Thick as thieves.....

Saying this can only hurt John McCain among Republicans at a time when he needs to win them over in Florida. Do you think Bill Clinton did this on purpose?

Of course he did it on purpose as he is always calculating. But, I think the purpose is larger....it is meant to keep John McCain meek and mild for the general election against Hillary, not to hurt McCain in Florida.

Rcade, I know you hate Hillary, but do you REALLY think Obama is a qualified, viable candidate?..He gets the nomination, and it is a Republican landslide like the one Reagan did. Believe me, any possible republicans who would not vote for McCain based on this info will be doubled by the democrats who would vote for him instead of Obama. Racist?...for some it would be. For me, Obama says and does nothing to persuade me he would be the man for the job, no matter what color he is (and he IS 1/2 white...)

BC is telling the truth here because time and again since Hillary elected the stuff had been coming out about the work she and McCain have done.

She has known that anything she sponsored would just get shafted by some GOPers on principle because of her name so she has worked with both Dems and GOP to get stuff done.

Good strategy and I think has earned her quite a bit of respect across lines.

Sometime having your name in lights is not the best strategy if it destroys the work you are doing. Its a sign of a good politician.

Clinton,

People are always talking about having enough "experiance" to be president. However as Bill knows there is no experiance which prepares you to be the most powerful man (or woman) on the planent. Therefore to bring the experiance card in is silly they are all equaly inexperianced.

Since "Obama says and does nothing to persuade me he would be the man for the job" What pray tell does Clinton say that would make you want to vote for her?

Rcade, I know you hate Hillary, but do you REALLY think Obama is a qualified, viable candidate?

That's a stupid question. I don't hate Hillary, and it's pretty weak for one of her supporters to play the experience card. Obama's three years in the Senate and eight years in the Illinois Senate, combined with his background in law, are a comparable record of accomplishment to Hillary's seven years in the Senate and eight years as a First Lady.

If you want experience in government, you should be backing McCain over Clinton.

If you want other things, like the capacity to lead, strong ideas for how to govern the country, and a good platform, I think Obama's a worthy rival to Clinton in all of those areas. And like McCain among the Republicans, Obama's clearly the stronger Democratic candidate if you hope for a president who can move beyond bitter partisan rancor.

And like McCain among the Republicans, Obama's clearly the stronger Democratic candidate if you hope for a president who can move beyond bitter partisan rancor.

Posted by rcade at 2008-01-26 12:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's a newsworthy and accurate statement.

McCain better be concerned...I hear that she and Vince Foster were pretty close too and look what happened to poor old Vince when people started after the beastie....

So you're afraid McCain might commit suicide?

Yeah...That is what happened....Vince Foster "committed suicide"...I'll bet you also believe that Hildebeast really forgot all of the answers to those questions she was asked under oath while testifying before Congress, she had no idea how those FBI files made it into the living quarters of the White House, that she couldn't find the Rose Law Firm Billing Records, and finally, that she really does have 35 years of experience.

Of course, if you believe that, I also have a Bridge to sell you. It would be quite an opportunity for you if your interested.

"Yeah...That is what happened....Vince Foster "committed suicide"..."

Well, if that wasn't the case, the Department of Justice under the Republicans for the last 7 years would have investigated it, right? And brought charges, right?

from wiki:

"There have been three official investigations into Foster's death, all of which concluded that he committed suicide. The first was by the United States Park Police in 1993, in whose jurisdiction the original investigation fell. Due to Foster's position in the White House, the Federal Bureau of Investigation assisted in the investigation. Investigations by a coroner and Independent Counsel Robert B. Fiske, in a 58-page report released in 1994, also concluded that Foster had committed suicide. Conspiracy theories of a cover-up still persisted. After a three-year investigation, Whitewater independent counsel Kenneth Starr released a report in 1997 also concluding that the death was a suicide. In addition, two investigations by the U.S. Congress also found that Foster committed suicide."

So, five investigations, all concluding suicide, and not a single charge has been brought. Is that the bar...accusations without proof or charges? If so, George H.W. Bush is a raping pedophile, and his son a co-conspirator of 9/11.

Five investigations, all concluding the same thing, but you know the exact opposite is true. Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiight. Typical Republican party-over-truth position.

"The idea was to get Cliton out of power, that was done."

That was done? You mean, by getting him out of power by having his second term end?

That really showed him!

"No need to get insulting."

Truth is the ultimate defense.

Hans

"First I am a democrat."

Yeah, Clitizen, and I'm a martian.

"I have never seen a democrat here that demanded evidence when alleging the 9/11 conspiracy"

Most folks with brains avoid those threads like the plague. 9/11 happened because terrorists, mostly from Saudi Arabia, hijacked planes and flew them into buildings, coupled with a massive failure of our intelligence system.

"Yet you demand something more from me. "

Nice deflections, but the issue is the Foster suicide, Clitizen. After five investigations, all concluding you were wrong, yes, more is demanded than the throwing of feces.

Most folks with brains avoid those threads like the plague. 9/11 happened because terrorists, mostly from Saudi Arabia, hijacked planes and flew them into buildings, coupled with a massive failure of our intelligence system.


