After weeks of hammering Barack Obama for having an association with a former Weather Undergound member, John McCain was asked Thursday afternoon about his own connections to a past felon: G. Gordon Liddy.

The question came, of all places, from late night comedian David Letterman, who pressed the Senator to explain why he was friendly with the man who was convicted in the Watergate scandal of conspiracy, burglary, and illegal wiretapping. McCain - according to an advanced report of the show - initially said that he "met" Liddy before adding, "He paid his debt, he went to prison, he paid his debt."

NULL

That was funny. My wife and I caught Letterman tonight.

G. Gordon Liddy sent McCain this:

So John McCriminal doesn't mind palling around with known criminals but oh Mannnn if Barack Obama does it perish the thought. I just don't know about McCalamity I really don't. When You think He can't sink any lower He surprises You. Unfuckingbelievable.

Larry

Ya, that was a jaw dropper.

Another uncomfortable moment came during an interview with Katie Couric when she asked the candidates the same questions. One question was about the MOC from Florida who just got caught with a mistress - the one who replaced Mark Foley.

Katie asked, "what do you make of politicians who preach one thing and then are found to be unfaithful?"

What could McCain say to that one?

Not much AmericanUnity. Oh I got Your email. I was going to reply then My web email service provider took a dump and now I can't access it yet. Should be cleared up by mid next week. All is well on My end how about Your end??

Larry

It's OK. Been a tad in the dumps after all that's happened this year. Rough patch. But, 'this too shall pass'. Getting geared up to do a little traveling to see some extended family. It's always good to get away and refresh one's perspective.

I'll look for your emails when you get things up and running again. Did you rap to the quick track I sent you? LOL Master Larry Mo! Take care.

McCain, tucked in for the night with terrorists and traitors Oliver North and G. Gordon ("My Wife's Name is 'Mrs. Liddy'") Liddy...Oh, right, it was done for the uber-good.

Don't see any Rightbots complaining.

Oops, my bad. I forgot: Situational ethics, the trump card in the Rovian deck.

Liddy should have been put in jail for telling his radio listeners that the ATF logo on their hats was a target for bullets.

AU- let me know when you're in MI. I'd like to meet you.

ALEX

Sounds good to me. It probably won't be until Spring, but it would be fun to hook up.

The extended family I'm going to visit sooner live in Florida and Portland, OR

I'll probably swing up to MI in the spring. It'd be a pleasure to meet you too. AND we'll probably have a President Obama by then too if things keep on keepin' on for another 19 days.

What part of the planet do you live in/on, AU?
Alex, Upper or Lower Penninsula?

DOC

I live in Nashville, TN

I lived in Chicago and Detroit til 18, and then L.A. for many years. Been here in beautiful Nashville for quite awhile.

Thanks AU never thought about THAT stuff before. I'll give it a go and see what happens.

Larry

How about you, DOC?

AU-

Born in PA, childhood in Southern Cal, then on to the Mexican border in southern Arizona, Big Sur in the hippie days, the Navajo Rez, Kansas and now. . .wait for it. . .Oklahoma.

Oklahoma .... where the RED comes sweeping down the plain...

TN isn't a whole lot better, but it's definitely improving as more and more people move here from all over the U.S. You ever get down this way give me a call and I'll show ya around.

I lived in SoCal a long time myself.

Where I am, AU, it's ORANGE.

If I do get to Nashville---I have a son in the Keys---I definitely will let you know ahead of time. What a hoot.

Southern Cal was pretty good back then. When we got to the AZ-Mexico border I adapted pretty fast, loved it. My brother used to drive to high school there with his surfboard strapped to the top of my Mom's car. He wasn't quite as adaptable.

Were you in SCalf in the KFWB, B. Mitchell Reed Days or later?

I was in SoCal 1974-1987

Nashville's pretty blue. Memphis is solid blue. It's East Tennessee that's F'd up. Them thar hills and inbreeding caused a lot of political retardation. LOL

Definitely stop here for a day or two. I'm easy to get to off I-40.

I have a public email on my User Page you can email me at. I'll get back to you with my contact info.....

I was at the University of Tennessee a few years back giving a talk and some of the folks there told me that you didn't have to go too far out of Knoxville to be in Dayton (as in "Monkey Trial") coutry.

If I do get up to coming that way, I'll definitely let you know.

By the way, when traveling, no matter what: Avoid the Mexican food in Cordele, Georgia.

Avoid the Mexican food in Cordele, Georgia.

Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Will do! Thanks for the heads up!

We're starting to get some good Mexican food around here now.

When you come through we'll grab some good chow.

I remember hitchhiking through the Smokies when I was in high school with a buddy to hit Spring Break in Florida. I-75 wasn't completed yet through there, and so it was two lane roads and some VERY interesting characters. One thing that sticks in my memory were the kids in the hills with no shoes (this was the 70's mind you) who stared at us like we were from Mars.

I'll tell you about 400 lb Bubba and his twin, Bubba, when I ate my first grits. That story's a hoot!! Think "My Cousin Vinnie"

The instant I ran across the word "grits" in the post, even before I got to your film reference, I thought: "My Cousin Vinny."

I have a friend who's a corporate lawyer in Scottsdale---we used to talk revolution back in the day, obviously took separate paths---and he would love to get up in front of a jury and say, "Everything that guy just said is bullshit...Thank you."

LOL !!!!

My buddy and I had long hair and bell bottoms.

We got a lot of "y'all ain't from around here are ye?" on that trip.

"long hair and bell bottoms"

Yeah, "Y'all not from here, are yas?"

Remember those days well.

A bit earlier, during Vietnam, I remember meeting a date's father---a low life GOPiggie real estate shyster---and he tried to brace me on radical politics on campus. (We're talking the era of the Last Poets and "When the Revolution Comes...") He wanted to know if I "liked" Communism. I told him it had some good points but was waaaay too conservative.

LOL

I hit the 'hippie' era when it was pretty much over, but had a trenchcoat, Cheech and Chong giga rolling paper, and long hair nonetheless.

On the other hand, I'd been a classical pianist and A student at the same time.

I graduated in 1974. Now, 'the man' are those who rape shareholders and taxpayers for nothing but pure greed. Cops don't bug me at all LOL

"I'd been a classical pianist and A student at the same time."

Makes for an interesting life.

What think ye of Glenn Gould's "Goldberg Variations" (any incarnation)?

Used to listen (a lot) to Van Cliburn's prize-winner from Moscow. Ran into him once in the Tucson airport (when it was tiny). Very much a modest gentleman.

What think ye of Glenn Gould's "Goldberg Variations" (any incarnation)?

I prefer the 80's version. Stereo is so much better.

I got out of classical music when I left high school. 5 hours a day of practice since I was a tike burned me out. Being much more interested in composing, my studies moved to conducting, arranging, and such in commercial music. Somehow the idea of being married to a piano for 8 hours a day for the rest of my life playing someone else's music didn't appeal. I did 3 years of touring as a teenager playing with symphonies. The stuffy, snobby attitudes of the old crusts who couldn't even agree among themselves about how a passage by (insert composition here) should be played was too pretentious and limiting for my free sprited mind and attitude.

Luckily, when I move off to go to university, a world famous film composer took me as one of a handful in his class and then helped me get work when my chops were good enough. Claire Fisher, Henry Mancini's conductor, taught me about commercial arranging. Then, I got into a plethora of various music from playing with rock stars to orchestral music for feature films. I learned songwriting years ago, and now mix all that up to lead a varied musical career that enables me to work when and where I want, and take time off when I need to. All in all I really enjoy it.

I do pull out some of my favorite classical pieces from time to time and get those chops rockin' too. Most recently, Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue. Last year, Beethoven's Sonatas.

AU, you're obviously doing something you like to do. Consider yourself fortunate. (I'm not moaning; I love what I do and am thankful for being able to do it.) I'm curious---and I know nothing about it---how much does interpretation play into a production of a classical piece? I used to think if it was "written" down in musical notation that was that. But then I'd listen to Leonard Bernstein conduct the NY Philharmonic in a Beethoven piece and Herbert von Karajan lead the Berlin Philharmmonic through the same symphony and the two recordings were significantly different. Is it like different readings of Shakespeare?

