Black XXVII: "Dubyuh's Got Faith!!"

"It's the only time in my life I've ever voted Republican. =)"

Well, you picked one heck of a good GOPer to support. So, yer from a family of Pubbies and you had to be a "renegade", eh? They must just shake their heads when you start spewing yer Pro-Socialism rant...LOL!!

So it wasn't a bad upbringing that led you astray...what was it that got yer mind so skewed to the Left?! Was it a way to pick up girls or what?!

LOL...MUD

441 posted on 06/07/2004 7:25:59 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

"I couldn't find a direct link to the Soros speech you keep referring to...do you have one?"

Click on "George Soros Speaks" on post 432...MUD

442 posted on 06/07/2004 7:31:32 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

"...knowing LA, they'll bounce back and win the next three..."

Yep...I still feel they are clearly the more talented squad. The Lakers are my second-favorite team after the Bucks, but they piss me off when they give an effort like they did last night (Shaq not included).

FReegards...MUD

443 posted on 06/07/2004 7:33:47 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

To: Libloather; lowbridge; ForGod'sSake; scholar; BraveMan; jla; backhoe; Ironword; ironman

"Oh, How They Hated Reagan!!...And How Wrong They Were!"

"President Reagan was held in near universal contempt by our alleged allies, the Western Europeans. By sheer coincidence my first trip to Europe was in 1984 during the week of the former President's wisecrack during a pre-radio broadcast soundcheck about invading the Soviet Union in 10 minutes. The outcry I witnessed was deafening. According to the Europeans, Reagan was worse than Hitler or Stalin. He was a warmonger, hell-bent on a nuclear confrontation with the peaceful socialists of the Soviet Union. He was a cowboy, an uneducated lout who merely mouthed words put in front of him by his handlers. He was a puppet of the State of Israel. And most damning of all in the eyes of the Europeans, Reagan actually had the temerity to admit publicly to a belief in God. Reagan was so gauche, so unsophisticated, you know----so unFrench.

444 posted on 06/07/2004 7:40:16 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

I am reading it, and I'm finding the chain of logic to be even funkier than the formatting.

First of all, how do you go from Soros' words, "...they establish two kinds of sovereignty in the world, the sovereignty of the United States, which is inviolate, not subject to any international constraints, and the rest of the world, which is subject to the Bush Doctrine," to your idea that "What is, in fact, "inviolate" here is the neo-neoliberal doctrine of U.S. sovereignty, which states simply that there must be none--we must yield our sovereignty to the United Nations."? What, exactly, does Soros say that suggests we must be subject to the United Nations rather than an active part of it? Or is this just projection on your part?

And who, in your mind, is a "neo-neoliberalist"? I read your definition and couldn't think of anybody that fits the bill. For that matter, what would a "neo-liberalist" be? I must have missed that movement over here on the left.

Also, why do you endorse killing Americans who disagree with you?

445 posted on 06/07/2004 7:41:31 AM PDT by SamFromSC

So it wasn't a bad upbringing that led you astray...what was it that got yer mind so skewed to the Left?! Was it a way to pick up girls or what?!

Yeah, sure. Chicks dig Birkenstocks. </sarcasm>

I grew up in the backwaters of East Texas -- verrry conservative part of the state -- and my mom and dad were both dyed-in-the-wool Republicans. There was also a lot of Klan activity in the town, and to make a long story short, when I compared the constant harassment my black and Hispanic friends received on a daily basis, with my family's indifference to same, then I think that was the genesis of my "commie liberal" thinking. It didn't really reach intellectual maturity until my college days, however, and I got my own critical thinking skills and paid more attention to current events.

I've mentioned being Democratic a few times, but politics generally isn't discussed in my family for other reasons. As a matter of fact, I still get Hillary jokes emailed from my aunt occassionaly. Of course, I reply to each of those jokes with the latest edition of my Michael Moore newsletter... =)

446 posted on 06/07/2004 7:48:04 AM PDT by SamFromSC

"...why do you endorse killing Americans who disagree with you?"

I read all MiaT's stuff and have NEVER seen her endorse killing fellow Americans...where do you see it?

MUD

447 posted on 06/07/2004 8:09:31 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

"...the latest edition of my Michael Moore newsletter..."

My gawd, you are defintely warped...LOL!!

Takes all kinds, I reckon, but I sure am glad those who think like you are outta power!!

MUD

448 posted on 06/07/2004 8:11:41 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

Of course, I reply to each of those jokes with the latest edition of my Michael Moore newsletter

I guess one good joke deserves another.

