil suit to prevail the plaintiff must be able to prove that the defendants
knew the taping was illegal.
Good luck with that.
how is it that the tv stations get away with 'ambush interviews'?
They do them in public, where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Posted by: Tully at September 23, 2009 10:18 PM (tUyDE)
12
zhombre, ACORN is a corporation that has received multiple millions of dollars in tax payer funding and they intimidate banks into giving loans to people who can't afford them, register democrats and other phony Americans, and give advice on skirting U.S. laws and basic decency. Thus Obama made sure they were a partner in the U.S. Census based on their total respectability and attention to accuracy because as we all know the census is extremely important. That was after he spoke to their group and assured them that he would enthusiastically request their help in shaping the agenda for his administration - youtube it - it'll give you a tingle up your leg just like Chris Matthews.
Posted by: Jayne at September 23, 2009 10:19 PM (dwIL0)
13
Thanks, Jayne, but I knew that. The irony lamp was lit when I posted that. But I have liberal friends who get all their news from NPR and, nice people that they are, about many issues they are clueless.
Posted by: zhombre at September 23, 2009 10:35 PM (zzL++)
14
From Roxanne, 1987 movie with Steve Martin:
[Roxanne Kowalski is walking behind a hedge because she is nude]
Roxanne Kowalski: Nobody had a coat?
C.D. Bales: I thought you said you didn't want a coat...
Roxanne Kowalski: Why would I not want a coat?
C.D. Bales: You said you didn't want a coat!
Roxanne Kowalski: I was being ironic.
C.D. Bales: Oh, ho, ho, irony! Oh, no, no, we don't get that here. See, uh, people ski topless here while smoking dope, so irony's not really a, a high priority. We haven't had any irony here since about, uh, '83, when I was the only practitioner of it. And I stopped because I was tired of being stared at.
Posted by: zhombre at September 23, 2009 10:37 PM (zzL++)
15
I don't know exactly where to search, but I have heard that there is a journalist shield law that protects investigative journalists from the electronic surveillance law.
Posted by: iconoclast at September 24, 2009 12:09 AM (P4tl8)
16
Looks like the case will turn on whether or not the Acorn slimes had "a reasonable expecation of privacy". Something I would reasonably expect they did NOT have. Of course, it depends how many lefty kooks they pack the jury with.
The real solution is to conduct retaliatory lawfare. Such as finding someone with standing to file personal lawsuits against the crooks who run Acorn....
Posted by: iconoclast at September 24, 2009 12:19 AM (P4tl8)
17
"Note that for a civil suit to prevail the plaintiff must be able to prove that the defendants knew the taping was illegal. " -- Actually, that's the responsibility of the tapers and not the taped. These wannabe journalists should have familiarized themselves with the law prior to undertaking their operation. By not doing so, they are guilty by negligence.
Discovery goes both ways. Now Giles and O'Keefe will have to turn over ALL the raw, unedited tapes from ALL the ACORN offices they visited. Giles and O'Keefe are now going to have to show WHY they undertook this operation in concocting an elaborate scheme involving underage sex traffic and prostitution. Are there previous statements and/or witnesses to this specific kind of illegal behavior on behalf of ACORN and if not, why would they concoct such an elaborate scheme if not for the sole purpose of embarrassment and harassment.
Remember also that these ACORN representatives broke no laws. The underage sex traffic and prostitution idea/scheme was created by Giles and O'Keefe and not ACORN. These reps can easily say they knew it was all a hoax and played along with it and the burden to prove differently is on Giles and O'Keefe which will be impossible for them to do. This is why Giles and O'Keefe should have filled out the paperwork and allowed these reps to process the paperwork knowing their criminal intent. That way ACORN would be implicated in criminal conspiracy activity. Real journalists would have known to do that. That way, this lawsuit and any future lawsuits (and you can bet there will be more) wouldn't have any merit due to the organization's self-incriminating behavior.