There's only room for interpretation in classical music.

Oddly though, much of the classical music repertoire we hear today is quite different than the original composer's intent.

There are boundaries for sure, but interpretation is acceptable, even though purists will bitch and moan no matter who's interpretation is is - if it isn't their favorite.

The old, "different strokes for different folks" applies.

Critics are critics by and large because they can't do what they critique. Ain't that the way? LOL

If you wanted a good dose of Baroque, where would you go? Hogwood and the Academy of Ancient Music?

If you wanted a good dose of Baroque, where would you go? Hogwood and the Academy of Ancient Music?

My CD collection.

I've never been a huge baroque fan - well, with the exception of Handelm, Bach, and Mozart, although I'm not fond of the fluffier, light baroque selections. I need melody, and when they get too complex for complexities sake they lose me. Handel's Messiah moves me greatly to my soul.

Romantic music is my classical music love. I had a statue of Beethoven on my piano like Linus from Peanuts did. I LOVE large ensembles and the passion of the music. When I went to bury my sister in May, the Detroit Symphony did Beethoven's 9th. So moving. It was the finale to that trip. I always felt God in certain musical selections, the 3rd movement of that being one. I also love Rachmaninoff, Copeland, and well .. a lot of others.

I should add that had Mozart had the instruments and size of orchestras Beethoven had he'd have been every bit as popular. Bad timing.

***** McCain Defends G. Gordon Liddy ****

.......seems McCain has closer ties to terrorists than Obama..........

.....not to mention that seccessionist traitor Todd Palin......

didn't jimmy carter commute liddy's sentence?

"McCain Defends G. Gordon Liddy"

This is defending Liddy?

"I know Gordon Liddy. He paid his debt, he went to prison ... I'm not in any way embarrassed to know Gordon Liddy."

Obama's buddy did not pay his debt. Ayers ran. His case was thrown out on a technicality. Ayers brags about his involvement. Does Obama defend his friend? Nope, Obama doesn't defend anybody. Obama blames others. Obama changes the subject and twists it into an attack on himself.

The buzz going around is that his friend Ayers ghost wrote "Dreams of My Father". This book has many similarities with Ayers' own books. Can't get much closer than that.

You know that Obama and Ayers are friends? Buddies? Prove it. No, not the talking points your masters feed you. Proof.

Liddy was apprehended, indicted, tried, convicted, and did jail time.

What are Ayers tried for? What was he convicted of having done? How much time did he serve?

"The buzz going around". . .

That's just the sound you hear in your head.

"This book has many similarities with Ayers' own books."

Printed words on paper contained within covers. Yeah, sounds like something well worth looking into.

"Can't get much closer than that."

Make yourself useful; go check out the Grassy Knoll and see if you can get a clue.

"His case was thrown out on a technicality"

So was Oliver North's.

Your point?

Obama's ... BUDDY....did did not pay his debt.

#36 | Posted by KBM at 2008-10-17 09:31 AM |

Go Fuck Yourself !!... Why don't you go ask your buddy John McAsshole about his (3) trips to the Bahama's on Charles Keeting's private Jet after this fucking asshole fucked the American People out of Billions.

But McAsshole wasn't palling around with him.

What a campaign this fuckface has run on behalf of the Republiscums!!

The glaring flaw in McCain's rationalization is that AFTER SERVING IN PRISON, Liddy broadcast a recommendation that citizens shoot federal agents in the head.

"The buzz going around is that his friend Ayers ghost wrote "Dreams of My Father"."

That buzz is only occurring inside right wing nut cases' heads. The more you post the more I laugh KBM. Keep it up, you are great entertainment.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You are comparing Bill Ayers to Liddy?

This is truly the most desperate things I've ever seen by the Libs.

Why are you being desperate? You are winning!!

"You are comparing Bill Ayers to Liddy?"

Let's see, one's a convicted felon and one isn't.
Care to guess which is which, Eddie?
Nah, better have your first shot of Ovaltine before doing that kind of heavy lifting.

Desperation? Hardly. Why are righties all in a twitter about the depths of McCain's lies and falsehoods? What's a matter, Eddie, was Ward a little hard on the Beaver last night?

Let's see, one's a convicted felon and one isn't.
Care to guess which is which, Eddie?
Nah, better have your first shot of Ovaltine before doing that kind of heavy lifting.

#43 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Come on, Doc. You're disgusting.

Are you really defending Ayers?

"William Charles "Bill" Ayers (born 26 December 1944)[1] is an American elementary education theorist and former 1960s anti-war activist. He is known for the radical nature of his activism in the 1960s and 1970s as well as his current work in education reform, curriculum, and instruction. In 1969 he cofounded the radical left organization the Weather Underground, which conducted a campaign of bombing public buildings during the 1960s and 1970s."

And this fuck is working with children now?

......How about McCain palling around with that seccessionist traitor Todd Palin ??.........

.......could Todd have ghost-written the McCain book "Secceeding from Bush"..??.......or the other McCain book "Separating from the Past 8 Years"....or the other McCain Book "Separatist Fleets of My Fathers ?"........

.......McCain has to come clean about his evil relationship with the seccessionist traitor.........

"Are you really defending Ayers?"

Did it hurt much when you jumped the shark, Eddie?

I didn't support Ayers' descent into the Weatherman swamp at the time it happened and I don't support it today.

But here's some late-breaking news for you, Eddie: Bill Ayers has done a hell of a lot more to try and improve the United States of America than G. Gordon Liddy.

Plus---fasten your safety belt and hold onto your hat---Liddy's a convicted felon and Ayers isn't.

How many convicted felons has Obama embraced?

How many convicted felons has McCain embraced?

......How about McCain palling around with that seccessionist traitor Todd Palin ??.........

#47 | Posted by skizziks

How is this traitorous?

Wants to pull out of a country that is self-destructing?

Got Neocons on one side draining the treasury

and Libs on the other side moving the country toward communism.

Where does the traitor part come in?

"Where does the traitor part come in?"

Eddie, give The Google a workout. Try these search terms: "Civil War" "1861-1864."

Plus---fasten your safety belt and hold onto your hat---Liddy's a convicted felon and Ayers isn't.

How many convicted felons has Obama embraced?

How many convicted felons has McCain embraced?

#48 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

So what?

Liddy paid for his crime. Ayers didn't. OK?

Ayers writes:

"Although the bomb that rocked the Pentagon was itsy-bitsy - weighing close to two pounds - it caused 'tens of thousands of dollars' of damage. The operation cost under $500, and no one was killed or even hurt. [14]"

You are disgusting, at best, Doc.

you are a slime that defends bombers!

Tune into Fox and watch Karl Rove comment on Bill Ayers then come back and tell us about your moral indignation about Ayers so I can laugh in your face.

Where does the traitor part come in?

#49 | Posted by Eddie

The part where Liddy tells his listeners to aim for the heads of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agents when shooting it out with them.

During Vietnam we napalmed millions, thousands of children grew up and still live with the scars (the lucky ones who weren't killed). The war crimes committed by the United States (as admitted by former Def. Sec. McNamara) make Ayers crimes miniscule in comparison. When one's country is involved in a crime against humanity as the war in Vietnam was it forever clouds the ability to brand the actions by opponents of that war as criminals.
There were opponents of Hitler who blew up buildings in Germany, had Germany won that war they would have been considered terrorists but since we won they are considered heroes. As in so many things, simplistic decisions about right and wrong are impossible when dealing with issues relating to the Vietnam War.

"Where does the traitor part come in?"

Eddie, give The Google a workout. Try these search terms: "Civil War" "1861-1864."

#50 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

A true fuck up of the United States. A. Lincoln had the balls to believe in the United States as one country.

Yes, Doc. Do some research. The United States was in a similar situation that it is now. The Civil War happened because of the "Idiots in Congress" who did not listen to the people. Kind of like now...