449 posted on 06/07/2004 8:13:50 AM PDT by P8riot

To: P8riot; Dubya's fan; Dubya; Reagan Man; George W. Bush

"A Time for Choosing" - Ronald Reagan

"Address on behalf of Senator Barry Goldwater Rendezvous with Destiny October 27, 1964

"Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us that they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he will forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer--not an easy answer--but simple. If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based upon what we know in our hearts is morally right. We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion now in slavery behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skin, we are willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Let's set the record straight. There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace--and you can have it in the next second--surrender.

Admittedly there is a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson in history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face--that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight and surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand--the ultimatum. And what then? When Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we are retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary because by that time we will have weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he has heard voices pleading for "peace at any price" or "better Red than dead," or as one commentator put it, he would rather "live on his knees than die on his feet." And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us. You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin--just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well, it's a simple answer after all. You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." There is a point beyond which they must not advance. This is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater's "peace through strength." Winston Churchill said that "the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits--not animals." And he said, "There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty." You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness."

Reagan was a giant...MUD

450 posted on 06/07/2004 8:18:54 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

I read all MiaT's stuff and have NEVER seen her endorse killing fellow Americans...where do you see it?

Read below (emphasis mine):

Marquis of Queensberry niceties, multicultural hypersensitivity, unipolar-power guilt, hegemony aversion (which is self-sabotage in the extreme--we must capture what we conquer--oil is the terrorist's lifeblood)... and, most important, the mutual-protection racket in Washington--pre-9/11 anachronisms all--are luxuries we can no longer afford.
Notwithstanding, the underlying premise of our hyperfastidious polity, (that we must remain in the system to save the system) is fallacious at best and tantamount to Lady Liberty lifting herself up by her own bootstraps.
To borrow from the Bard, let's start metaphorically, or better yet, economically and politically, by killing all the seditious solicitors, which include the clintons and their left-wing agitprop-and-money-laundering machine: the Viacom-Simon & Schuster-60-Minutes vertical operation, the horizontal (as in "soporific") Cronkite-ite news readers, the (hardly upright) Ben-Veniste goons and Gorelick sleepers, and, of course, the clueless, cacophonic, disproportionately loud, left-coast Barbra-Streisand contingent.

451 posted on 06/07/2004 8:19:13 AM PDT by SamFromSC

However, this business of cutting taxes and funding a war at the same time is as ridiculous as if I quit my job and then went out and bought a Ferrari.

I did that back in 1978. Well, OK it wasn't really a Ferrari, it was 308 GTB (really a Dino, technically all Ferraris are 12 cylinder), and it wasn't new either it was only a year old. My ex-wife had it the last time I looked.

452 posted on 06/07/2004 8:27:16 AM PDT by P8riot

So, MiaT uses Shakespeare's advice that we first kill all the lawyers and you assume she wants to kill all the Lib'rals?! As yer quote shows, she is speaking metaphorically...we must CRUSH the Lib'rals, SLAUGHTER the Lib'rals, and DESTROY the Lib'rals!! But we need only KILL the TRAITOROUS ones...after a proper trial fer TREASON, of course!!

MUD

453 posted on 06/07/2004 8:27:36 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

"...this business of cutting taxes and funding a war at the same time is as ridiculous as if I quit my job and then went out and bought a Ferrari."

Nonsense!! As the Gipper demonstrated in the 80's, you can cut marginal tax rates, spurring the economy and actually increasing tax revenues. That's what's happening now, thanks to Dubyuh's (rather miniscule) tax cuts. I say we cut rates even more in '05, then again in '06-'08!!

Winning the War on Terrorism includes beating down the Size and Scope of the terrifying Federal Leviathan!!

MUD

454 posted on 06/07/2004 8:31:31 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

To: Mudboy Slim; Mia T

It wasn't Shakespeare's advice, it was the advice of Dick the Butcher in Henry VI, a vicious killer. One of my favorite plays.

But I thought it was pretty clear that she says we should start our war against "neo-neo-liberalism" by killing all the seditious people, including the Clintons, the so-called "liberal media", and so forth. I'm trying to read it as "killing them economically and politically," as you seem to imply, but it's very hard to do in the context of the rest of her quote, which supports playing outside of the "Marquis of Queensbury" rules. The quote reads more like "lets start our war economically and politically, by first killing the seditious solicitors..."

Mia T, would you like to retract this?

455 posted on 06/07/2004 8:54:55 AM PDT by SamFromSC

"Unknown Legend" by Neil Young

She used to work in a diner
Never saw a woman look finer
I used to order just to watch
her float across the floor
She grew up in a small town
Never put her roots down
Daddy always kept movin',
so she did too.

Somewhere on a desert highway
She rides a Harley-Davidson
Her long blonde hair
flyin' in the wind
She's been runnin' half her life
The chrome and steel she rides
Collidin' with
the very air she breathes
The air she breathes.

