You know, whenever liberals try to debate common sense, it’s always fun to throw a general question out there to them like “what could George Bush have done to prevent 9/11?” taking into consideration liberals’ policy of ”be nice to our enemies.”
I’m always leery of folks like this fella; Jurassicdork, whose website has one of those phony counters claiming that the United States is responsible for almost one million deaths from the Iraq invasion. That number; by the way, greatly exceeds the phony John Hopkins’ study performed three years ago — the one Rosie O’Donnell still cites – “655,000 dead, who are the terrorists?” Whenever someone owns a blog that posts a phony death counter that exceeds the insanity of Rosie O’Donnell, I become suspicious. But like a trainwreck, Lindsay Lohan, or the Anne Nicole Smith Show, it’s kind of fun pokin’ your nose in every once in awhile.
Low and hehold, this is just a bellicose blowhard who needed some attention. I’m happy to say that we over here at the loving and accepting GayConservative.org (people like myself, Philip, Airforcewife, Jennifer, Shawmut and more) were happy to oblige. In getting his feedback, I’ve decided to highlight some of the funniest moments ever in the history of liberal repartee.
Jurassicdork states in response:
“Because it seems Gay Conservative Steve has a problem with my pointing out the holes in Ann Coulter’s argument”
I don’t think so — I merely asked him to answer what Al Franken could not. With all of the ridiculous rules and regulations put onto our CIA post-watergate by idiot-Democrats in Congress, what could George Bush have done even if he knew all of the specific details of the September 11th attacks? All of his blather factually boils down to once conclusion: NOTHING. (Also, there were no “holes” in Coulter’s response. In fact, Coulter pointed out the “holes” in the Democrats’ argument by putting the question to Franken.)
Next, he says:
“Coulter’s stupidity speak for itself without resorting to ad hominems.”
Has JurassicDork checked YouTube lately? Has he checked with Al Franken? Has he checked with Bill Maher? Generally, when people are stupid, we don’t spend endless hours and millions of George Soros’s dollars on attempting to debunk them. Moreover; let’s ask the college liberals on campuses that throw pies and hurl insults not only at Coulter but at countless other conservative speakers. When was the last time a conservative threw a pie or attempted to physically attack a liberal speaker?
He says:
“Alas, logic and civility are not enough when dealing with that “other” ilk.”
While in the same message he simultaneously says:
“I’ve taken heat in the past from my own readers that sometimes my cursing is too gratuitous, that I’m too angry. So this first paragraph is for those readers. Your thoughtful pleas for more civility and less anger are very often taken under advisement and, when the mood strikes me, I oblige by laying out the facts with my arguments while not resorting to angry rhetoric. Today is different because circumstances compel me to do otherwise. So, to you gentle souls, if you have delicate sensibilities, allow me to warn you right now that what follows will be the vilest, filthiest, most furious post that perhaps I’ve ever written and will act on you like a microwave oven on Dick Cheney. So take this as your final opportunity to allow your mouse to migrate on over to the right side and click on the link of someone more civil and elegant, like Glenn Greenwald, for instance.”
Is his goal to be “gratutitous” or “angry” or is he begging for “civility”? Moreover; whenever I hear a liberal discuss civility, I politiely refer them to the loving reactions of Alec Baldwin or Sean Penn (along with the college campus incidents mentioned above.) Just like their love of the gay community while liberals will use being transgendered or gay in a moment of convenience to better attack Ann Coulter, this joke excuses himself and his rhetoric by proclaiming that it’s the only way to deal with conservative “ilk.”
That part isn’t even the funniest or most ridiculous of his snorefest. The best is when he “attempts” to inject facts and “common sense” into the debate, which in turn only strengthens the conservative argument against big-government policy and the possibility of liberals owning “common sense” to begin with.
He says:
“Yeah, Ann. Better to ask a comedian when the next al Qaida attack will be than to ask your hero who’d been posing as the leader of the free world for the last six and a half years.”