You should really think before you type. LOL

How is this traitorous?

#49 | Posted by Eddie

Whaaaat?? Are you retarded or just oretending to be?

Where does the traitor part come in?

#49 | Posted by Eddie

The part where Liddy tells his listeners to aim for the heads of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agents when shooting it out with them.

#53 | Posted by 726

My Pointed-headed friend,

sending armed Federal Police against citizens of the US INSIDE the US is against the Constitution!

Again!!! Where does the traitorous part come in?

You're too easy.

So John McCriminal doesn't mind palling around with known criminals but oh Mannnn if Barack Obama does it perish the thought.

#3 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-10-17 04:00 AM | Reply

Larry,

McCain said that Liddy went to prison for his crimes. Did Ayers?

No, he bragged on TV about being guilty and getting off on a technicality. He admitted his guilt in terrorist crimes -- after he knew it was safe to do so.

They are not the same, unless you are just a bigoted partisan ass who ignores the facts.

Oh ........ sorry. Didn't mean to hit so close to home.

-sending armed Federal Police against citizens of the US INSIDE the US is against the Constitution!

This one has his Posse and his Comitatus confused.

It is the Federal government's use of the military that is restricted, not Federal employees.

Whaaaat?? Are you retarded or just oretending to be?

#56 | Posted by geezer1

Likewise, I'm sure...

Can you give me a good argument as to why this traitorous?

Are you just pretending?

Come on you idiots. Fight me. You guys are too freaken weak!

Don't you think America is worth fighting for?

You sit in your armchairs and call people traitors and then they just laugh at you.

If this is such a great country, then make the country RIGHT!

Eddie, the way you're going today you'll have to generate a new pair of balls if your parents let you borrow the car for the big date tonight.

It is the Federal government's use of the military that is restricted, not Federal employees.

#59 | Posted by Corky

Ummm. I'm pretty sure that these guys were "policing" for crimes that should be at the State level....

They were not US military. That's the difference.

Eddie, the way you're going today you'll have to generate a new pair of balls if your parents let you borrow the car for the big date tonight.

#61 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Doc, is that your retort to me telling you to grow up?

Ayers brags about his involvement.

#36 | Posted by KBM

You obviously do not listen to G. Gordon Liddy, do you? He never siad what he did was wrong, on the other hand he only rails about John Dean for being a weasel. He continuosly talks about the wonderful people who were in on the crap that he was doing and, of course, talks about what a great tragedy Waco was and shooting ATF agents in the head because they wear flak jackets. Great American! In the true spirit of the Founding Fathers.

William Ayers did some despicable things, was prosecuted and not convicted for whatever reason, but he made a life for himself as part of a community. My impression is that he has contributed more to society in the last twenty-five years than G. Gordon Liddy whose only contribution has been to preach to the choir from a radio show bully pulpit and have absolutely no remorse for his past actions.

"Doc, is that your retort to me telling you to grow up?"

No, Eddie, that's my advice to you based on the nosedive you're executing here today.

Seriously, you keep this up and I don't think your parents will let your borrow the car tonight.

Which means you'll be stuck playing with that condom you keep in your wallet.

Come on you idiots. Fight me. You guys are too freaken weak!
Don't you think America is worth fighting for?
You sit in your armchairs and call people traitors and then they just laugh at you.
If this is such a great country, then make the country RIGHT!

#60 | Posted by Eddie

You're a fucking idiot, as usual. Seccession IS traiterous. We fought the civil war to prove that!

They were not US military. That's the difference.

#63 | Posted by Corky

so you think it's ok for "Federal Employees" to have weapons, armor, and be trained the same as the Military and not be the military? And then attack US citizens much like the military would? Hmmmm.

Why are Federal Employees doing this?

This is the responsibility of the State.

Don't you think America is worth fighting for?

#60 | Posted by Eddie

Which is why seccession is NOT traiterous???? You are seriously ill.

You're a fucking idiot, as usual. Seccession IS traiterous. We fought the civil war to prove that!

#67 | Posted by geezer1

LOL. self-retorting retorts are the best.

You guys missed the best bit. The other stuff has been done to death, no one cares anymore. The best bit was:

"McCain said he thought Palin would appear on NBC's "Saturday Night Live," where Tina Fey has been doing a dead-on impersonation of her. "Probably get more of an audience than our debate did," he said.".

Now THAT would be worth watching...

LOL. self-retorting retorts are the best.
#70 | Posted by Eddie at 2008-10-17 11:22 AM

Rcade:

Could you tweek the site so we can enter a "This Boob Doesn't Even Know What a Self-Retorting Retort Is" flag?

Thanks.

How about McCain palling around with that seccessionist traitor Todd Palin ??.........

#47 | Posted by skizziks

How is this traitorous?

#49 | Posted by Eddie

maybe you should read your own posts, you moron.

Don't you think America is worth fighting for?

#60 | Posted by Eddie

Which is why seccession is NOT traiterous???? You are seriously ill.

#69 | Posted by geezer1

Is leaving the US, because you are dissatisfied which the outcome of the 2004 election, and moving to Canada to become a resident and retaining your US citizenship traitorous?

But talking about secession is?

maybe you should read your own posts, you moron.

#73 | Posted by geezer1

Another self-retort retort!!!

(this means you should read yours, LOL!!!)

Doc,

LOL!!! You are so easy to tick off!

I love making you idiots wake up and smell the history as it repeats itself.

#74 | Posted by Eddie at 2008-10-17 11:25 AM | Reply | Flag: You Think My Last Post Was Moronic, Well, You Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet

"I love making you idiots wake up and smell the history as it repeats itself."

You're too ignorant to know history doesn't "repeat itself"?

Tell you parents you won't be needing the car.

Is leaving the US, because you are dissatisfied which the outcome of the 2004 election, and moving to Canada to become a resident and retaining your US citizenship traitorous?

But talking about secession is?

#74 | Posted by Eddie

Just when I think you can't get any stupider, you surprise me. You want to leave and go to Canada? Good, it's a free country and you're doing all of us a favor. You want to take a piece of America and start your own county, you are a traitor!

G. Gordon Liddy:

* August 26, 1994 - Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests." ... "They've got a big target on there, ATF. Don't shoot at that, because they've got a vest on underneath that. Head shots, head shots.... Kill the sons of bitches.

* September 15, 1994 - If the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms insists upon a firefight, give them a firefight. Just remember, they're wearing flak jackets and you're better off shooting for the head.

Liddy's connections to John McCain:

In 1998 Liddy hosted a fundraiser at his house for John McCain's re-election campaign at which guests could have their pictures taken with McCain and Liddy.[6] Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 in 2008.

Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain said "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family." "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."

(like committing felonies or giving tips on national radio on shooting Federal agents in the head?)

Eddie quotes the Constitution, inaccurately, then falls back on the Conservative catch-all, state's rights, when proven wrong.

Typically boring.

William Ayers did some despicable things, was prosecuted and not convicted for whatever reason, but he made a life for himself as part of a community. My impression is that he has contributed more to society in the last twenty-five years than G. Gordon Liddy whose only contribution has been to preach to the choir from a radio show bully pulpit and have absolutely no remorse for his past actions.

We will never know the influence Ayers has left on the community until after the election. The so called MSM decided a few years ago to ignore anything that could be connected to Obama and his less than transparent run to the Presidency. Even bucking the Clintons and their own party. Who injected Ayers in their debates. Not to mention passing on Rezko, Wright and every answer given by Obama which turned out to be a blatant lie.

Eddie quotes the Constitution, inaccurately, then falls back on the Conservative catch-all, state's rights, when proven wrong.

Typically boring.

#81 | Posted by Corky

Oops...

As Corky wishes he hadn't gotten into this conversation.

Oh, maybe now you can really do something, Corky. Show me in the Consitution where it's OK for a Para-Military group to Police citizens...

"Dumb", doesn't quite cover it, eh?

G. Gordon Liddy whose only contribution has been to preach to the choir from a radio show
#82 | Posted by crispee_oc

I don't agree with his words "shoot to the head", but his dire ambition to keep US informed has merit.