Giles, O'Keefe and Breitbart are going to have to prove they did what they did for the social good as journalists or to target, harass and cause irreparable harm to the organization's reputation for political interests. Discovery of ALL the raw, unedited tapes from ALL the offices they visited will definitely shed light on this issue. Keep in mind, they've already been caught in several lies concerning their "operation" and depending on the outcome of this litigation, will undoubtedly be facing more litigation in each state they visited. They should have filled out the paperwork.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 24, 2009 12:40 AM (bhNGz)
18
Tully,
You write:
>They do them in public, where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Would one have such a reasonable expectation in a corporate workplace? This is normally represented in an employee manual, although the Acorn manuals I've found so far are exceptionally poor substitutes for such a document. As a information technology and security risk expert for a Fortune 500 financial firm, I'm well aware that we not only monitor employee instant messaging, emails, web usage and other activities, but specify in our policy that there should be no reasonable expectation of privacy in the workplace. This policy specification also provides for our video monitoring of workplace environments (particularly necessary when you handle checks and credit cards) and for the other controls that may result in the digital recording of employee behavior within the workplace.
Would one expect an employee at ACORN to be subject to such monitoring? In the event the employee ever encounters PII (personally identifiable information), especially financial information (credit card, debit card, checking account), the industry practice answer is a certain yes. Controls recommended in PCI (Payment Card Industry), for instance, would provide for such monitoring. Do we have the express written consent of an employee prior to their being recorded on a camera in Maryland or any other state? Of course not; they've received training that they are subject to the various privacy programs and controls the company may deem necessary to protect the confidentiality of our customer's data.
Given that Acorn was dealing with PII (social security numbers, names, addresses, etc.), there should be no reasonable expectation of privacy given the expectation that Acorn would institute monitoring controls. Should Acorn have failed to document such expectations, the industry practice still should prevail and if anything, this is further indication that Acorn has failed in the application of appropriate controls over PII and financial data (something I would expect to encounter given the data I've seen so far).
Conclusion: These employees had no such expectation of privacy in a workplace handling PII/financial data.
Posted by: HatlessHessian at September 24, 2009 12:40 AM (7r7wy)
19
"a reasonable expectation* of privacy" -- is already established in Maryland's law.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 24, 2009 12:42 AM (bhNGz)
20
You're wrong hatless -- the reasonable practice would be conducted by the company itself in which the employees would be aware and by taking jobs with the organization, would have consented to being monitored and recorded. Usually this type of monitoring involves video only and that in many states, it's a felony to audio record somebody without their consent. This does not apply to a pimp and a prostitute who are not doing what they did for PII. If Giles and O'Keefe were to embark on this operation for the purpose of PII, then they would need the organization's permission and/or a regulatory agency's permission and STILL, the reps at ACORN would need to be notified as per Maryland's law. And most certainly, audio recording would have been forbidden.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 24, 2009 12:48 AM (bhNGz)
21
That is for a court to decide, not a lefty with situational ethics.
As for the discovery phase, I highly doubt that the discovery will be able to extend to tapes made outside of that particular office. Which is a pity because it will show even more Acorn corruption
Posted by: iconoclast at September 24, 2009 12:49 AM (P4tl8)
22
It's not situational ethics, it's the law and us lefties knew it all along. 8>)
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 24, 2009 12:53 AM (bhNGz)
23
>>"Under MarylandÂ’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act, it is unlawful to tape record a conversation without the permission of all the parties."
The law does not say any such thing. Go ahead and cite the relevant language from the Act if you can.
Posted by: Steve at September 24, 2009 07:17 AM (PN3VA)
24
Why is that disgusting pedophile Timmy Evans being allowed to post here?
Posted by: Steve at September 24, 2009 07:19 AM (PN3VA)
25
Because ACORN and their fine educated state-of-the-art Jewish lawyers got me out of it and a huge cash settlement while bankrupting the defendants 50 times over in making them defend themselves. You know how it works, all the best Conservatives always have the best Liberal lawyers.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 24, 2009 08:50 AM (OX5qU)
26
One can gauge Lipiwitz's knowledge of the law by the fact L seems to think that we have private prosecutions leading to jail sentences in the US, when this is a purely civil suit. The actual filing can be found
HERE.