Succinct. Accurate.

Thank you.

"Most folks with brains avoid those threads like the plague. 9/11 happened because terrorists, mostly from Saudi Arabia, hijacked planes and flew them into buildings, coupled with a massive failure of our intelligence system."

I agree with Alexandrite.

Excellent, Danforth!

Hans

No need to get insulting.

Sure, go right ahead. Take away ALL our fun.

Many thanks, Alex & Hans.

You'd think something that obvious wouldn't have to be stated.

You'd think something that obvious wouldn't have to be stated.

Posted by Danforth at 2008-01-26 04:10 PM | Reply | Flag:


Yeah, well most people seem to think that Iraqis were on those planes and saddam was involved...because Bush/Cheney insinuated and lied about it over 900 times themselves or through surrogate bastards with no souls(rumsfeld, ari)

The american populace is, by and large, too willing to take our leaders at face value when they're frightened. So it becomes the job of our "leaders" to scare us shitless so we'll allow them their agendas.

Hans -

Cliton out of power - fatally injured lame duck with a Republican Majority in Congress and totally discredited. (Consider the Dems did the same thing to Bush. You know...illegal war, high treason, investigations, bring the troops home, surrender, etc....until they got elected. Hear any of those things from them now? No, they have the power they sought...no reason to go further.)

Danforth -

I can't believe that someone as bright as you appear to be would be so dumb as to believe that a party that can embrace Robert Sheets Byrd and Al Sharpton is monolithic to a point that it would exclude me. My family has registered democrat since that first disastrous republican president fought a war of aggression...against us! (Still waiting on reparations...)

As to wanting more...can you explain the lack of blood or the fact that no one in the family seems to be able to identify the gun used as his? Can you explain why the Secret Service was at his house removing files and interfering with the police investigation? Please....

" that it would exclude me. "

Who said it excludes you, Clitizen? I've just never seen you say a single good thing about the Democrats.

"As to wanting more...can you explain the lack of blood or the fact that no one in the family seems to be able to identify the gun used as his? Can you explain why the Secret Service was at his house removing files and interfering with the police investigation? Please...."

Take it up with the five groups who investigated (including Ken Starr), and all, independently, came up with the same conclusion, as well as the coroner.

Alternately, take it up with Alberto Gonzales, former head of the DOJ, who had every opportunity to investigate and bring charges if warranted.

Danforth,

I am probably guilty of painting all democrats with he "liberal" brush. There are lots of conservative democrats that I could speak well of...they generally don't make the news.

Like I said. Once Cliton was crippled, there was no longer a reason to chase and do further damage. After all, Gore would not have suffered the same credibility problems that had been created for Cliton. Had one of the investigations been successful and he been removed from office or forced to resign (and proving a Hildebeast connection to Vince Foster's demise would have done that)...Gore would have come in to his own - unscathed by the scandal of the previous administration.

Why do you think no one wants to push the issue with Bush? Is it because - despite what the libs would have us believe - he has done nothing criminally wrong? I mean...if he had...there would have been investigations, right? There would have been evidence presented, right? There would have been a trial or impeachment, right? Do you need to take that up with Miss Nancy?

"Cliton out of power - fatally injured lame duck with a Republican Majority in Congress and totally discredited."

Interesting bit of historical revision.

Fact: Clinton had a "Republican Majority in Congress" from 1995 forward. He was hardly "out of power" from 1995 forward.

Fact: In the 1998 mid-term elections the Republicans lost five seats in the House:

Hans,

I hate to let the facts get into your way. The Republicans came into power as a direct result of the Cliton Agenda...remember that health care that Hildebeast was going to give us? Regardless of the loss of 5 seats, the Republicans NEVER lost the majority.

Bill went from dictating an agenda to making statements like "I am still relevant" and "Amend it, don't end it" begging Congress not to end Affirmative Action.

Everyone in the world knew that Cliton was lying as soon as he started to move his mouth....he was done at that point.

"Everyone in the world knew that (Clinton) was lying as soon as he started to move his mouth....he was done at that point."

Which is why he left office with a sky-high approval rating, one George Bush will only be able to dream about...right, Clitizen?

"Regardless of the loss of 5 seats..."

Regardless?

With a "fatally injured" and "totally discredited" Bill Clinton in the White House, plus the 6-year-"itch," and instead of gains for the opposition party (the usual 6 year mid-term results - just ask the resident a_hole), but a loss of 5 seats?

And that's a "regardless"?

"The Republicans came into power as a direct result of the Cliton Agenda..."

And the Democrats returned as a direct result of the Bush agenda.

(The usual 6 year mid-term results - just ask the resident a_hole.)

But that was the 1994 election, not your much-vaunted "Cliton out of power" because of the impeachment proceedings.

So much for your assertion that Clinton was "fatally injured" and "totally discredited."

But don't let the facts get in the way of your delusions.

Hans

""Amend it, don't end it" begging Congress not to end Affirmative Action."

Congress ended Affirmative Action between 1995 and 2001?

Please provide a link for that.

Hans

that would certainly explain his high job approval ratings...