You know it ain't easy
You got to hold on
She was an unknown legend
in her time
Now she's dressin' two kids
Lookin' for a magic kiss
She gets the far-away look
in her eyes.

Somewhere on a desert highway
She rides a Harley-Davidson
Her long blonde hair
flyin' in the wind
She's been runnin' half her life
The chrome and steel she rides
Collidin' with the very
air she breathes
The air she breathes.

Pre...MUD

456 posted on 06/07/2004 8:57:47 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

I gotta get started on my project, but read the article I quoted earlier. Reagan's tax cuts made our deficit enormous, created the largest earnings gap between the rich and the poor ever (only to be outdone later by Dubya), and gave us massive debts that took two terms of Clinton belt-tightening to undo.

Another round of tax cuts for the wealthy may help you win the War on the Poor, but it won't help with the War on Terrorism.

457 posted on 06/07/2004 9:03:45 AM PDT by SamFromSC

did that back in 1978. Well, OK it wasn't really a Ferrari, it was 308 GTB (really a Dino, technically all Ferraris are 12 cylinder), and it wasn't new either it was only a year old. My ex-wife had it the last time I looked.

My wife won't let me be irresponsible like that anymore. =) The only car I ever bought new was a Hyundai Accent. Pathetic. It was like having two hampsters on a wheel under the hood. =P

458 posted on 06/07/2004 9:06:23 AM PDT by SamFromSC

Too literal, as well as too liberal, I see.

I used the attribution as shorthand.
I was thinking 'expeditious,' not 'scholarly.'

(Notwithstanding this, how does one ever definitively tease out a playwright's beliefs from those of his characters.)

I was using the quote
--and the reference to the "Marquis of Queensbury" rules--
metaphorically,
so I have nothing to retract,
although I hasten to add
that I have nothing against
trying the lot of them for
treason,
which I do believe is a capital offense.

CLINTON TREASON + THE GORELICK WALL

by Mia T, 5.5.04

This story merits its own book, but what deserves immediate comment is the willingness of the Clintons to risk everything to keep the cash pipeline open. Schwartz kept it open and full. Before he was through, Schwartz and Loral would donate roughly $2 million to the Clinton cause. Whether Schwartz gave additional money or favors off the books is a question that deserves asking.

A second question that deserves asking is just how much damage Schwartz, Berger and the Clintons did to America's national security.

A third question worth asking is whether Ron Brown's very real threats to expose these machinations led to his death.

Some dare call it treason:
Jack Cashill reveals how Clinton sold America's security to China
WorldNetDaily.com| Wednesday, May 5, 2004 | Jack Cashill

Reverse Gorelick

by Mia T, 4.15.04
QUINN IN THE MORNING (ESSAY DISCUSSED)
(MP3, REAL, WINDOWS MEDIA, WINAMP)

e would have it backwards and miss the point entirely if we were to attribute The Gorelick Wall and the attendant metastasis of al Qaeda during the clintons' watch, (which, incidentally, was then in its incipient stage and stoppable), to the '60s liberal mindset.

Rampant '60s liberalism was not the underlying rationale for The Gorelick Wall.

Rather, The Gorelick Wall was the underlying rationale for--The Gorelick Wall was (insofar as '60s liberalism was the Wall's apparent impetus) a cynical cover for --the willful, methodical malpractice and malfeasance that was the product of the virulent clinton strain of rampant '60s liberalism.

While it is true that The Gorelick Wall was the convenient device of a cowardly self-serving president, The Wall's aiding and abetting of al Qaeda was largely incidental, (the pervasiveness of the clintons' Nobel-Peace-Prize calculus notwithstanding).

The Wall was engineered primarily to protect a corrupt self-serving president. The metastasis of al Qaeda and 9/11 were simply the cost of doing business, clinton-style.

Further confirmation of the Wall-as-cover-for-clinton-corruption thesis:

Gorelick's failure to disclose the fact that she authored the memo that was the efficient cause of 911
Gorelick's surreal presence on the 911 commission investigating Gorelick's Justice Department, a maneuver that effectively removes from the universe of witnesses a central witness, Gorelick, even as it uniquely positions a central player, Gorelick, to directly shape the commission's conclusions. (Is there any question which two people are responsible for Gorelick's insertion on the commission?)

Conversely, that it never occurred to anyone on the commission that Gorelick's flagrant conflict of interest renders her presence on the commission beyond farce calls into question the commission's judgment if not its integrity. Washington's mutual protection racket writ large, I suspect.