Maryland law does indeed require proof that the tapers knew they were violating the relevant two-party-consent law in order for the plaintiffs to recover civil damages. (See claim #13 in the suit, which claims "knowing AND had reason to know." "Reason to know" is not enough to collect damages, the plaintiff must prove positive knowledge. Difficult.)
This is further complicated by Maryland's shield law for press. Note that all three plaintiffs are claiming damages for "loss of reputation," a claim that is a naked attempt to end-run the absolute-truth defense for defamation by trying to recast a defamation claim as something else, something which has failed to fly in court on the 4th Circuit before. See the Food Lion case, wherein the court dismissed such attempts and noted that the damage to reputation was caused not by the publication of plaintiff's embarrassing actions, but by the actions themselves.
Also note that once you remove the "reputation" claims the only remaining damage claims are those of the two employees for loss of employment and emotion distress, damages caused at least in part by their co-plaintiff, ACORN. The defendants didn't fire anyone, and ACORN itself will find a judge rather non-sympathetic to their being a party to claims for damages they themselves caused. It would be LOL irony if Breitbart et al dragged ACORN in as a third-party defendant....
Yes, Maryland has an anti-SLAPP statute tied directly to the First Amendment. That could also come into play, as ACORN has a history of SLAPP suits against anyone who stings them with truths. Discovery could be really really fun, as the defendants can explore just about
everything related to ACORN's hiring, training, and operational practices.
No call on the "expectation of privacy" issue. Not enough information yet available, but generally employees have no reasonable expectation of privacy in the workplace, as employers generally have an inherent right to supervise employee conduct, especially when the personal financial information of others is involved.
Posted by: Tully at September 24, 2009 10:00 AM (tUyDE)
27
no lipi, it is merely your facile interpretation of the law.
The Acorn representatives had no reasonable expectation of privacy when in an office conducting business. Leon Wolfe has a
nice discussion of some of the applicable law on redstate.
So the privacy consideration is reasonably out, which eliminates use of the wiretapping law if the "reasonable expectation" were not enough. Truth is always the best defense against defamation. And the Acorn has as much admitted that the firing was unjustified--putting it at risk for an employee lawsuit for unjustified firing. Nice
And this assures that Obama's Acorn will remain in the news for a while longer. Though possibly going around some more and blathering like a lefty kook about eliminating nuclear weapons, blaming the USA for the world's problems, and pontificating about the biggest non-problem in the world Global Warming will distract attention from Obama's Acorn.
Posted by: iconoclast at September 24, 2009 04:27 PM (FGCRY)
28
The trailer park "Woodward and Bernstein" will also be facing multiple suits in California and Pennsylvania as well. Maybe they can go back to Joe Thiel and get another $30,000 "grant" to pay for 10 minutes of their attorney's billable time to defend themselves from the first $30,000 "grant".
And how many more times if Breitbart going to claim how much he supports Giles and O'Keefe who PRODUCED, EDITED and SUBMITTED THESE VIDEOS?!?!? We get it Breitbart...you're blaming it on the kids. We get it!!!
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 24, 2009 05:29 PM (OX5qU)
29
I find it ironic that Lipiwitz, who on other strings at this site has recited ad nauseum that he has no interest in this matter, is the one defending ACORN and their former employees.
Posted by: Michel Smith at September 24, 2009 05:37 PM (T4ASz)
30
we get it lipi--Acorn and its affiliates like SEIU plan on conducting lawfare to discourage any further investigations.
However, since the truth is the best defense against defamation lawsuits I would guess that the CA suit has little chance of going anywhere. Philly? well, how exactly will anyone sue for damages in Philly? I thought the Acorn enablers refused to help O'Keefe and Giles? Maybe because the Acorn workers weren't offered enough juice on the deal?
Great group of scumbags you have chosen to ally yourself with, lipi. Not surprising for someone on the left--most lefty organizations are as ethical as Tammany Hall, but with fewer scruples.