But, if you include the Context of the statement. Liddy is describing a way to protect yourself if this para-military group, dress in black, at night break into your home while you are thinking that it's someone, dressed in black, to rob you!

radio show bully pulpit and have absolutely no remorse for his past actions.

And Ayers had remorse for his actions?

"Dumb", doesn't quite cover it, eh?

#84 | Posted by Corky

just say that you're too lazy and move on.

Ayers has carved out a stellar reputation in juvenile justice. States all over the country have adopted his views and recommendations on reducing juvenile recidivism in the criminal justice system, for example.

Carl Bernstein on Liddy and Ayers::

"During the same period that Bill Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground, Gordon Liddy was making plans to firebomb a Washington think tank, assassinate a prominent journalist, undertake the Watergate burglary, break into the office of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist, and kidnap anti-war protesters at the 1972 Republican convention."

"If ATF agents attempt to curtail a citizen's gun ownership, Liddy counseled, "Well, if the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests."

"More recently, Liddy explained making the Clintons objects of shooting practice: "I did relate that on the 4th of July of last year, when I and my family and some friends were out firing away at a properly-constructed rifle range and we ran out of targets, and so we - I drew some stick figure targets and I thought we ought to give them names. So I named them Bill and Hillary, thought it might improve my aim. It didn't. My aim is good anyway. Now, having said that, I accept no responsibility for somebody shooting up the White House."

"But the more likely explanation of why McCain avoided a debate confrontation about "palling around with terrorists" is McCain's very real - and recent - symbiotic association and praise for another (not Ayers) domestic terrorist emblematic of the Vietnam era: G. Gordon Liddy.

"Does John McCain "pal around with terrorists?" Certainly McCain's continuing "association" and relationship with the convicted Watergate burglar and domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy might suggest so"

This is a fair story to bring up.. but stay with the facts.. Liddy participated in a burglary coverup, and served time in prison for it. He didn't try blowing up the pentagon or the capital.

Ayers was never convicted due to a legal technicality, but NO-ONE, including Obama, has any question that he participated in violent acts, including bombings. And Liddy, while unquestionably on the far right politically, has views that are much better accepted by the majority of Americans, even if they disagree with him on individual issues.. (ie ..Liddy says this is a good country, we should be proud of being americans, its honorable to serve in the military, etc)

No credible democrat claims to accept Ayers' off the chart political philosophies, and that's what makes Obama's past association with him of interest. Unlike McCain, Obama hasn't a history of national exposure, and so his associations become a bigger part of trying to determine who he is. Like or dislike McCain, no-one really questions his philosophical base.

But, its a fair story.

his dire ambition to keep US informed has merit.
#85 | Posted by Eddie at 2008-10-17

Perhaps, if you're into dire ambitions.

If you are too lazy to read and and too dumb to comprehend the Posse Comitatus Act, then I don't know what to tell you.

"He didn't try blowing up the pentagon or the capital."

That's true.
Liddy was just involved in a plot to destroy the Constitution.

We will never know the influence Ayers has left on the community until after the election.

#82 | Posted by crispee_oc

That's just bullshit! Notwithstanding his past, Ayres made a life for himself in education and rose to a very high level including a lot of community work in that field. He was named "person of the year" in Chicago for his work on education and is a university professor. He may not be a wonderful person because of his past activities, but he has certainly contributed to the community in many positive ways since. I certainly do not want to defend Ayers for his idiotic actions during the '60s but he has not publicly called for shooting ATF agents either.

"Does John McCain "pal around with terrorists?" Certainly McCain's continuing "association" and relationship with the convicted Watergate burglar and domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy might suggest so"

#87 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

Nice try taking things out of context. I'd say that's a tad dishonest, don't you think?

Ayers DID bomb the Petegon.
Liddy did not.

Liddy talks about "shooting people who are invading your home", OK?

Where does the terrorist part come in? LOL

Ayers IS a terrorist
Liddy is not....

Ayers DID NOT pay for his crime
Liddy did....

any questions?

"That's true.
Liddy was just involved in a plot to destroy the Constitution."

I'm sure I'll be sorry I asked.. Did you miss the part about him being convicted and sent to prison?

"And Liddy, while unquestionably on the far right politically, has views that are much better accepted by the majority of Americans"

Now you're just making shit up.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You are comparing Bill Ayers to Liddy?

This is truly the most desperate things I've ever seen by the Libs.

Why are you being desperate? You are winning!!

#42 | Posted by Eddie


worth posting again...

any questions?
#93 | Posted by Eddie

Yeah, WTF are you trying to say?

Did you miss the part about him being convicted and sent to prison?
#94 | Posted by nmg_no at 2008-10-17 11:51 AM

Check out the thread, and don't bother reporting back what a stupid question that is.

"Nice try taking things out of context."

Says the guy whose party wants to pretend Ayers is the same guy now as when Obama was 8 years old.

No credible democrat claims to accept Ayers' off the chart political philosophies, and that's what makes Obama's past association with him of interest. Unlike McCain, Obama hasn't a history of national exposure, and so his associations become a bigger part of trying to determine who he is. Like or dislike McCain, no-one really questions his philosophical base.

But, its a fair story.

Which had been played out in McCain's 2000 run. Why wasn't Ayers questioned by the Tribune or local media years ago when Obama started his electeive campaigns? There is finally some tapes being aired exposing Ayers and his same radical positions. Of course it was 1998 so nobody gives a damn today. Even though it was in the heart of Obamas rise.

worth posting again...
#96 | Posted by Eddie

Oh, okay, then it's worth noting again that Liddy was actually convicted of a felony and Ayers wasn't.

"He didn't try blowing up the pentagon or the capital."

That's true.
Liddy was just involved in a plot to destroy the Constitution.

#91 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Wow, really Doc?

I can't wait for this explanation.

I'm going to make popcorn. LOL

I'm going to make popcorn.
#102 | Posted by Eddie at 2008-10-17 11:54 AM

Riiiight, that would be the lunch crowd gathering around your pushcart.

worth posting again...
#96 | Posted by Eddie

Oh, okay, then it's worth noting again that Liddy was actually convicted of a felony and Ayers wasn't.

#101 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Yep, and Liddy paid for his non-violent crime and Ayes did not pay for his VIOLENT crime.

Hmmmm.

I'm going to make popcorn.
#102 | Posted by Eddie at 2008-10-17 11:54 AM

Riiiight, that would be the lunch crowd gathering around your pushcart.

#103 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Ouch, Doc. Is this you conceeding?

"There is finally some tapes being aired exposing Ayers and his same radical positions."

Obama has been in political life for years and years. Has he ever made a statement regarding his own "radical positions"? Has he ever demonstrated tendencies to vote based on radicalism? Of course not.

But, I guess you go to the finish line with the campaign you have, not the campaign you want....

Why is it one can hear this "Ayers, Marxist, Socialist, Rezko, Wright" on the radio 24/7 and not a word about the economy and real, meaningful middle class issues on those shows? Why can you expect to hear those very same talking points here day after day ?

Why haven't I ever heard a word about deficits, the national debt, the plight of the middle class, unemployment, foreclosures, falling wages, et al?

Is it that these talking buttheads are so rich those listeners are a part of an inside joke they don't even realize they're the butt of among those getting rich, saying nothing of substance, spouting disproved (blaringly) NeoCon theories about how the world will be wonderful if only they were in power.

Uh, did those listeners miss 2000-Now when all those theories were put to the test and failed miserably?

Ouch, Doc. Is this you conceeding?
#105 | Posted by Eddie at 2008-10-17 11:57 AM

No, it's your loop completing yet another circuit on your One-Trick-Pony act.

Make mine butter but no salt.

Thanks and keep the change.

Question about Ayers. Did this ever reach the jury? If not, Ayers was not even tried for the crimes. It is not possible to declare Ayers as a criminal if he was not convicted of crimes.

What you have is accusations that were never tested;
Unlike Bill Clinton who had his accusations heard by a unbiased jury and a decision rendered.