How idiotic! If a stand-up comedian (or a bellicose-blogger for that matter) is going to continue to run around using the idiotic “Bush was warned!” argument, they better damned well be able to sufficiently answer the questions put to them by anyone. If Al Franken is just a “comedian” (Jurassicdork’s words, not mine) — that happens to be running for office by the way — then why in the hell is he even blathering about something that Jurassicdork himself even admits that he is unqualified to talk about in the first place? See to him, Franken’s using it to promote Bush-hate is sufficient, but Coulter asking him to clarify what it is that George Bush could have done with the inept policies put in place by Jurassicdork’s party is totally out of the question.
Hey Jurassicdork, how about unqualified liberals shut up about it altogether? Then we’ll stop imposing our questions of common sense onto you, okay.
He then inadvertently reminds us of the utter failure known as big government by droning on about ridiculous federal programs like FEMA with the intent to spotlight Bush’s cronies. Right along with Hillary, Jurassicdork is happy to portray the Federal Emergency Management Administration as “Bill’s FEMA” where eight years ago (long before Katrina), Hurricane Floyd occured in North Carolina that killed 56 people and evacuated over two million. Clinton, the king of crony placement, and his wonderboy James Lee Witt (then director of “Bill’s FEMA) were so slow to respond to the tragedy that even Jesse Jackson complained.
Conservatives in 1999 could have used this chance to do to Clinton what liberals do to Bush and spotlight Clinton’s cronyism with appointing Witt. However; as a general matter, it is not conservatives that endorse ridiculous federally funded organizations like FEMA. In North Carolina and Mississippi for example; when there are massive storms, the local government are on the spot as well as the residents who pull up their britches and get to work. “Bill’s FEMA” believes the best way to handle an emergency is to pass out debit cards to victims and watch our federal funds be used for such vital supplies from merchants as Bloomingdales and don’t forget the visits to the strips clubs as part of the victims’ healing process. (Taking the strip clubs into consideration, no wonder Hillary refers to it as “Bill’s FEMA!”)
Liberal idiocy has decided to set up these nuisance organizations at our expense while simultaneously selecting moral outrage over which cronies are worse. How about we just do away with liberal policies altogether?
He then complains and mentions Walter Reed. It has been well-documented that indeed it is again – liberal policy- that put no-good maintenance men in charge at these facilities, that are funded and paid for by taxpayers, to care for the facilities that serve our wounded troops. While all individuals can agree that the actual medical care at Walter Reed is excellent, liberals then decided that it was Bush’s fault that maintenance men working under liberal policy (making it impossible for them to be fired) aren’t doing their jobs.
He blathers on about toothpaste, bad food, and liberal hysteria that admit problems with — say it with me — LIBERAL POLICIES AND PROGRAMS. We all know the kind of people that work for places like that and if it makes Jurassicdork feel any better, I will voluntarily sign away all nomination rights to FEMA and the FDA. Hell, put Teddy Kennedy in all of those positions for all I care! We conservatives advocate taking care of ourselves and we’ll save our desired appointees for real positions like the Supreme Court.
This is a perfect example of how a liberal is when they are forced to recognize the failure of large government. It’s these same idiots that create myths of global warming (just 30 years after they were warning us of the next ice-age) to propose massive tax on gasoline and government funded “programs” (like FEMA) to pay unqualified folks to pointlessly count how many leaves fall from oak trees in November.
The frustration is equal, but liberal socialization and big government have been failures stemming way back to FDR. I’m paying the maximum amount of social security tax that anyone can pay each year to put into a fund that is currently paying for others who did not put in nearly as much as I have. (And I’m only 33!) Will it be there for me when I’m 62? These programs have served liberals in two major ways. First, they get to take more of our money (since working for their own is out of the question). Second, they get to blame the failures of their own programs on Republicans.
Moving forward, Juassicdork continues:
“You ask what Bill Clinton had done to fight terrorism. First, let me ask you: What did HW do to fight terrorism because the attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 was just a couple of months after Clinton took office.”
More attacks happened during Clinton’s tenure than any other administration’s except for Reagan’s. Reagan had an excuse, he was stuck cleaning up a mess created by the peace-lovers who handed us buckets of unemployment and international enemies, Carter and Mondale. I forgot, Clinton did bomb an aspirin factory. That went over well, didn’t it? I do believe it was Senator Feinstein who insinuated that it was this sloppy attack that made Bin Laden angry enough to plan and execute 9/11.