Posted by: iconoclast at September 24, 2009 05:43 PM (FGCRY)
31
btw, does effectively calling Giles and O'Keefe trailer trash qualify as hate speech? If someone described Van Jones as ghetto scum, would that be hate speech?
just asking if lipi thinks all people who live in trailer parks, ghettos, barrios, and similar places are trash undeserving of any consideration or respect.
Posted by: iconoclast at September 24, 2009 07:37 PM (FGCRY)
32
zhombre, I have liberal acquaintances - I can't call them friends - who state that Republicans targeted ACORN just to get at Obama, so I don't see irony as often as I see stupidity.
Posted by: Jayne at September 24, 2009 11:36 PM (dwIL0)
33
Keep f***ing that chicken, Lipiwitz. You've really jumped the shark. It sounds like you're getting your legal talking points from those lefty human rights lawyers who are such experts on international law surrounding torture. Heh! Keep that caterpillar away from me you brute!
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 24, 2009 11:57 PM (3O5/e)
34
jayne
That is just mouth-dropping unbelievable for any Obama supporter to utter. So further investigative journalism should explore further into the world of underage immigrants forced into prostitution in order to target Obama? Really?
Of course, for real prostitutes one doesn't have to go much farther than MSNBC....
Posted by: iconoclast at September 24, 2009 11:59 PM (O8ebz)
35
Here is something interesting:
http://departments.oxy.edu/uepi/acornstudy/
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 12:51 AM (bhNGz)
36
"So further investigative journalism should explore further into the world of underage immigrants forced into prostitution" -- And exactly WHO'S idea was it to have underage immigrants forced into prostitution? Was it ACORN's or was it Giles and O'Keefe's? You can go to YouTube and replay the videos if you need reminding before answering the question as to WHO'S idea it was to have underage immigrants forced into prostitution. Obviously Giles and O'Keefe are not engaging in underage sex traffic and prostitution activities but neither is ACORN. The idea was Giles and O'Keefe's.
The disgusting aspect of this whole ACORN McCarthyism is the mainstream media. ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, CBS, NY Times, Washington Post, USA Today, LA Times...all of them. Of all the accusations and allegations against ACORN from all the Right-wing opinion generators, pundits and Republicans and their echo chamber, not one single member of the mainstream media ever asked any of them "where's your proof?" Never was there a "truth" litmus over this 3 year, non-stop partisan campaign of lies against ACORN and the Right's attempt to tie them in with every Democrat and RINO they could find.
The truth has finally been revealed:
http://departments.oxy.edu/uepi/acornstudy/
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 05:38 AM (bhNGz)
37
"not one single member of the mainstream media ever asked any of them "where's your proof?""
No one asked "where's your proof" because they were capable of watching the video tapes to see for themselves that ACORN employees and supervisors freely, repeatedly offered their official advice on:
* the best ways to smuggle underage sex slaves into the U.S.,
* the best ways to commit tax fraud by claiming these underage sex slaves as dependents to the IRS, and
* the best ways for the pimp-turning-politician to use cutouts and fake fronts to politically shield himself from his illegal sources of income.
No non-pedophile wants any of their taxpayer money going to sponsor an organization that's advising people on how to maximize their profits while sexually exploiting young girls.
And that's why non-pedophiles are universally repulsed by ACORN's nationwide behaviour, and why government agencies that are involved with ACORN are scrambling to dissociate themselves from such a scummy and exploitative organization.
Posted by: Lipsfullofshit at September 25, 2009 06:19 AM (sPIAv)
38
Federal Whistle Blower Laws should protect them from any suit.
Posted by: Frank at September 25, 2009 06:48 AM (R80G6)
39
Federal Whistle Blower Laws? Have you even read the Federal Whistle Blower Laws? Can you even read? Go read up on the Federal Whistle Blower Laws Frank and then decide if these two hacks qualify.