Which falls into the old adage that you can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, and the real question is what IS the definition of FOOL.

How about we start with NAFTA?

A_Citizen,

Reading must not be a strong suit of your....but then neither is your grasp of history.

In your 5:01pm post from yesterday YOU were the one claiming...

Cliton out of power - fatally injured lame duck with a Republican Majority in Congress and totally discredited.

...idea was to get Cliton out of power, that was done. No need to chase any further.

idea was to get Cliton out of power, that was done. No need to chase any further.

"Finally, you want to talk about popularity."

The term is "job approval," not "popularity."

If Clinton was a "fatally injured lame duck" and "totally discredited," why were his job approval ratings, after his impeachment ("idea was to get Cliton out of power, that was done"), so high?

"Proof of how stupid the American public is!"

Typical wingnut "appreciation" of the American public.

Sort of like their "support" of the troops:

Contingent upon their usefulness at the time.

Hans

Hans,

Wow that first line of text is really good - certainly not attributable to you....however as I said earlier, it is certainly applicable to you.

The chasing of Cliton began LONG before the impeachment. I would hope that a good democrat would recall that the impeachment had its origin in lying under oath, specifically about the blue dress, and about obstructing justice, by telling others to lie.

However, Travelgate, Whitewater, etc. started LONG before then. The scandals and Hillarycare catapulted the Republicans into power. The impeachment and the stench that Cliton left behind was probably the deciding factor in Bush winning the White House in 2000 - after campaigning on the idea of 'returning decency' to the office.

The chasing of scandals (and the agenda) was what put Cliton out of power. The impeachment was merely a footnote.

"The chasing of Cliton began LONG before the impeachment. "

Now you're moving the goal posts.

"The chasing of scandals (and the agenda) was what put Cliton out of power. The impeachment was merely a footnote."

Fact: Elected in 1992, re-elected in 1996.

Fact: Acquitted by the US Senate.

Fact: Instead of an expected gain of seats in the 6-year, mid-term election the GOPers lost seats.

Fact: Throughout his second term Clinton had high job approval ratings.

Fact: Clinton's vice-president received a half-million more votes in the 2000 election than his GOP opponent.

Fact: Clinton served until the end of his second term.

Real "out of power" evidence.

But don't let facts get in the way of your delusions.

Hans

Hans,

If you are referring to my 3:48 PM post, I was answering Danforth's question about why Bush diod not continue to investigate the murder of Vince Foster. As I said...there was no need to continue the chase. Cliton was out of power. Each and every scandal that was raised was done for the EXACT reason that dems have screamed to the heavans about Bush...in attempt to regain power... as I said in my 5:01 post.

Want to continue the dance?

"I was answering Danforth's question about why Bush diod not continue to investigate the murder of Vince Foster. As I said...there was no need to continue the chase. Cliton was out of power. "

You mean January 20, 2001, had come and gone (Clinton was out of power)?

Then why this comment:

Cliton out of power - fatally injured lame duck with a Republican Majority in Congress and totally discredited.

You're moving the goal posts again.

Hans

Hans,

Why don't you tell me ONE Cliton initiative, that the Republicans opposed that survived Congress post 1995. Sounds like a man in power to me.

"Fact: Clinton's vice-president received a half-million more votes in the 2000 election than his GOP opponent"

Factually untrue. The election in November is for electors, not for the candidate not a single ballot for the candidate is cast at that time. There are not millions of electors, so on the most basic level, this statement is not true.

Damn those facts! Looks like we can add civics to the list of subjects that you need help with. Are you a product of government education?

"Factually untrue."

Oops:

George W. Bush Republican Texas 50,460,110 47.9%

Al Gore Democratic Tennessee 51,003,926 48.4%

So, once again, how was Clinton a "lame duck" when his term was already over?

Hans

The election in November is for electors

Another move of the goal posts, and Hans still scores!

"Another move of the goal posts, and Hans still scores!"

Thanks, Yav. Although I am still waiting on an answer as to how was Clinton a "lame duck" when his term was already over.

Hans

if you and Hans are both dumb enough to believe that you vote FOR president.

Isn't what Hans said.

"He was a lame duck beginning in 1995 ..."

No doubt that President Bob Dole and Vice President Jack Kemp are glad of that "fact."

Hans

"Isn't what Hans said."

Of course it isn't. Thanks for pointing that out, Yav.

I do believe that we're witnessing a classic spin here.

Since he can't answer my question ("How was Clinton a "lame duck" when his term was already over?"), spin, spin, spin away.

Hans

YAV,

"Fact: Clinton's vice-president received a half-million more votes in the 2000 election than his GOP opponent"

I can do some remedial reading for you if you need to. But the statement Gore received any more than 266 votes is factually untrue. However, Hans then counters:


"Factually untrue."

Oops:

George W. Bush Republican Texas 50,460,110 47.9%

Al Gore Democratic Tennessee 51,003,926 48.4%
Unless you're using Vern's calculator.

Hans

Posted by Hans at 2008-01-27 04:47


Thus indicating a complete lack of understanding of the fact that he was wrong. Then your attempt to move the goal posts is almost laughable.