What did HW do? Well if you pay attention, between the 1988 Pan-Am flight hijacking and the WTC bombing of 1993, we enjoyed a near five-year break from Muslim violence (all through HW’s term). This was the longest span of peace between attacks on our interests from 1979 to 2001, but not quite as long as the gap of Muslim violence on American interests since 2001 until the present (six years). I think HW’s five-year break may have had something to do with us bombing the snot out of Saddam’s regime in Desert Storm that made them think twice before messing with America, plus I think George W.’s six-year break has something to do with our troops kicking some major ass in Iraq and Afghanistan right now.
The surge of Muslim violence got its confidence up after Clinton ripped our troops out of Somalia.
Continuing with his sad concern for national security he says:
“So far in Iraq, Bush has killed a million hostages to get at a few hostage takers. At the very least, Clinton never went on record to say, “I am truly not that concerned about him” less than seven months after the original World Trade Center bombing.”
That is incorrect. We have rounded up all of Al-Queda’s top guys (explaining why we aren’t as worried about OBL as an imminent threat) and are holding them at Guantanamo (you know, the thing you guys keep crying about while simultaneously proclaiming that Bush could have done more to prevent 9/11.) We have deposed of Saddam, had three elections where millions upon millions of Iraqis have voted, killed HUNDRED OF THOUSANDS of insurgents and terrorists and rounded up more. All of this with 3,000 American deaths. Compare that to the 60,000 in Vietnam, 300,000 in WW2, or 600,000 in the Civil War, and I cannot help but wonder what exactly Jurassicdork would have had to say during WW2.
We will win this war and even Jurassicdork’s own Democrats in the House and Senate refuse to put their money where their mouth is and vote against it or its funding. We can win it a lot sooner if we stop catering to the idiot Democrats in Congress who keep crying phony crocodile tears of concern over blacks, gays, civilians, and the troops.
To quote Michael Scheuer in regard to winning this war, we can win it:
“Anywhere we can, whenever we can, without a great deal of concern for civilian casualties. As I said, war is war. The people who got killed when they were hosting Zawahiri to dinner were not the friends of the United States.”
If liberals would stop politicizing our troops and Iraqi civilians with their counterfeit concern, we could finish this thing tomorrow but as has been pointed out and proven over and over again by liberals like Jurassicpork, they; in their mission to watch this country and its humanity self-destruct, would rather our troops fail to further illustrate their hate for Bush rather than grant Iraqis the same freedom that they take for granted everyday.
steveflesher
Philip
Mel Maguire
Mark Ciavola
Comments
This is América! Nice cartoon!
Funny that you would quote Schuer. Did you read his book “Imperial Hubris”? I did. It’s a devastating rip about why what George Bush has done has put the U.S. in MORE danger. Schuer’s not a man who supports your position.
And if you’re so sure that the U.S. MUST win the battle in Iraq, that it’s essential to national survival, why aren’t you over there fighting? Of course, we know it’s because the military — NOT the Democrats, who tried to eliminate the policy under Clinton and were stopped by right-wingers — wouldn’t let you, because you’re gay.
But you could always sign up with one of the mercenary contractors to drive a truck, or lay bricks at the billion-dollar embassy in Baghdad, or flip burgers at some fast-food outlet in a desert base. What’s stopping you?
If you don’t walk the walk, you shouldn’t talk the talk. That’s why my wife and I walked our arses down here. We realised that if we kept whingeing about how awful the Bush Crime Family fascism was, and didn’t leave our cushy lifestyle in order to back up our beliefs, we were nothing but poseurs. And you?
I purposely used Scheuer BECAUSE liberals are always using him and mis-characterizing his words to support their idiocy.
Scheuer answered much of these characterizations on O’Reilly, the same night he said what he said which I quoted above.
Apparently he does agree with me that we need to go in there and finish this off without listening to liberals cry about civilians.