And Lipsfullofmaturityandintelligence...talking about a crime is not illegal. DOING a crime is illegal. And the idea of sexually exploiting young girls was Giles and O'Keefe's according to the videos you hold so sacred. You're accusing ACORN of being pedophiles but by your own logic, it's Giles and O'Keefe who on the videos, are self-admitted pedophiles. Soon to be so far in debt it ain't even funny self-admitted pedophiles.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 04:13 PM (OX5qU)
40
Interesting stuff:
On September 23, Los Angeles Times media critic James Rainey reported that ACORN official Lavelle Stewart "told me this week" that when conservative videographers James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles came to Stewart's ACORN office in Los Angeles disguised as a pimp and prostitute, Stewart "tried to get the 'prostitute,' who claimed she had been beaten by her pimp, to go to a women's center." Stewart's reported statement and a police report filed by officials at ACORN's Philadelphia office undermine O'Keefe's and Giles' claims that they were never rebuffed at any of the ACORN offices they visited, and the videographers have yet to release the Los Angeles and Philadelphia videos.
"And visits to other ACORN offices have gone almost entirely unmentioned. Lavelle Stewart, a fair-housing coordinator in the group's Los Angeles office, told me this week that she tried to get the "prostitute," who claimed she had been beaten by her pimp, to go to a women's center.
"The fact she was not taking the help I offered her made me think something was not right," Stewart said. "It raised a red flag."
******************************
San Diego ACORN official also reported duo to police following encounter. In a September 22 article, the Associated Press reported that California police said an ACORN worker contacted them about "possible human smuggling":
Police say a worker with the activist group ACORN who was caught on video giving advice about human smuggling to a couple posing as a pimp and a prostitute had reported the incident to authorities.
National City police said Monday that Juan Carlos Vera contacted his cousin, a police detective, to get advice on what to with information on possible human smuggling.
Vera was secretly filmed on Aug. 18 as part of a young couple's high-profile expose.
Police say he contacted law enforcement two days later. The detective consulted another police official who served on a federal human smuggling task force, who said he needed more details.
The ACORN employee responded several days later and explained that the information he received was not true and he had been duped.
And you honestly believe these hacks are NOT getting sued? Come on!
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 04:57 PM (OX5qU)
41
More from mainstream media's decision to practice journalistic integrity today:
O'Keefe's dismissal of ACORN's claim that "the videos were doctored" undermined by report that they were. O'Keefe reportedly dismissed ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis' claim that the secretly filmed videos were doctored, stating, "They've lied every step of the way." But one video that reportedly "left out" an ACORN employee's statement that it would have nothing to do with a prostitution business undermines O'Keefe's claim. According to a report by CNN's Casey Wian that aired on the September 17 edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight, the videographers edited San Bernardino ACORN organizer Tresa Kaelke's statement that ACORN would not associate itself with prostitution. Wian said: "Left out of the originally released tape but included in a transcript the filmmakers later released is Kaelke's statement that ACORN would have nothing to do with their prostitution business."
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 25, 2009 05:02 PM (OX5qU)
42
Lipiwitz - Edited tape is not the same thing as doctored tape. Sorry, your claim does not fly. The ACORN employees have not been accused of any crimes that I am aware, only stupidly conspiring on tape to commit them if O'Keefe and Giles had gone further with their scam. To claim otherwise as you imply is false.
Your strawmen of the Philadelphia and LA office visits are just that at this point. Compare what O'Keefe, Gilea and Breitbart have said with your pillowbiting, bedwetting assertions. Nothing you have put forward contradicts what they have said. If you cannot see that you are even less intelligent than I thought.
If you want to accuse conservatives of spreading lies about ACORN, have the testicular fortitude to lay them out in a comment and defend them. Mkay?
Keep f***ing that chicken. I'm glad you don't care about this, 'cause it's sure taking up a bunch of your time.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 25, 2009 07:48 PM (3O5/e)
43
These reps can easily say they knew it was all a hoax and played along with it
At which point their lawsuit collapses, since they chose to play along, aka "consented".