Hans,

I am still waiting on a piece of legislation that Cliton passed after 1995 that the Republicans opposed.... Being able to enact your agenda is sorta a characteristic of being in power.

"But the statement Gore received any more than 266 votes is factually untrue."

Once again, oops:

"But the statement Gore received any more than 266 votes is factually untrue."

No doubt Wiki (and every single news outlet in the world) will appreciate your "edit," wiping out the popular vote.

No doubt the fact that Gore received 543,816 more votes than Bush in the 2000 election will forever be erased from every single historical review of that election.

No doubt none of them want to be "factually untrue."

Can't wait to see all of the mea culpas flowing across newspapers, magazines and television outlets, refusing to ever again report on the popular vote from 2000, or any US presidential election, past or future, ever again.

Such "logic" certainly cannot be overlooked!

Hans

Now, once again, waiting on the answer as to how Clinton was a "lame duck" when his term was already over.

Hans

Hans,

It is obvious to me that you have not a clue what you are talking about. Gore received 266 votes and that is it. There is not a state in the union in which the voters cast a ballot for a specific candidate. They vote for his electors. That is what they have voted for since they received the right to vote for president. To make the inaccurate statement once is a mistake - twice and then an attempt to justify it is simply stupidity.

I have already answered your last question several times. Do your own research. Based upon what I have seen of your intellectual abilities thus far, I suggest that you try to focus on one thing at a time.

Therefore, admit that you have done little more than make an ass of yourself with regards to the electoral question and then research what piece of the Cliton Agenda was passed after 1995 over the objection of the Republicans.

"Gore received 266 votes and that is it."

And, once again, oops:

George W. Bush Republican Texas 50,460,110 popular votes (47.9% of the popular vote) 271 electoral votes

Al Gore Democratic Tennessee 51,003,926 popular votes (48.4% of the popular vote) 266 electoral votes

"Gore had more of the popular vote. Bush garnered more electoral votes."

Oohrah... can't you read?

But the statement Gore received any more than 266 votes is factually untrue.

Posted by A_Citizen at 2008-01-27 05:33 PM

It is obvious to me that you have not a clue what you are talking about. Gore received 266 votes and that is it.

Posted by A_Citizen at 2008-01-27 05:54 PM

"Gore had more of the popular vote. Bush garnered more electoral votes."

And, Oohrah... you're absolutely correct.

The point was, Gore received over a half-million more (popular) votes than Bush.

How was that possible if the incumbent, Bill Clinton, was supposedly a "fatally injured lame duck" and "totally discredited"?

If A_Clitizen wasn't so filled with hatred for Bill Clinton he could see that.

Hans

"check your box"

Checked... and replied, Oohrah.

Hans

Hans,

I don't hate Bill Cliton at all. In fact, if I could have him back (And the same Republican majority in Congress) I would take him over any of the contenders for office this go round. Because of the gridlock that was created, government did very little that was not for the good of the people, Cliton's agenda was dead, the market thrived, and government shut down....who could ask for more?

Was he a liar - yes. Ineffective post 1995 - yes. Do the Republicans directly owe him for the majority in Congress and ultimately winning the White House - yes.

"I don't hate Bill Cliton at all."

A self-retorting retort.

Hans

"I don't hate Bill Cliton at all."

Then why do you keep calling him "Cliton"?

"Yes, Clinton was a liar. He continues to be one today..."

Are there any current politicians who could not be called a "liar"?

Hans

Bill -

I call him that for several reasons:

1. that is the single largest contribution he made to the office. 100 years from now the blue dress, monica and impeachment will be all that is left of his administration.

2. I reject him as a person. Simply speaking - he is a piece of shit. But during his administration, I made money, benefited from the way government was at the time, so I can't say I hate him.

3. for the same reason people call our current president by his slew of slurs, or that some refer to Huckabee as Hucksterbee, etc. The slur of the name identifies a trait of the person. Cliton fits him well.

"The slur of the name identifies a trait of the person."

Actually, the slur says a whole lot more about the speaker than it does the target.

I once said a similar thing to JeffJ, who never used the "Cliton" slur again.

Hans

"all get the "liar" moniker. Fewer have lied under oath, like B Clinton has done."

Is french kissing someone who is not your spouse considered adultery?

Is oral sex with someone who is not your spouse considered adultery?

Is sexual intercourse with someone who is not your spouse considered adultery?

Are they degrees... or are they the same?

Hans

There are instances where I get concerned what someone thinks of me to a point I consider changing my conduct or words. Considering the general tone of the Retort, I am not going to give up my right to slur, when most other folks here engage in that kind of conduct without remorse or interference.

Want to be consistent, go correct the actions of the following:

"Dumbya" Posted by danni at 2008-01-26 07:48 AM

"Shrub" Posted by Zap at 2008-01-27 08:41 AM

"twiddle dee and twiddle dum (the Bush Twins)" Posted by mariachi at 2008-01-27 10:31 AM

"Chimpy" Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2008-01-26 02:38 AM

You let me know when you get that problem corrected, and I will again find my N when I type his name.