Scheuer doesn’t represent one party. But I would like to add him to the list of folks that liberals have claimed possession of…
Cindy Sheehan
Jersey Girls
Valerie Plame
Micheal Scheuer
I don’t think so.
“why aren’t you over there fighting”
I didn’t join the military back when we weren’t at war. That stupid argument is old of “you must join something to support something” — if you believe that, join the fire department or police department to support them, otherwise you really do not.
Moreover; it was Clinton who pushed for Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, the same President who did not give us any prominent blacks. Well, except for his secretary, Betty Curry.
“That’s why my wife and I walked our arses down here”
Stop shaming the good people of Australia by associating the ideals of that country with your insane ideology.
John Howard is an amazing prime minister, and certainly does not share in with your insanity. Moreover; conservatism won in Australia recently in another historical landslide.
As Ann Coulter said, when looking at France, Australia, and England’s leaders, (as well as Canada’s conservative government), liberals who keep threatening to move out of the country are running out of places to run to!
As you were here, you are there a total minority. I really don’t know who you think you’re fooling.
How do you define “recently” as in when the Liberals won, Steve? The last Commonwealth election was in 2004. Labor’s leader was a guy named Mark Latham, who’s analagous to Howard Dean — a hothead who cheesed swing voters off by being pugnacious. Labor lost three years ago, not recently, but that was a much different political climate to what it is now.
Labor controls the parliaments in every Australian state. Labor is tipped to win this year’s Commonwealth election, which will give it control of the country. (Albeit, a big country with a small population…) One of the first things you’ll see is a tip-toeing of Australia’s token force out of Iraq, a la what the Poms are doing.
Lastly, you’re telling ME I’m a total minority down here? From where you sit in the U.S.? Do you know any Australians? Do you follow Australian events? Ask yourself honestly — when you make statements like that, do you have a factual basis for what you’re saying, or are you projecting your own wishful thinking about what Aussies are like?
I find the latter with a lot of the undiluted Kool-aid conservatives. They see the world as they imagine it, not as it is.
Mate, I’m a hospital nurse. (That’s how we got in here, on a work visa.) I talk to all sorts of patients and families at work, and people outside chat to me all the time because an American accent attracts attention. And uniformly, even with an active duty military officer I had as a patient on the ward, they think the U.S. has gone nuts. This officer said his mates regard him as a bit conservative, but when he was on liaison duty in the U.S., military people there thought he was a lefty.
I find that my political attitudes are more in sync with the average Aussie than they were with the people where we lived before emigrating — San Francisco. I fear it is you who is fooling yourself.
San Francisco!? Well that explains it.
I know enough about Australia’s politics to know that John Howard is Australia’s LONGEST SERVING Prime Minister and won a historic third term AFTER the NY Times touted in that same year that Australians were furious at him for his support of the Iraq War.
They were wrong apparently and obviously other individuals are voting in Australia that didn’t come from San Francisco of all places.
Good grief — no offense, but people in San Francisco are known to turn crazy after they live there for a few years. “Peace” activists like Janis Joplin lived there and was so peaceful, she killed herself on heroin. “Peace” activist Grace Slick attempted to go to the White House and slip LSD in Nixon’s cocktail.
There is a couple I know that moved there that are now divorcing because the man cannot figure out if he wants to be a man or woman.
And if all this isn’t enough, NANCY PELOSI is pretty much all we need to know.
You know, the Democrat that wants to charge a windfall tax on investments, stock growth, and IRA growth to make life better for illegal aliens? Yeah, her.
The issue people have with Scheuer and have misused him (I believe) is the fact that he is a professional intelligence officer. He is geared to cite his findings, as a doctor is bound to accurately cite a diagnosis. It’s not a ‘people (or boss) pleasing’ type job. Sycophancy and breeze-riding only infected the breed when Deutsch and Tenet were DCI’s (each the candidates of Sandy Berger and Tony Lake).
Fortunately, Scheuer held on during that period .
With Tenet et al.*, still there he just burst out!
*Plame, McCarthy,etc.
As a former Marine, I think it is an insult for someone to use the tired old phrase, “We aren’t you in the war instead of sitting back here in the U.S.?”