Furthermore, since it was only a hoax and the employees didn't mean it, why did ACORN fire them?
It should be no surprise that the Obama puppet is defending the ACORN criminals. What's really funny is that the Obama puppet doesn't think that Breitbart, et al., were aware of this possibility all along and have planned for it -- including how to use it to inflict maximum damage on Barack Obama and his support and endorsement of ACORN's criminal behavior.
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty at September 26, 2009 01:24 AM (1Izxt)
44
Lipiwitz - The Democrats in the House put a cutoff in ACORN funding in the continuing budget resolution. Open your good eye and at least see what the stiffs in your own party see.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 26, 2009 10:53 AM (3O5/e)
45
I'm very interested to know EVERYTHING about the wonderful "community organizers" at ACORN.
- HOW do they train their "get out the vote" specialists? Do they teach forgery as competently as tax evasion?
- Why is this organization NOT recognized as a partisan organization by the federal or state government? Could they be playing the race card, perhaps?
- When will our "representatives" finally investigate this organization that has received taxpayer funding for how long?
Posted by: nomoretaxmoneytoacorn at September 26, 2009 04:28 PM (enUtG)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 21, 2009
Intimidation and Domestic Terrorism at UNC Chapel Hill
Glenn Reynolds
links this morning to an article that hits close to home, an apparent campaign by radical campus leftists at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill to destroy a campus group via
threats of violence:
Is a major state university going to let radical groups silence a legitimate college organization and drive it off campus through a campaign of violence and intimidation?
That is just one of the important questions raised by the most recent incident involving the UNC-Chapel Hill student organization Youth for Western Civilization (YWC) and a coalition of radical leftist groups. Some of the radicals are connected to the school, such as the UNC chapter of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), while others are community-based and have no affiliation with UNC.
According to a Raleigh News & Observer report last week, anonymous flyers appeared on the Chapel Hill campus that provided the name, photograph, phone number, and home address of the YWC's faculty advisor, emeritus professor Elliot Cramer. The flyers asked, "Why is your professor supporting white supremacy?"
Nikhil Patel, the current YWC president, perceived an implied threat in the flyer. It was not the first time that the radicals used this approach to intimidate the YWC. At a YWC event in April that was violently disrupted by radicals, they directed the following chant at YWC members and in particular, last year's YWC president, Riley Matheson: "Against racists, we will fight. We know where you sleep at night."
Violence and the political left is nothing new, especially violence from the SDS.
And there is the possibility that the threats of violence from this generation of SDS radicals may have "teeth" provided by an SDS radical of days gone by with a violent past.
Until several years ago, Howard Machtinger was the Teaching Fellows Director at UNC's School of Education. Prior to his academic career, Machtinger was best known for his activities as an active member of the SDS and it's more violent domestic terrorist offshoot, the Weather Underground. A recent article called Time Bomb in the San Francisco Weekly News alleges Machtinger was one of the bomb builders for the terrorist group, and alleges that he and Bernadine Dohrn were behind the Feb. 16, 1970 Park Police Station bombing that killed SFPD Officer Brian McDonnell.
Machtinger, 63, still lives locally in Durham, NC and remains politically active.
I'm not alleging that Machtinger is building bombs for the UNC-CH Students for a Democratic Society or is training a new generation of Weather Underground terrorists, but his past associations indicate a man willing to go to extremes to push his ideology, and his proximity to the UNC group and his ties to the campus make it reasonable to wonder if his influence plays a role in the recent threats that may drive Youth for Western Civilization off of UNC-Chapel Hill's campus.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:07 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 491 words, total size 3 kb.
1
America badly needs a de-communization effort similar to the de-Nazification which happened in Germany after WWII. These scum are are entrenched in positions of influence throughout society.
McCarthy was right.
Posted by: Steve at September 21, 2009 10:36 AM (RYcYq)
2
Word. The Democrats were lost to Marxism in the forties. Sadly, Republicans flirt with it as well, generally claiming only to more efficiently administer programs clawing FROM EACH in accordance with their ability (to pay) and TO EACH in accordance with their bottomless needs. Political philosophies are not even relevant at this point. Just the basic math dooms SS, Medi-this and that, the various takeovers of the economy. Bah.