BTW, what was the reason for Ayers case being thrown out?

Why haven't I ever heard a word about deficits, the national debt, the plight of the middle class, unemployment, foreclosures, falling wages, et al?

#107 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

Because people don't like talking about the Federal Reserve just printing money out of thin air. Attacking Iraq to protect the dollar?

Why?

Because it's the ugly side of the American economy tazing the world. It works! It's greed. But, it works. Countries around the world are using the dollar as a reserve currency.

However, that's beginning to cave.

you see it when the Indian companies that we send our jobs to don't want to be paid in dollars anymore.

EDDIE

My point was none of the right wing pundits spend time on real issues. They make a rich living pointing fingers at everyone and never spending time on the public airwaves talking about solutions.

When they claimed "if only the Republicans were in control things will be wonderful", many bought into that, and the NeoCons had their chance. Anyone who could argue their theories in practice were successful needs a vacation at the funny farm.

Yet, they continue to claim those that did manage the economy and government in a pragmatic way with positive results are the problem.

"Nice try taking things out of context."

Says the guy whose party wants to pretend Ayers is the same guy now as when Obama was 8 years old.

#99 | Posted by Danforth

Yes, Obama was 8 years old when the Pentegon blew up.

"Yes, Obama was 8 years old when the Pentegon blew up."

And since then, Ayers was lauded as a model citizen, and worked on a charity board with a lot of Republicans.

Are all those Republicans guilty of "palling around with terrorists"?

Carl Bernstein on Liddy and Ayers:

(McCain still pals with Liddy and calls him a friend)

"During the same period that Bill Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground, Gordon Liddy was making plans to firebomb a Washington think tank, assassinate a prominent journalist, undertake the Watergate burglary, break into the office of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist, and kidnap anti-war protesters at the 1972 Republican convention."

"If ATF agents attempt to curtail a citizen's gun ownership, Liddy counseled, "Well, if the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests."

"More recently, Liddy explained making the Clintons objects of shooting practice: "I did relate that on the 4th of July of last year, when I and my family and some friends were out firing away at a properly-constructed rifle range and we ran out of targets, and so we - I drew some stick figure targets and I thought we ought to give them names. So I named them Bill and Hillary, thought it might improve my aim. It didn't. My aim is good anyway. Now, having said that, I accept no responsibility for somebody shooting up the White House."

"But the more likely explanation of why McCain avoided a debate confrontation about "palling around with terrorists" is McCain's very real - and recent - symbiotic association and praise for another (not Ayers) domestic terrorist emblematic of the Vietnam era: G. Gordon Liddy.

"Does John McCain "pal around with terrorists?" Certainly McCain's continuing "association" and relationship with the convicted Watergate burglar and domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy might suggest so"

Only Liddy's arrest thwarted his other plans during the Watergate era.

He also had a gun with him during the Watergate break in so he could shoot anyone who stumbled on their burglary.

When they claimed "if only the Republicans were in control things will be wonderful", many bought into that, and the NeoCons had their chance. Anyone who could argue their theories in practice were successful needs a vacation at the funny farm.

#111 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

Yes, you are right. These are neocons.

But, but ignore important Conservatives like Ron Paul. Paul has quite a following amoung Republicans. Not big enough to do anything, but growing. Most are young Congressmen which is encouraging. The Republicans are serious resisting this movement.

The neocons have been very successful in making the bankers extremely rich. Just look at what's happening now! They get the Federal Reserve to print trillions in money out of thin air. The bankers lined their pockets with come of this money and got bailed out in the end!!!

However, the Democrats are none better. Taking the country in a Socialist/Maxist direction is not the answer. Making the Federal Government this extremely large Mommy taking care of everyone is not the answer. I just can't see myself sucking off the tit of this behemoth.

"Does John McCain "pal around with terrorists?" Certainly McCain's continuing "association" and relationship with the convicted Watergate burglar and domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy might suggest so"

#114 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

Ok, I give up. Where's the terrorist?

Have you ever collected unemployment? Would you if you had to?

Unemployment insurance is not paid by the worker. It's paid by the gov't and the employer.

"If ATF agents attempt to curtail a citizen's gun ownership, Liddy counseled, "Well, if the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests."

#114 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

You have to remember. This was said during the Clinton years. Remember all the fuck ups of Janet Reno? (or were you 8 at the time :) )

It was very possible for Reno to start dis-arming folks. There was that notion amoung most Americans.

"Unemployment insurance is not paid by the worker. It's paid by the gov't and the employer."

That's parsing. Workers could easily argue their salaries would be higher if unemployment insurance wasn't needed. Same with payroll taxes: it's all part of the compensation package.

EDDIE

I don't have a beef with real conservatives at all.

The balance between the left and right has worked like a charm in our Democracy until the NeoCons came along.

The best thing that could happen is a renewal of The Fairness Doctrine so the NeoCons spreading hate and blame 24/7 can be exposed for the self serving morons they are until the public mocks them and they're run off the public airwaves they use to divide America into "us vs them" in the most egregious ways.

Having different points of view is fine. These guys are in it for the money, and haven't served America's interests in the least. Their whole premise has been utterly disproved. They need to be run off the air. They've contributed nothing of substance.

"You have to remember. This was said during the Clinton years."

So that makes it all better?

Cough...cough...cough...HACK!

Have you ever collected unemployment? Would you if you had to?

Unemployment insurance is not paid by the worker. It's paid by the gov't and the employer.

#118 | Posted by Petrous

Paid by the employer on the Employees behalf. It is what it is... insurance.

Have you ever made a claim to your Auto Insurance policy? Home Owners?

Petrous, what is your point? Did you intend to post on another thread?

"You have to remember. This was said during the Clinton years."

So that makes it all better?

Cough...cough...cough...HACK!

#122 | Posted by Danforth

you honestly don't remember the abuse of power? WOW!

It really wasn't abuse of power, but rather, fuck up after fuck up.

You don't remember Janet Reno? Holy Crap.

That woman was going "teach these people a lesson" and it blew up in her face.

"you honestly don't remember the abuse of power?"

And that justifies Liddy? Wow....

"You have to remember. This was said during the Clinton years."

So that makes it all better?

Cough...cough...cough...HACK!

#122 | Posted by Danforth

Some people refuse to remember history and those are doomed to repeat it:

There goes Eddie again, linking to pages which don't prove anything he's saying.

"you honestly don't remember the abuse of power?"

And that justifies Liddy? Wow....

#125 | Posted by Danforth

Justifies Liddy, what?

telling people how to defend themselves in their homes?

It was a political statement!!! A sign of the times and you don't get it!!!

Look what's coming after Obama gets in.

"It was a political statement!!! A sign of the times and you don't get it!!!"

Now...what was that about Ayers?

There goes Eddie again, linking to pages which don't prove anything he's saying.

#127 | Posted by Danforth

Hiding behind ignorance is not attractive.

"Hiding behind ignorance is not attractive."

Then why do you do it?

If you actually have something to say, say it. Linking to vague pages, as if someone will magically understand your drivel, is worthless.

"It was very possible for Reno to start dis-arming folks. There was that notion amoung most Americans.

#119 | Posted by Eddie "

WTF are you talking about? Nobody though Reno was going to start "disarming" folks except paranoid weirdos like you and Liddy.

"It was a political statement!!! A sign of the times and you don't get it!!!"

Now...what was that about Ayers?

#129 | Posted by Danforth

You mean Ayers blowing up a public building?

And Liddy talking about protecting your property?

What about it?

If you actually have something to say, say it. Linking to vague pages, as if someone will magically understand your drivel, is worthless.

#131 | Posted by Danforth

Sorry Danforth,

I thought you knew.

WTF are you talking about? Nobody though Reno was going to start "disarming" folks except paranoid weirdos like you and Liddy.

#132 | Posted by nullifidian

You're probably too young to remember. Millions of Americans were prepared for bad news that they needed to begin turning in their weapons.

You don't think a national weapon law will come out of a Democrat led Congress along with a Democrat President?