I think that it is an insult because…
First, it says that anyone off the street could do the hard work of the people in the military at just the moments notice.
Second, there are people in the service today who haven’t gone to Iraq, either because their units haven’t gone or any other reason.
Third, the job of the military is to protect the people.
Fourth, that is proves something…mostly, that you will change your mind if you are thrown into combat. That is rubbish, because you would have all of the military in rebellion. By the way, the military supports the President. Of course, there are a few who don’t agree with the President, but the rating of the President among the troops is opposite of that of the American people.
It’s rubbish and I’m glad that Bukko sticks to his position about the war as much as I stand by my position on the war – DON’T CUT AND RUN, as Bukko did!
In refence to an issue Kevin at QC one member offered that “to defend against terrorists one must think like….” I found it a rather smug dismissal of the crisis and epplied with a better idea. ‘Thinking like terrorsts to ‘defend against’ terrorists is a fair platitude if we were fighting with platitudes. But just to understand them is not enough.
Our goal must be to defeat them, not just defend against them! Defense is a glory any wimp can proclaim even at the end of the gamut.
Ruthlessness and criminality in whomever, Whomever, whatever or Whatever is their way of thinking. Out think that!
The killing field was our choice after
years of their murders, Iraq was available. (Hell, its population accomodated common thugs and murderers running things for years.)
They are still coming by the thousands and dieing in the ethical void in which they’ve lived.
Raw and indecent as my remarks are, and by no means denying the price we’re paying in human sacrifice, they are no less sordid than many annals of human history.”
DEvDov: I am emotionally committed to finish this campaign on our terms for you, forSchuerer , Steve, Kevin and Patriks. The press session today went pretty well, I thought. He seenmd as relaxed as I was with Congress not is session. Frankly, I expect GW to show a little intelligence ‘tradecraftand mischief of his
own.
I know enough about Australia’s politics to know that John Howard is Australia’s LONGEST SERVING Prime Minister and won a historic third term AFTER the NY Times touted in that same year that Australians were furious at him for his support of the Iraq War.
Apologies for having another go at you, Steve, but that sentence is one more example of what I mentioned about you believing things that are flat-out wrong.
John Howard is NOT Australia’s longest-serving PM. That was a guy named Robert Menzies, who became Prime Minister in 1949 and stayed until 1966. He was Howard’s role model. You probably would have liked Menzies, because he tried to outlaw the Australian Communist Party during the 1950s and sent Aussie troops into the Vietnam War.
Howard won a FOURTH term, not a third, in 2004. He was first put in as PM in 1996, and got his term renewed during elections in 1998, 2001 and 2004. The last win came because Aussies don’t like the Iraq war, but they vote more on the basis of what the national interest rate is. Almost every mortgage here is adjustable, so when they crank up the equivalent of the Federal Funds Rate, people get screwed, and Howard promised to keep rates low. But you’re not interested in the vagaries of Aussie politics. If I wasn’t living here, I wouldn’t be either.
I don’t fault you for not knowing the ins and outs of political careers here. It’s a minor country in a far-away location. What I do fault you for is stating confidently that you know something WHEN YOU DON’T. And when it’s so easily proveable.
Use the Google, son. You’ll learn things, and your arguments will be so much stronger. Plus, the smarter you get, the more left-wing you’ll become.
Finally, why is someone on a gay site slagging San Francisco? It’s one of the few places in the U.S. where gay people can be free of societal pressure. I lived all over the U.S. and found people as a whole to be much more intelligent and friendly there than any other area. Not perfect — we got hate mail when we flew a French flag outside our house in March 2003 as a war protest — but overall folks are decent. As they are in Oz, which is quite gay-friendly.
That said, I commend you for engaging in civil discourse. You’re totally wrong in your political positions, but at least you’re polite. Most right-wingers I debate with, and I don’t waste much time doing this, soon descend into vitriol and insults (righties like to call liberals GAY — what does that say about their “accepting” nature, Philip?) You and the others on your site have better manners. Cheers for that, mate.
“That said, I commend you for engaging in civil discourse.”