Hans -

I don't think the question he lied about Under Oath was "have you committed adultery?"

"For a sitting president, a lawyer no less, to lie under oath... not good."

I never said it was good. But there's a certain amount of moral equivalency going on here.

Either lying is wrong, under oath or not, or it isn't wrong.

There's this "lying under oath is so wrong" but other lies by politicians are, well, to be expected.

I say lies are lies. Legally there's a difference. But "in the eyes of God" different?

"But when you are under oath testifiying in a sexual harrasment case, then you have to tell the truth."

At its core that is one reason why I believe that Clinton was given a certain amount of leeway in the whole situation.

Most people understand (read: understand, not condone) lying about an extra-marital affair, regardless of the venue where the lying takes place. They understand the attempt to keep family from being hurt.

Hans

"I am not willing to lower the legal bar in regard to any POTUS. "

Agreed:

President Reagan, backing away from his own previous statements on what he called ''the Iran-contra so-called affair,'' said today that it was not a scandal, ''and never at any time did we view this as trading weapons for hostages.''

All of this concern about lying under oath (regarding an extra-marital affair) ignores a more fundamental truth about presidential lying:

All of this concern about lying under oath (regarding an extra-marital affair) ignores a more fundamental truth about presidential lying:


Iran Contra has not been ignored. It has been recorded by history. It is simply unrelated to the lying Clintons and therefore need not be mentioned in that context. (duh)

Funny how whenever the right brings up Clinton lying under oath the left cries "Clinton's blowjob! Deflection!" But the left can bring up Iran Contra under the guise of "ignoring a fundamental truth".

Such is the ugly and ignorant side of lack of moderation. *sigh* I wish this country would outgrow this myopia known as petty partisian politics. America would be a far better place.

"Such is the ugly and ignorant side of lack of moderation."

goatman... a friendly recommendation:

Someone who piously says:

I see that by leaving I am merely changing the channel.

..should not return by commenting on politicians who lie or don't lie.

I did not realize I had given up my first ammendment rights, Hans. You know, I didn't.

Tell me, Hans, when you leave someplace, do you never return? You do sometimes? Is this a right that only you have, or may others exercise it? Or do they need your permission to exercise it? You need to explain these things to me o sagacious one!

If I want to speak on lying politicians, I will. Deal with it

On this blog I don't triumphantly announce Hans Leaves like some others here

On this blog, I don't sanctimoniously deflect to Iran Contra when a Clinton is cast in a negative light. We are different, people, Hans. We post differently.

Deal with it

Fine. But don't be surprised when people remark on someone who announces that they're leaving (goatman leaves) and yet they don't leave.

Likewise, don't be surprised when people remark on your deflctions. Besides, I did leave, Hans. For two weeks.

Deal with it.

At least Goatman, if he changed his mind about returning to DR, had the cajones to come back on here using his real username instead of trying to slither back and hide using a bunch of phony different names -- like a few others have done in the past. It takes more guts -- after having said you were leaving for good -- to just come on and say you've changed your mind and have decided to return. At least he's being honest about it.

gutsman...yeah! Great new name for goatie:>)

"Besides, I did leave, Hans. For two weeks."

So much for the "time to change channels"

This comment is especially resonant:

"I am leaving for good."

Apparently, "leaving for good" is "two weeks."

Hans

I thought everybody was going to drop the whole Goat/Spud episode? No more "dead potato" or take-offs making fun of Dethspud's name should be done to him either when he comes back. What's next? Someone will demand when Spud comes back that he apologize to Goat first? Then on and on and on this whole episode goes without end. imho -- let's just let both those guys come back on DR without anybody having to eat their words first. That's all I have to say about it. You all do what you want.

Hans: Have you been 100% faithful to every declaration you've ever made to everyone in your life?

Hey...Goatman!!!

I'm so glad you're back!!!

And don't go away again, ok?!

GOATMAN said he might be back. What's the big deal?

"I thought everybody was going to drop the whole Goat/Spud episode?"

Might want to run that by _2112_ and ride_on.

"Hans: Have you been 100% faithful to every declaration you've ever made to everyone in your life?"

I try to refrain from making maudlin declarations... especially on public blogs.

Too bad others don't heed that sage advice.

Otherwise "I am leaving for good." tends to lose any real meaning.

Hans

People make decisions based on emotion. I don't know of anyone that doesn't.

I'm glad you're back Goatman. I hope Sir Spud does as well.

"GOATMAN said he might be back."

Unlike last time when I said I was simply taking a break, I am leaving for good.

"Have you been 100% faithful to every declaration you've ever made to everyone in your life?"

Interesting to see a public declaration of infidelity to one's word.

Hans

Interesting to see a public declaration of infidelity to one's word.

I try to refrain from making maudlin declarations...



I'll take that these responses as a "no" to my question, Hans.

That being the case, what makes you so superior even though you've done the same? Or are you human too?

"...what makes you so superior even though you've done the same?"

Naturally you have example of me doing "the same."

This should be interesting.

Hans

Naturally you have example of me doing "the same."


No. But your failure to answer my question directly speaks volumes.