"Sorry Danforth, I thought you knew."

Try this:

Pick the phrase or section that you believe makes your point. Post it, and then post the link.

"Millions of Americans were prepared for bad news that they needed to begin turning in their weapons. "

Oh, I get it....you're making shit up.

Unemployment insurance is paid for by the employer. You could consider a fringe benefit, but you don't pay tax on it when your employer is paying it.

If you collect unemployment, you pay tax on the money.

However, you may collect more while on unemployment than what your employer paid in. That extra is paid for by the government. When Congress extends benefits, it's paid for by the gov't.

That is welfare. Other people's taxes paying for your unemployment benefits.

If you are against welfare and the 'spreading the wealth' concept, then you must reject all forms of welfare.

Otherwise, you sound like the people against the death penalty, with exceptions when you raise names like McVeigh. You draw the line where it is convenient.

The gov't took their gold. They wouldn't get the guns from them. I'm surprised people gave up their gold, but people were different back then. I don't think the Gold Confiscation Act of 2008 would be accepted in the US,

"If you are against welfare and the 'spreading the wealth' concept, then you must reject all forms of welfare."

Including the trillion dollar bailout of the Wall Street welfare queens?

Definitely the Wall Street welfare queens.

There was that notion amoung most Americans.

#119 | Posted by Eddie

Only among UnAmericans sucking up to Gee Whiz Gordon Felon and flush rimjob.
You really shouldn't strain so much worrying about Janet Reno coming after your guns.
Nobody wants them.
Nobody wants to take them away from you.
That's just bs gw felon and rimjob shove down your throat to get you to vote neo-con-and enrich them in the process.

William Ayres: tried to make it a better world 40-plus years ago went a bit far in exuberant idealism.

Gordon Liddy: wild-eyed fanatic straw boss of the Watergate burglars, the lunatic Nazi who held his palm over a burning candle in trying to show the world he had balls. herm

the whole interchange between them for the most part was a lot of hooey

again........we have 2nd and 3rd rate comedians trying to be political pundits like letterman and maher

at least when stewart RARELY has someone other than an obama shill on it..........he is at least funny at times..........

and so he knew liddy............what a fuckin reach that is............

like mccain said

he did his time and is a citizen of the country
he didnt get off on a techicality and only wished THAT HE COULD BOMB MORE and maybe KILL MORE PEOPLE

or liddy didnt preach HATRED AND RASCISIM to mccain FOR TWENTY YEARS or throw land deals his way like razko

OH SHIT...SORRY WE cant bring up obamas past......ONLY MCCAINS>.............damn I forgot

"Millions of Americans were prepared for bad news that they needed to begin turning in their weapons. "

Oh, I get it....you're making shit up.

#137 | Posted by Danforth

Too funny for words.

hint: NRA

Only among UnAmericans sucking up to Gee Whiz ..
#142 | Posted by frankf55

let me get this straight, and I've heard it before from Maxist many times as a retort.

To believe in the Constitution in it's original intent is to be UnAmerican.

In other words, if you believe that you have a right to arm yourself, then you are UnAmerican.

That's just bs gw felon and rimjob shove down your throat to get you to vote neo-con-and enrich them in the process.

#142 | Posted by frankf55 at 2008-10-17 02:14 PM |

So Bush and Company controlled the dem presidential debate and had Hilary inject Ayers? Rezko, Wright??? As Harry Hoo used to say... Amazing!!!

Nobody wants them.
Nobody wants to take them away from you.
That's just bs gw felon and rimjob shove down your throat to get you to vote neo-con-and enrich them in the process.

#142 | Posted by frankf55

Just wait, you fool.

However, the people who want to keep their weapons make up a HUGE voting block. So what you said is pretty much bullshit, but that shouldn't matter to you.

The right's been saying "They're gonna take away our guns!" for a hundred years. Have they?

If you answered 'no' you answered correctly.

The NRA claimed that by making someone who buys a gun wait 3 days so a background check can be completed to rule out the mentally ill, felons, etc is a violation of 2nd Amendment rights. Was it?

If you answered 'no' you answered correctly. It kept lunatics and criminals from buying them legally. No one else has a problem.

Now, the NRA claims that applying the same 3 day waiting period for bun purchases at traveling gun shows would be a violation of 2nd Amendment rights. Is it.

I feel more comfortable knowing that people who buy guns aren't going to shoot the first person they see thinking it's a monster, or use it to commit their 1000th armed robbery.

I have a gun I bought 10 years ago. Waited 3 days for the background check. Was I cool with that? Absolutely. By my getting a BG check I knew others had to as well, and reputable gun sellers wouldn't be handing over a loaded murder weapon unknowingly to someone who should never have one in their hand.

So Bush and Company controlled the dem presidential debate and had Hilary inject Ayers? Rezko, Wright??? As Harry Hoo used to say... Amazing!!!

#147 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2008

AND EVEN then.......remember all the charges of rascism leveled against the wife and even the fIRST BLACK PRESIDENT HIMSLEF.........

we still dont know enough about rezko and wright and yet THE MEDIA IS ALL ABOUT DESTROYING A PLUMBER who just asked a question

So, I don't understand those who argue against common sense in doing BG checks and making people wait 3 days for a gun they didn't have before and will own most likely for years.

People SAY a lot of things about what "THEY'RE GONNA DO!". 99.999% of it is absolute rubbish when compared to opportunity and history.

The last president who said he wasn't going to raise taxes did. His name rhymes with tush. The one before him raised them every year but his first year in office. His name rhymes with Fagen. The one before 'the unitor not a divider' never raised taxes (but the right said he would).

again........we have 2nd and 3rd rate comedians trying to be political pundits like letterman and maher

What is with Letterman? What a jackass! I used to like him, but he has become too political. I would not like him if he started dumping on Obama.

Time for him to retire.

Bill Maher is a hack! Shoot from the hip, hack!

I would love to see him and

and so he knew liddy............what a fuckin reach that is............

However, it was fun to watch the Libs on this thread try and defend Ayers... Priceless!

he did his time and is a citizen of the country
he didnt get off on a techicality and only wished THAT HE COULD BOMB MORE and maybe KILL MORE PEOPLE

I know! He reminds me of another idiotic jackass who hides amoung the Ivory Towers. What was his name? Churchill, Ward Churchill. They fired him, though. Man, did he scare the pants off the University Officials though. They paid him a huge severence so he wouldn't sue.

At least Maher knows enough about politics to be smart and funny. Letterman is a fucking retard. He has no idea what he's saying, he just repeats what he's heard and then shits his pants when called on it.

The last president who said he wasn't going to raise taxes did. His name rhymes with tush. The one before him raised them every year but his first year in office. His name rhymes with Fagen. The one before 'the unitor not a divider' never raised taxes (but the right said he would).

#152 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

Guess what? It's still not ok for Obama to raise or introduce new taxes.

Get rid of some? Yes.

Get rid of spending? Yes

Get rid of spending overseas? Absofuckinglutely.

Bill Maher is a hack! Shoot from the hip, hack!

I would love to see him and

#153 | Posted by Eddie

Congrats on your most sensible post yet.

BL2

Shouting at clouds over Joe is on another thread.

Congrats on your most sensible post yet.

#156 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

You're smart. Lay low, shoot from the shrubbery.

EDDIE

Go to this link and put your annual adjusted gross income in there (after deductions). Takes 20 seconds:

Since Palin was picked the night-time comedy shows have cracked jokes ripping Republicans at a rate of 7-1 vs. Democrats.

Obviously, Republicans are 7 times as funny.

Speaking of "funny", that SNL skit last night was a fucking bomb.

"To believe in the Constitution in it's original intent is to be UnAmerican."

When it comes to the entirety of its original intent that would be a correct statement, yes, unless you're a nutcase.

Its original intent included: human bondage, letting only males vote, denying Indians citizenship, and preventing the people from voting for senators.

"If you are against welfare and the 'spreading the wealth' concept, then you must reject all forms of welfare."

Including the trillion dollar bailout of the Wall Street welfare queens?