From the youngsters, much of the objection to the objections about Barack is that they amount to calling him a big Commie. They are only vaguely aware of why this should be objectionable but aware they are. Here are two questions for the Meathead in your life. Firstly, if Obama WERE a "Big Commie" (and we presume they agree that there is such a beast) what WOULD he be doing? Maybe nationalizing the banks? Medicine? The auto industry? Newspapers? Hmmm. As the wise Goldfinger said; once is bad luck, twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.
Secondly, if someone is calling Barackus a "Big Commie", so what? Just what is wrong with being a Commie? I think you will find their education spotty on that.
Posted by: megapotamus at September 21, 2009 11:00 AM (wJMs3)
3
the University of Kansas just hired as it's chancellor a prominent member of the ruling elite of UNCC. A PC selection that believes in the self esteem of students rather than the education of students. Bad Call Jayhawks
Posted by: bman at September 21, 2009 11:39 AM (xK1dQ)
4
Setting aside the clear threats of violence, the leftists are also trying to equate a type of civilization with race. As always. They think your race affects your point of view and how you would like to order your civilization. This exposes their own bigotry, especially with the clear example of the opposite in the form of the USA, where persons of all races can come together to form one civilization. This isn't just my interpretation of the interpretation of a few "fringe." Rather, it is so central to the idea of America that we print it on all our money. E. pluribus unum. Would they rather we say, "Out of many, many?"
Posted by: Silhouette at September 21, 2009 12:08 PM (+ZT5h)
5
Bman: virtually all college administrators at that level believe in the PC catechism, or a do a real fine job of reciting it. They are the Establishment now, the conformists, the ones who impose and enforce orthodoxy.
Posted by: Zhombre at September 21, 2009 07:25 PM (zzL++)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
NEA/Obama Administration Target of Next Breitbart Corruption Probe?
It sure looks that way.
The President had a certain amount of plausible deniability when he tried to claim he didn't know how deeply corrupt ACORN was. After all he has only acted as a lawyer and trainer for them over a number of years.
But if someone in the White House is illegally using public funds to further the Administration's political agenda, we may just have the start of something here far worse than we ever could have imagined...
Update: Big Hollywood has the audio and transcripts of a highly politicized call between carefully-selected pro-Obama artists and artist groups, the White House Office of Public Engagement, and the National Endowment for the Arts.
This is apparently a direct effort by the Obama White House to contract out political propaganda favorable to their policy initiatives.
What was said on the call seems irrefutable. What laws were broken (if any) remains to be seen.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:46 AM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Particularly since we also have "Obama 2.0" and the first serious attempts to repeal the 22nd Amendment. This is an all-out war on the Republic.
Posted by: Jonathan Nolan at September 21, 2009 02:13 AM (vCmG9)
2
Far worse than you could have ever imagined, perhaps. I have no illusions about the potential depths of human depravity, nor about the moral or ethical status of the current administration. It has none of either. So there is very little that Barry Lackwit or his minions could attempt that would be worse than I could ever imagine.
Posted by: wolfwalker at September 21, 2009 07:41 AM (OoSEZ)
3
AWESOME!!! Somebody is finally exposing Bush's Faith Based Initiatives program!!! SWEET!!! Unfortunately...that was considered legal by your "other" set of laws.
I'm intrigued. I'm sure it will be amusing. At least you had 60,000 tea-baggers and birthers who thought those ACORN videos were somewhat important.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 21, 2009 09:00 AM (OX5qU)
4
"we may just have the start of something here far worse than we ever could have imagined..."
I don't know - I can imagine pretty bad. Check out http://www.usdebtclock.org/ We're heading toward a crash that'll make the Great Depression look like the "Good ole days". The Fed will debase the currency in a futile attempt to maintain the entitlements by money printing; wiping out the savings of those who tried to plan responsibly. When reality finally dawns, they'll abandon those social contracts as well as the old currency. The currency replacement will be the "coup de grace" for whatever is left of our savings.