Well, Steve, I guess you were the only one between you and Bukko!
Stay in Aussie-land!
“I don’t fault you for not knowing the ins and outs of political careers here. It’s a minor country in a far-away location. What I do fault you for is stating confidently that you know something WHEN YOU DON’T. And when it’s so easily proveable”
Okay, so let’s re-address my point here. I am sorry for the mistake. John Howard is the SECOND-longest running Prime Minister of Australia and he served THREE full terms and is on his fourth. Sorry for the technical mixup. This is hardly a case of being “flat wrong”, especially when your second correction only strengthens the point that you utterly avoided.
He won in landslides, Bukko! Thanks to you, I can now say four of them rather than three.
Do you think San Francisco would have elected him once? Which makes the point that the people of Australia are nothing like the people of San Francisco.
“Use the Google, son. You’ll learn things, and your arguments will be so much stronger. Plus, the smarter you get, the more left-wing you’ll become.”
Again, he is a conservative who supports Bush and the Iraq war. I was wrong by omitting the word “second” but what you just did was only strengthened what I said by proving that I stood to gain nothing by lying about it. If indeed the longest-running PM was a liberal, then I could see your point.
In the end, you know my argument (the point) is supported by fact. The fact that I did KNOW SOMETHING about it was only added to and confirmed by your touch-up of my overall point.
Nice try avoiding my factual point; now, are you going to finally answer it?
In terms of San Francisco, let’s first define what it means when people are free from “societal pressure.” Most places in the country couldn’t care less if someone was gay. If by being free of societal pressure you mean walking about in drag and in chaps in public, then you have a point. But that isn’t called “being gay”, that is called “being a freak.” To which you are correct, San Francisco wins hands down!
People like Philip and I (and others who comment here) are able to separate being gay from the rest of our lives. Do you walk around letting heterosexuality determine how you present yourself to people and how you vote? Of course not.
It’s called objectivity.
Finally, I would like you to document for me one time a liberal speaker has been attacked on a college campus by conservatives.
Ann Coulter was attacked, so was Pat Buchanan, so was Bill Cristal, etc. All by liberals.
Then say what you said again about liberals being “smarter” and place the “vitriol” card onto the right. So smart and peaceful that they have to throw food or scream “you’re a nazi!” to debate their opposition.
Thanks for commenting. You’re more than welcome anytime.
Steve, you forgot the word “racist” also.
Notice the Dems are always so quick to use the word, they must be thinking about someone’s race all the time!
LOL. Devil Dog at that *racist* comment.
I have ONE day when I can’t check much online and I miss all this debate? I’m more than slightly miffed. Next time, someone let me know what’s going on, mmmkay?
Oh, and as to San Francisco… I’m a born and bred Californian, and I would not go back without forced orders for any reason on earth. Our last duty station was the San Francisco area (we had to take care of my MIL), and on the day the Iraq War kicked off, someone keyed a swastika on our minivan. We had a teacher accuse us of child abuse because our “military lifestyle” is “destructive to children” and “glorifies violence”, and a landlord who was so loving of all mankind that he tried to keep 2000$ of security deposit when my husband deployed.
San Francisco is more accepting and less forcing of conformity on people? Please! It’s one of the most socially rigid places I’ve ever lived (and that includes Texas!). Just because the social norms they are trying to force people into are stinky armpits, pot use, kumbaya, and naked bike riding instead of suits and ties and Donna Reed doesn’t make them socially accepting!
BTW, it was a teenager in Oklahoma that I saw wearing a t-shirt that said “Leave Our Homos Alone” when that idiot Phelps showed up to protest an out homosexual at a school there.
I question my political and personal beliefs every night as I’m thinking about my day. I always have to wonder about people who state, as gospel, YOU ARE WRONG without actual facts to point out how they came to that conclusion. Do you ever wonder if, perhaps, you might be the one driving on the wrong side of the road? Ever?
“Just because the social norms they are trying to force people into are stinky armpits, pot use, kumbaya, and naked bike riding….”
Airforcewife, excellent comment! I will be laughing all day over that.
I would love to hang out with you and Jennifer all in the same day.