#140 | Posted by Danforth

Especially that bullshit. What is it? 99 out of 100 voters did NOT want the bailout to happen? And then these assholes get huge severances and spend wheel barrel loads of cash to hold luxurious meetings in exclusive (probably white only) resorts to figure out how to spend the bail out money? Sorry, that shit just pisses me off to no end. I would love to find out who is responsible and let the "public" deal with them one-by-one!!!

These people should not be allowed to hold an executive position in any Corporation in any State, Common Wealth, or Possession in the US. Let alone, being prosecuted, found guilty and incarcerated in a State Prison with a cell mate named Spike.

Its original intent included: human bondage, letting only males vote, denying Indians citizenship, and preventing the people from voting for senators.

#163 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Really?

Proof? Start with Human Bondage.

Its original intent included: human bondage, letting only males vote, denying Indians citizenship, and preventing the people from voting for senators.

#163 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Doc, this is from Woopie Goldberg and those white hating assholes.

So, unless you're a white apologist, and making idle racist statements, then you really need to prove your words.

When it comes to the entirety of its original intent that would be a correct statement, yes, unless you're a nutcase.

Its original intent included: human bondage, letting only males vote, denying Indians citizenship, and preventing the people from voting for senators.

Which is precisely why it was structured so that it could be changed as times changed. In fact, a process was put into place to achieve just that. Subverting that process to the whims of 9 elitists in black robes is NOT the way to go about changing the Constitution.

Since Palin was picked the night-time comedy shows have cracked jokes ripping Republicans at a rate of 7-1 vs. Democrats.

#160 | Posted by JeffJ at 2008-10-17 03:36 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Obviously, Republicans are 7 times as funny.

#161 | Posted by Danforth at 2008-10-

more proof of the media being in the tank for obama

letterman isnt funny anymore at all
BUT I never miss a stewart show even if I hate what he says

BUT COLBERT.........what a scream

"Proof? Start with Human Bondage."

Oh, the peanut gallery heard from.
You familiar with the term "slavery"?
It was not prohibited in the original Constitution.
Guess why an amendment was needed to let women vote.
Wanna guess some more?
Why was it necessary to put in an amendemnent that gave the people the right to elect their US Senators?
If the original intent was so hunkydorey, why 27 amendments?
I think that quality time you spent with your cellmate Spike is starting to take its toll.

"Since Palin was picked the night-time comedy shows have cracked jokes ripping Republicans at a rate of 7-1 vs. Democrats."

That's what happens when you pick a clown as your VP.

"So, unless you're a white apologist, and making idle racist statements, then you really need to prove your words.
#166 | Posted by Eddie"
Hard to figure out wtf you're yammering about.
I'll tell you what, James Madison, you go through the Constitution, drop all the amendments except for the first ten and then you tell me:
1. Where does it give women the right to vote?
2. Where does it say slavery is prohibited?
3. Where does it give Indians citizenship?
4. Where does it provide for the direct election of senators?

"Which is precisely why it was structured so that it could be changed as times changed.
#167 | Posted by JeffJ"

I'm aware of that. The Constitution has changed as the nation has changed. You want to try explaining that to Eddie?

Doc,

Any proof yet, there Sparky?

I'm aware of that. The Constitution has changed as the nation has changed. You want to try explaining that to Eddie?

#171 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Spken like a true Maxist.

"Spken[sic] like a true Maxist[sic].

#173 | Posted by Eddie"

That's basically your one sentence retort to virtually any argument, isn't it Eddie? There was nothing the least bit Marxist in Doc's post.

"Any proof yet, there Sparky?
#172 | Posted by Eddie at 2008-10-17 04:14 PM"

#171 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Where does the Consitution sanction Slavery?

Women voting? Didn't you have to own property in order to vote? This was the culture of times that wives were property and this was sanctioned at the state level. Did you know that Louisiana adopted France's laws on property and wives were considered property up until recently? That changed in the 1960s I believe. The Consitution would have NEVER been ratified with such language as to give women emancipation. You would have been run out of town. But, i give you that one. I like women having a brain and providing for themselves, hoever, I despise women using the "single mother" excuse. You got yourself into this, you can't use that excuse.

Indians not Citizens? Really? Not true. Hint: they, like everyone else had to do something first to be considered a citizen and be able to vote.

Where does it provide for the direct election of senators? This was a stupid idea!!! It should have stayed as it was. You really think that the Senate part of current Congress is able to do anything right? They are completely, without a doubt, afraid to do anything. They are paralized. They could have stopped this war is it weren't for that law.

That's basically your one sentence retort to virtually any argument, isn't it Eddie? There was nothing the least bit Marxist in Doc's post.

#174 | Posted by nullifidian

Really? I don't think so. Well, maybe not just Marxist. Facist? but Doc isn't a facist. Communist. I don't think Doc is a communist. More Socialist, just like 51% of America.

I retract the Marxist statement.

I think we should tear up the Consitution every six years and start with the original and ratify those amendments that should be included in the new Consitution.

"Where does the Consitution sanction Slavery?"

Okay, here's your assignment for this week: Study up on Article I, Sections 2 and 9; also Article IV, Section 2 and the way they've been read over the years (and what that original intent you're so agog about really was) and get back to me whenever you hear the little bell go off in your noggin.

"Indians not Citizens? Really? Not true."

Then why did a law have to be passed granting citizenship to those Indians born in this country but who were not citizens?

"Women voting? Didn't you have to own property in order to vote?"

Where does it say in the Constitution you have to have property to be able to vote?

"Where does it provide for the direct election of senators?"

Jeezus fucking christ, can't you do anything for yourself? Try the 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913.

"This was a stupid idea!!! It should have stayed as it was."

Oh, I get it, you use the nom du blog "Eddie" but you're really Zell Miller.

Until you undertake a serious overhaul of your knowledge base you'll have to play by yourself. But, seriously, do something about it if you want to come across as anything other than an underinformed, uninformed, bathed in the bliss of ignorance idiot.

Then why did a law have to be passed granting citizenship to those Indians born in this country but who were not citizens?

you mean the ones who reside on reservations? Just read the text for yourself.

Okay, here's your assignment for this week: Study up on Article I, Sections 2 and 9; also Article IV, Section 2

Not sanctioned.

Jeezus fucking christ, can't you do anything for yourself? Try the 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913.

#179 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

I was referring to that amendment you idiot!

Until you undertake a serious overhaul of your knowledge base you'll have to play by yourself. But, seriously, do something about it if you want to come across as anything other than an underinformed, uninformed, bathed in the bliss of ignorance idiot.

#179 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

In other words, I have to take your Marxist interpretation of the Constitution to "play" with you?

LOL. Go fuck yourself, there, Doc.

Indians weren't conceptualized as citizens when the Constitution was written, but as domestic aliens living outside American polity.

So, yes---A law had to be passed at some point giving them citizenship.

To take this very obscure topic a bit further---Some Indian tribes and confederations actually formed independent states prior to subjugation by the United States. As independent states they had to be dealt with by treaty.

So, yes---A law had to be passed at some point giving them citizenship.

#184 | Posted by Zed

Actually, Native Americans were considered citizens of the United States and a resident of the state they resided if they paid taxes in that state. Otherwise, Native Americans were considered to be a citizen of the Nation of their original tribe.

To take this very obscure topic a bit further---Some Indian tribes and confederations actually formed independent states prior to subjugation by the United States. As independent states they had to be dealt with by treaty.

#185 | Posted by Zed

There are close to 390 treaties with these Nations, some are valid today.

Until you undertake a serious overhaul of your knowledge base you'll have to play by yourself. But, seriously, do something about it if you want to come across as anything other than an underinformed, uninformed, bathed in the bliss of ignorance idiot.

#179 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

But seriously, Doc. You Maxist/Prgressive attitude asside. I think you and the fabulous 51% and the other sector, the neocons should open your minds to new interpretation of the Constitution.

The Constitution was truly written ahead of it's time. The amendments that needed to be added were done so because of the culture of the time and pressure was needed to change the culture.