I'll ask again since you failed to answer the first time:

Hans: Have you been 100% faithful to every declaration you've ever made to everyone in your life?

"But your failure to answer my question directly speaks volumes."

And your unfaithfulness to your own word ("I am leaving for good.") screams volumes.

goatman... stay. Don't stay.

I could care less.

But after making a public statement announcing you're leaving...

Interesting to see a public declaration of infidelity to one's word.

Interesting only to those who are a stranger to honesty with themselves and put themselves on pedestals. The rest of us see no particular interest in human weakness. It's a way of life for us mere mortals.

"No."

Of course you don't.

Hans

HANS

Please drop it

Anyone is welcome to post here anytime they want unless they get banned.

AU :-)

I agree with Au in this instance.

But the "I'm leaving now" card can only be played once. After that people tend to ignore or ridicule whatever poster has played it multiple times.(asshammer is an example)

Until that time,(if ever) I'm not gonna mention it, goatman.

Welcome back.

"Interesting only to those who are a stranger to honesty with themselves and put themselves on pedestals."

You mean like people who dedicate entire threads to leaving the Drudge...

Hans: Have you been 100% faithful to every declaration you've ever made to everyone in your life?

Deal?

spud had the same problem. Being perfect and never erring


His problem was with you personally, which was his real mistake. But, I've seen spud admit error before. The trait your describing belongs to someone like tadowe, not spud.

Will you and hans please drop this topic?

goatman... stay. Don't stay.

I could care less.

Hi Hans! Long time no see. Hope you are well. BTW, don't you mean: I couldn't care less?

"Please drop it"

And fall off my pedestal?

Hans

"BTW, don't you mean: I couldn't care less?"

Perhaps.

And GREAT to see you, Gal!

Hans

And fall off my pedestal?

I'll catch you. For a small fee of course...

: )

You mean that kind of pedestal?

No, I mean the kind of pedestal where a person cannot admit that they are human, too. Will you? (if after 3 times, it is doubtful. The god-syndrome runs deep)

Hans: Have you been 100% faithful to every declaration you've ever made to everyone in your life?

Gal Tuesday- Hey, long time.

Will you and hans please drop this topic?

I can't speak for Hans, but I will.

"Is it that hard to be honest with yourself Hans"

I find no lack of irony in a comment from someone asking me to be "honest" with myself... especially after dedicating an entire tread to announcing his departure from the Drudge...

... only to return.

Hans

"I can't speak for Hans, but I will."

Of course.

But only after a "be honest with yourself, Hans" post.

Hans

Hey Alex! Good to see you too. Now what's all this about Spud having left over some Goat/Spud episode???

"Now what's all this about Spud having left over some Goat/Spud episode???"

Fortunately, Gal has directed this question to Alex.

I am afraid I would not be as gracious as our good friend Alex in answering this question.

Hans

But the "I'm leaving now" card can only be played once. After that people tend to ignore or ridicule whatever poster has played it multiple times.(asshammer is an example)
Until that time,(if ever) I'm not gonna mention it, goatman.
Welcome back.
Posted by Alexandrite


Alex, I think the "I'm leaving for good" card is the one we need to be concerned about. But since Goat is up being up front about coming back I agree with you and I also say:

Welcome back, Goat!

"Please drop it"

And fall off my pedestal?

Hans

LOL That depends on the meaning of 'it'.

Gal- Long painful story exceedingly short.

Goatman kept going after spud the way he used to with bob.
Spud punched back way too hard and hit him in the dead wife.

Spud got nine dumps as the conversation headed subterranian, and goatman declared he was leaving with a thread.

Goat is back. Spud is unbanned. And that's that.(I hope)

Fortunately, Gal has directed this question to Alex.

Actually, I was asking anyone who would like to answer. Spud has been posting 'round these here parts almost as long as I have, so it's a bit of a shock to hear he's gone for good.

"...so it's a bit of a shock to hear he's gone for good."

Yes.

And, sadly, we might have seen the last of our good friend Dethspud.

I hope I am wrong about that, Gal. My earliest memories of being on the Drudge are of reading Spud's posts.

Yesterday was his birthday.

Hans

Thanks, Alex.

My wife and I watch a little of "MIami CSI" as a comedy and laugh at almost every line David Caruso utters. I do a mean impression of him: "I................." or "You knowwwwwwwww" Or how he always leaves a room without telling anyone where he's going.

The guy is always turned sideways. What a lucky guy to have a network TV gig.

Did spud say he was never coming back? Does anyone email him? I've never contacted him outside of drudge.

"And that's that.(I hope)"

Critical piece missing, Alex.

But that'll do it, I guess.

Hans

I hope I am wrong about that, Gal. My earliest memories of being on the Drudge are of reading Spud's posts.

Me too. Happy birthday, Spud, wherever you are.

AU- Did David start his career in soap operas or did NYPD blue turn him into a crab?

Miami sucks so hard because of Caruso. "I'm horatio cane"

*pose*

*toilet flush*

*turns on CSI Vegas for some real TV*

"Did spud say he was never coming back?"

He's conspicuous by his absence.