Remember, in the 1930's the U.S. was still mainly an agrarian economy. My mother's family had a family farm to move back to during the First Great Depression. I don't have that option.
The US dollar's failure will drive the world to a new standard reserve currency or a "world currency". I tell my wife that I hope I'm just a crazy old man, but at this point I don't see how it turns out any other way...
Posted by: Diogenes Online at September 21, 2009 09:17 AM (2MrBP)
5
I read the article and there is a point to be made. How much tax-payer money has been funneled every year through the Faith Based Initiatives Program to the Family research Council to thrown that Value Voters meeting held every year. I noticed no Democrats are ever invited. You may be on to something.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at September 21, 2009 09:32 AM (OX5qU)
6
>>"Somebody is finally exposing Bush's Faith Based Initiatives program!!! SWEET!!! Unfortunately...that was considered legal by your "other" set of laws."
It was "considered legal" by the American courts. To you those probably represent another set of laws.
Posted by: Steve at September 21, 2009 09:57 AM (RYcYq)
7
>>"How much tax-payer money has been funneled every year through the Faith Based Initiatives Program to the Family research Council"
Shouldn't you have an answer to your moronic questions BEFORE you pose them, pedophile?
Posted by: Steve at September 21, 2009 10:00 AM (RYcYq)
8
Here's a newsflash.
"The head of a community reform organization faces sentencing after pleading no contest to two counts of criminal sexual contact with a minor in Torrance County. Ben McGartland of Albuquerque, head of the New Mexico chapter of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, was charged in July in state District Court in Estancia with 10 counts, including second-degree criminal sexual penetration of a minor, three counts of criminal sexual contact, attempt to commit a felony, kidnapping, concealing identity, two counts of possession of drug paraphernalia and possession of marijuana."
Since Timmy Evans is still posting here I guess he has not been busted. Yet.
Posted by: Steve at September 21, 2009 10:30 AM (RYcYq)
9
The NEA should be abolished. The Constitution's only reference to the Arts was in Article I, Section 8, [8] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,
by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
It specifically gives only one avenue to promote progress os science and
useful arts, which does not include funding.
If we followed the Constitution, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
lipowitz - if you truly believe that government funding of faith-based organizations was bad, then you should be just as appaled by the politicization of the NEA. Bush is gone - move on.
Posted by: SouthernRoots at September 21, 2009 11:34 AM (FJRFk)
10
"If we followed the Constitution, we wouldn't be having this discussion."
Constitution?? We have a Constitution? Who knew...
Certainly our current ruling class in D.C. doesn't.
Posted by: Diogenes online at September 21, 2009 12:03 PM (2MrBP)
11
Um, Lip,
I'm not real certain I can find a common point between your "progressive" friends in the .gov using a taxpayer-funded department of gov to further spread their propaganda and any money that was voted to a PRIVATE non-profit by Congress. Can you enlighten me?
DIdn't think so.
Posted by: emdfl at September 21, 2009 02:27 PM (Mkonf)
12
Lipiwitz is really getting desperate with the pivot and distract strategy.
Hey, look over there, BUNNIES!!!!
ACORN and Owebama's pitiful performance has put him over the edge.
Posted by: daleyrocks at September 21, 2009 06:51 PM (3O5/e)
13
If Federal employees participated, wouldn't that involve the Hatch Act?
Posted by: mark l at September 22, 2009 08:40 AM (WGbtD)
14
With Holder as AG, this goes nowhere.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at September 23, 2009 01:47 PM (nLRmO)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 16, 2009
Daily Show Slams ACORN and the MSM
Sure, you've probably seen it elsewhere already, but it's worth watching again.
Somewhere in Washington, DC, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are sweating bullets that their allies are falling apart.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:17 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 3 kb.
243kb generated in CPU 0.0736, elapsed 0.1575 seconds.
69 queries taking 0.0966 seconds, 450 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.