The Gorelick Wall is consistent with, and an international extension of, two essential acts committed in tandem, Filegate, the simultaneous empowering of the clintons and disemboweling of clinton adversaries, and the clinton Putsch, the firing and replacement of every U.S. attorney extant.

Filegate and the clinton Putsch,
committed in tandem,
the product of a careful criminal calculus,
at once empowered clinton
and disemboweled his opponents.
clinton was now free to betray with abandon
not only our trust,
but the Constitution as well.
The Common Man
Mia T
February, 1998

Allegations of international clinton crimes swirling around the White House in 1995 and beyond support The-Wall-as-cover-for-international-clinton-crimes thesis.

Once the clintons' own U.S. attorneys were in place, once the opposition was disemboweled by the knowledge that their raw FBI files had been in the possession of the clintons, once domestic law enforcement was effectively blinded to foreign data by Gorelick's Wall, the clintons were free to methodically and seditiously and with impunity auction off America's security, sovereignty and economy to the highest foreign bidder.

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com
missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualhillary.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com

Newly released Justice Department memos show that September 11 panel commissioner Jamie S. Gorelick was more intimately involved than previously thought with hampering communications between U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies fighting terrorism.

As the No. 2 person in the Clinton Justice Department, Ms. Gorelick rejected advice from the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, who warned against placing more limits on communications between law-enforcement officials and prosecutors pursuing counterterrorism cases, according to several internal documents written in summer 1995.

"It is hard to be totally comfortable with instructions to the FBI prohibiting contact with the United States Attorney's Offices when such prohibitions are not legally required," U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White wrote Ms. Gorelick six years before the 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and at the Pentagon.

"Our experience has been that the FBI labels of an investigation as intelligence or law enforcement can be quite arbitrary, depending upon the personnel involved and that the most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating," she wrote.

The documents -- released yesterday by the Justice Department at the request of two Senate Republicans -- drew renewed calls for Ms. Gorelick to testify publicly before the September 11 commission about the so-called "wall" between law enforcement and intelligence agencies that many have blamed for allowing the 2001 terrorist attacks to occur.

Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, said yesterday that Ms. Gorelick's policies regarding the wall contributed to "blinding America to this terrible threat."

Also, he said, the newly released memos raised apparent conflicts with statements Ms. Gorelick has made recently defending herself and her role in the Clinton Justice Department.

"These documents show what we've said all along: Commissioner Gorelick has special knowledge of the facts and circumstances leading up to the erection and buttressing of 'that wall' that, before the enactment of the Patriot Act, was the primary obstacle to the sharing of communications between law enforcement and intelligence agencies," Mr. Cornyn said.

In a June 19, 1995, memo, Ms. White recommended a series of changes to a Gorelick policy that went beyond legal requirements in separating law- enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Memos show Gorelick involvement in 'wall'
Charles Hurt and Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published April 29, 2004

The Mary Jo White Memo:
Documentation of clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance

by Mia T, 4.30.04

ary Jo White's memo is documentation of the clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance.

White's 1995 memo effectively put the clinton-Gorelick cabal on contemporaneous notice that Gorelick's Wall was placing America at grave risk from terrorism.

The memo explicitly warned that the protective wall the clintons and Gorelick were busy erecting (doubtless to blind domestic law enforcement to the clintons' illegal foreign schemes) would (also) blind domestic law enforcement to terrorist plots foreign and domestic.

From this it follows that Gorelick's Wall was not the clintons' and Gorelick's simple (albeit monumental) blunder.

Rather, Gorelick's Wall was no less than the clintons' and Gorelick's malfeasance--willful, self-serving and seditious--with the metastasis of al Qaeda and 9/11 the sorry endpoint.

NOTE: Bin Laden declared war on America throughout the clintons' watch. Had the clintons understood that this was war, not crime, that a terrorist war requires only one consenting player, Gorelick's Wall would be just another clintoncorruption footnote.

"The Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden].

At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."

MORE

bill clinton
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer

It is critical to understand that this same terrorism-is-crime-not-war flawed, dangerous thinking animates John Kerry, and the left, generally.

A post-9/11 America must never again put these dangerous pre-9/11 dinosaurs in any positions of leadership. To do so would be to place at grave risk no less than our very existence.

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

Bored Certified
NEW virtual john kerry can bore + snowboard at the same time series

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

459 posted on 06/07/2004 9:30:57 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))

To: SamFromSC; jeffo; sauropod; Pippin; Tolerance Sucks Rocks; leadpenny; sultan88; jla; FBD

"Clinton belt-tightening"...BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

"Conservative Rock Song!!"

WOOOOO-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...MUD

460 posted on 06/07/2004 10:14:03 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (Rest in Peace, Dutch Reagan!!)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794