"Does anyone email him?"

Unanswered. :-(

Hans

Dare I ask what I missed, hans? Wasn't here for the whole episode. Turned the channel cuz it sucked.

if I ruled the world potatos, goats, and buffalo would all live in harmony. :-)

"Please drop it"

And fall off my pedestal?

Hans

Posted by Hans


flyin' high, too? ff

Any one of us could act better than David Caruso. LOL

I especially get a kick out of when he's in a room with a 6' 8" guy with arms the size of garbage cans and Horatio gives a look that says, "pal, don't make me tear you a new asshole".

THAT'S funny !!

Vegas is good. My wife's favorite show. I watch with her sometimes.

"Dare I ask what I missed, hans?"

My e-mail's public.

Hans

if I ruled the world potatos, goats, and buffalo would all live in harmony. :-)

Posted by AMERICANUNITY


just what we need ~ another world peace freak...don't u think that if God wanted peace ~ we would have it?:>)

I don't understand why Caruso always stands sideways. He even shoots sideways.

5 bucks says David Caruso has a toupe. At the very least he dyes his hair.

OH, and the sunglasses flipoff. Oooooo "Mr. Cool' LOL

He just entered a house, gun drawn, at a 30 degree sidewars tilt - and flipped off his sunglasses LOL!!!

I'll check it out Hans

Do vegetables and animals live in peace there?

I should have said starches and proteins

Alex and Hans,

Thanks for the update. Didn't mean to bloody the waters. :-( Pax to you both.

Larry has been gone a month. Is he taking a break?

He just entered a house, gun drawn, at a 30 degree sidewars tilt - and flipped off his sunglasses LOL!!!

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2008-01-28 12:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

Let's hope his character gets ass cancer and dies.(in ONE episode)

LMAO Alex !!!!!!!

Do vegetables and animals live in peace there?

Posted by AMERICANUNITY


maybe in the next episode of the "Golden Compass"

Can you imagine a 'CSI Fargo"?

"okie dokey then'

On 'CSI Fargo" they'd spend an entire season solving the one murder in North Dakota per year.

CSI Detroit. Are you listening TV executives?

Larry has been gone a month. Is he taking a break?

Posted by byrdman


lipo?

Utterly sick and tired of the hyper-individualism and consumerism we decided enough was enough; we want a country that is really fair to all it's people. We want a country that is more concerned with the health of their neighbor than whether or not they'll get the new hot gadget when it is released. We want a country where its citizens feel that their obligation to our country extends beyond just paying taxes. We want, and demand a change in all facets of our country!

lipo?

litter

Goatman

Me too (your 12:36)

Shoot, these days people barely know their next door neighbor.

"CSi DesMoines"

"I'm gonna have to have a look at that corncob. Now drop it!!"

"We want a country where its citizens feel that their obligation to our country extends beyond just paying taxes"

Half the country wants to fight an expensive war and not pay for it themselves. God forbid they should have to contribute to paying off that debt.

Goatman-

Utterly sick and tired of the hyper-individualism and consumerism we decided enough was enough; we want a country that is really fair to all it's people. We want a country that is more concerned with the health of their neighbor than whether or not they'll get the new hot gadget when it is released. We want a country where its citizens feel that their obligation to our country extends beyond just paying taxes. We want, and demand a change in all facets of our country!


See, ya had me there...but then followed it up with a sick piece of trolling. *sigh*

For the record, I know 3 of my neighbors and spend regular time with one of them and their rather large family. My other cool ass neighbor is gone all the time, which is too bad.

In my old neighborhood I knew almost no one at all.

Seriously doubt lipo is the answer. I was guessing jail.

CSI: Cambodia.

"The victim was executed"

OK, this could get really dark if I keep going.

I know my neighbors, but I made a point of it.

Shoot, these days people barely know their next door neighbor.

That's sad. Everyone of the living from my childhood neighborhood still reserves the 4th of July to be with each other. If they have family or friends who want to come, fine. But they all stay in the neighborhood with each other. Been going on since 1965.

Where it used to be me and the neighborhood kids putting firecrackers in the ripe tomatoes and figs and coming back muddy from the creek, it soon became our own kids. Now a new generation is dawning and it is our grandkids.

A great tradition, and great way to be neighborly. What you say is true, AU, that many don't know their own neighbors. That's sad. I still know mine from over 40 years ago.

Larry came back exclusively as goatman, since they're the same person.

CSI North Minneapolis

"Is arson still a crime?"

Larry came back exclusively as goatman, since they're the same person.

Posted by Alexandrite

gutsman doesn't sound Catholic enough to be lipoman

See, ya had me there...but then followed it up with a sick piece of trolling. *sigh*

The litter comment was uncalled for, Alex. You are right. I apologize. But believe me it wasn't meant as a troll -- just a sick joke.

gutsman doesn't sound Catholic enough to be lipoman

I haven't been catholic enough since father Smythe caught me chugging his Gallo from the gallon jug and eating the hosts when I was an altar boy. That pretty much took me off the bell-ringing and genuflecting circuit.

CSI: West Virginia.