However, those amendments you mentioned can be thrown out now and nothing would change. Blacks would not be slaves, women could still vote, and Indians residing outside of their reservations would be citizens, especially if they were born outside their reservation.

My point was that to adopt the Consitution in it's original form is a good thing.

If you choose to think that white men are evil, that's your right.

How many presidential candidates made Propaganda Broadcasts for the Vietnamese? Two guesses but you'll need only one.
What political party made deals with Iran and gave them Weapons of Mass Destruction. And had them hold the hostages.
What Secretary of Defense gave weapons of mass destruction to Sadaam Hussein
What President was buddy buddy with Osama Bin Ladens Brother. And was even partners with his brother?
Ok that's enough for one night.

You Maxist/Prgressive attitude asside

Yer horrible spelling aside... yer not doing yerself any favors.

/Ya did spell "attitude" right.
//Cred fer that marvel.

My point was that to adopt the Consitution in it's original form is a good thing.

The evolution of the Constitution is a good indicator of the cultural and moral evolution of the US. From a land that once only allowed white land owners to vote to a more inclusive culture that disavowed slavery and misogyny and other regressive immoral ideas.

The argument of "Originalism" is largely a bullshit one, mostly fueled by a rightwing desire to prevent gay folks from enjoying their equal rights.

Celebrate the ammended Constitution cos it's truly one of the greatest things America has to be be proud of.

But don't rest on yer laurels and figure it's a perfect document just yet.

And certainly don't take a tip from the BushCo crew and try to enshrine intolerance into the document or refer to it as a "scrap of paper" when his job decription sed to protect it.

Be Well.

On Topic?

McBush defends G Gordon Liddy?

Of course he does, Liddy is crook just like Bush and Kissinger and Ollie North and Dick Cheney.

There is some honor among thieves, doncha know.

Be Well.

You Maxist/Prgressive attitude asside

Yer horrible spelling aside... yer not doing yerself any favors.

Spud, eddie rarely does himself any favors

The amendments that needed to be added were done so because of the culture of the time and pressure was needed to change the culture.

In this case he was actually partly right!

Each Amendment to the Constitution came about for a reason - to overrule a Supreme Court decision, to force a societal change, or to revise the details of the Constitution.

But omission of the truth is as bad or even worse then outright lying.

Unless you don't know any better.

Is that yer excuse this time Eddie? You don't know any better?

Christ, why do you guys even try?

More patience or spare time than I have, that's for sure.

"Christ, why do you guys even try?

More patience or spare time than I have, that's for sure."

Amen, Bro. I just don't have the patience to deal with these knuckle dragging morons anymore.

My point was that to adopt the Consitution in it's original form is a good thing.

The evolution of the Constitution is a good indicator of the cultural and moral evolution of the US. From a land that once only allowed white land owners to vote to a more inclusive culture that disavowed slavery and misogyny and other regressive immoral ideas.

#190 | Posted by dethspud

You missed the point!

Btw, I just misspelled 2 words, but you're a bigot!

You think I have an agenda; I do not. So, try and have an open mind. Being closed minded and pretending to compassionate is very annoying. It's like dealing with mental giants.

Yes, the Culture of the US (and the world) has grown. This has very little to do with the constitution. We no longer have slavery, women can vote, Indians are citizens, and with regret, we elect our Senators.

My point is that if we threw out the Constitution, started with the original, Blacks would not be slaves because slavery does not exist now and the original Constitution did not sanction it. Women would be able to vote because the original Constitution did not prohibit it (the culture did). However, Indians being citizens? If they live in the United States, yes. If they live on the reservation, they will need to choose. Senators being elected and not appointed, this amendment was a really bad idea. We elect representatives from each state based on population and each state appoints the 2 senators? That's a really good idea. They had it right the first time! Changing it was stupid. Think about it. Senators could vote in Congress based on the individual state's needs. The state loses power the way it is now. The state can't take care of its own people, which the Constitution of today mandates, but has virtually no representation in the Federal Government.

You have a bigoted notion that the original Constitution is somehow a racist because it was written by white men. This is bigoted.

You are a bigot spud. Fix it! Unless you and Doc want to be the Archie Bunkers of the Liberal Blogworld.

Each Amendment to the Constitution came about for a reason - to overrule a Supreme Court decision, to force a societal change, or to revise the details of the Constitution.

But omission of the truth is as bad or even worse then outright lying.

Unless you don't know any better.

Is that yer excuse this time Eddie? You don't know any better?

#192 | Posted by donnerboy

Actually, Sparky,

We are pretty much focused on cultural changes that the Constitutional amendments provided for. Ok? I don't see any references to Supreme Court decisions or the revision of the details of the original Constitution...

You accused me of lying or not knowing. You are wrong. That's ok. Probably because you didn't bother the read.

"Christ, why do you guys even try?

More patience or spare time than I have, that's for sure."

Amen, Bro. I just don't have the patience to deal with these knuckle dragging morons anymore.

#194 | Posted by nullifidian

I understand your feelings. It's difficult to realize that your line of thinking was bigoted when you so venomously speak out against bigotry.

I understand your feelings. It's difficult to realize that your line of thinking was bigoted when you so venomously speak out against bigotry.

great line but you see.........sometimes I dont think they even realize just how hypocritical they are at times

the amount of hatred they have blinds them

this thread is the perfect example

here is liddy who broke a law and paid his debt to society and now is on the radio, maybe still, or whatever and the left.......RATHER THAN EVEN TALK ABOUT AN UNREPENTANT TERRORISTS...........comes after an association between liddy and mccain.

I assure you that if it were even a COP KILLER Who paid his debt.........THIER VERSION of his debt, not mine.......then he would be an okay joe for even obama to "pal" around with

BL2,

Who said he needed to pay his "debt", in order for it to be okay to pal around with Obama....

The UNREPENTANT TERRORIST was part of an organization that did KILL and TARGET COPS (1970 San Fran) .....

But then again you probably knew that....

John McAsshole also took (3) trips with Charles Keeting on his private Jet to the Bahama's prior to the S&L Scandel breaking where it was exposed Keeting was a fucking crook who fucked American Taxpayers out of Billions !!

The UNREPENTANT TERRORIST was part of an organization that did KILL and TARGET COPS (1970 San Fran) .....

~Dreamy

Yes, that's been acknowledged and so has the fact that Ayers himself never hurt a blessed soul.

Speaking of UNREPENTANT TERRORISTS, if you put Ayers up beside George W Bush with his body count in the hundreds of thousands and millions of refugees suffering in misery, Ayers looks like Dennis the Menace with a slingshot in his pocket in direct comparison.

But you prolly already knew that.

Or did you?

Be Well.

G. Gordon Liddy:

* August 26, 1994 - Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests." ... "They've got a big target on there, ATF. Don't shoot at that, because they've got a vest on underneath that. Head shots, head shots.... Kill the sons of bitches.

* September 15, 1994 - If the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms insists upon a firefight, give them a firefight. Just remember, they're wearing flak jackets and you're better off shooting for the head.

Liddy's connections to John McCain:

In 1998 Liddy hosted a fundraiser at his house for John McCain's re-election campaign at which guests could have their pictures taken with McCain and Liddy.[6] Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 in 2008.

Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain said "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family." "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."

(like committing felonies or giving tips on national radio on shooting Federal agents in the head?)

Thank God Liddy was arrested during the Watergate breakin. Otherwise, there's no telling what kind of havoc he'd have committed. Bombings, assassinations, you name it.

Well, I can see we jumped around with different ideals here. But as I see it. Oliver North and Liddy served this country.

But Obama(is he really a US Citizen)and Ayers fought against the beliefs of this country.

YOEMAN

Uh, huh. That's not a winning line of attack or haven't you heard?

Liddy urged people to shoot federal agents in the head.

Palin is tightly connected with the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party, who's founder blew himself up making bombs and then was buried in Canada because he didn't want to be within sight of a U.S. flag.

Reading stuff like you posted reminds me why McCain won't win this election.