"Indrid cold just called again..."

I often wonder when people leave here if some of them may have died. Some people just disappear. Take Scarey E for example. He just never came back. There are others out there too. DKIA left for Iraq and never made it back.

My best friend and even my good friends usually start as neighbors.

I've had some pretty bad neighbors too. In fact I'm in the process of pissing one of them off right now. But then I'm the rolling stone so I have myriad of experiences.

Just ask ;- )


Hey Goat, glad you're back.

Bani

Tonight Larry King had on two guys (one pro and one con) about the validity of UFO's and the show also talked to one of the guys who saw the UFO in Texas last week. (Good photos of UFOs during the show too.) Don't know your time zone but if you can catch a rerun of it sometime tonight you might find it as interesting as I did.

Ozark

I remember that song and nobody sant sang "Wheel of Fortune" it like Kaye Starr. Who am I thinking of with the name Kay (?) or Star(?) who sang a version of "God Bless America" better than almost anyone? I'll google around later and find it.

Kate Smith?

Yep. Kate Smith

Shoot, these days people barely know their next door neighbor....

I hardly know any of the people around me. I moved here to my neighborhood at 12 and went thru the schools and everything. But then I had been away for years after I grew up and when I moved back home a few years ago to help my Mom because my Mom all the neighbors' kids I grew up had moved out on their own too. Their parents (all the neighbors I knew as a kid) had either passed away, moved to retirement communities, or are still here but are now at least in their 80's. I don't know any of the newer and younger people who moved in during the years I was gone. I think mayhe I know the neighbors in only about 4 or 5 homes with a couple more on a "met only once or twice" basis.
Maybe I should throw a hell of a block party?

We had a lady in my chruch growing up that reminded me of her - well, until she started getting old.

When she did start to get elderly, her vibrato was created by moving her chin like Katherine Hepburn on the long notes.

GOD! She got me in trouble so many times because my sister and I couldn't help but giggling and then laughing out loud during hymns.

On the street I grew up on most of my friend's parents - well, the surviving ones - still live there. In some of the homes where the parents are both gone the kids live there now. It's like old home week when I go to visit.

Thinking about it, I probably knew more people than my parents because I went to play with the other kids and then had a paperoute. My folks usually only went to the neighbors to get me home for dinner or something. The neighbors (GASP!!) drank beer and my folks were at church (dragging us along) every time the doors were open. Sunday morning, evening, and Wednesday night prayer meetings.

CC Sup!!!!!

If I were a rap fan......... YO! Thanks for taking the time though It was fly

On a related note:

It's a bitch during primaries. So many candidates everyone has their favorite. I don't begrudge anyone their pick. I just hate the intraparty BS and trying to paint someone into a corner along racial lines using Karl Rove tactics. That's for the GOP to use. I abhor any of that brand of politics from anyone. But, not that I'm cooling down a little bit over Bill's BS I'll have to take a 'wait and see' attitude. I will commit harikari before I'd ever vote for Mitt Romney! Gag me with a spoon!!

David Lettermen said he looks like an actor playing an American president in a bad Canadian TV movie LOL Pretty spot on if you ask me.

"But, NOW that I'm cooling down a little bit over Bill's BS"

Although he did it again last night "Well, Jesse Jackson won here in '84 and '88"

Will someone tell him to shut up? Many have. He won't listen :-)

BBOB -- Where are you?

Come baaaaack!

Gordon Hinkly - President of the Mormon church has passed away at age 97

Mitt Romney for President!!!!! (of the Mormon Church)

"Well, Jesse Jackson won here in '84 and '88" Will someone tell him to shut up?

Bill Clinton can't shut up. This is his second chance to be Co-President.

Same for Senatauh Clintooon (tm).

Personally I don't know what John Edwards is doing. He should be the one to attack the Clintons.

But now we can see the bigotry in the Democratic Party. For all these years as it fragmented into special interest groups and pandered as Senatauh Clintooon (tm) is doing with her "something for everyone" strategy, the Democrats have PC'd themselves into a self-righteous corner where we can now see them for what they have always been: Petty Tyrants.

Clinton benefited from an economy driven by the end of the Cold War, accessible computing for the masses, a ramped up manufacturing base in the tech sector (which along with the Internet Boom to Bust cycle crashed because of overcapacity in 2000), and constraints by Congress on spending in concert with Greenspan's Federal Reserve policy.

Nonetheless those 8 years provided the American public and the tabloid news vendors with a never ending circus, and policy debacles like NAFTA. Back in office you can expect that the North American Union will be pushed until it is a fait accompli.

As Zat said of the Bushies, These people have no shame, and it would be a shame if the American people were led astray for a second time.

ABC--Anyone But Clinton. It's that simple.

I've always thought he was overpaid and underworked...if he'd had been a mule on our farm,he wouldn't have got fed but every other day...

You crack me up Am-1.

But there's nothing like hillbilly logic to shine a light. Regardless of "job approval" which most Americans are ill-equipped to judge, Bubba never got a majority of the vote, and Senatauh Clintooon (tm) will top out at 45% if nominated.

Let that pig eat all she wants.