Monday, June 23, 2008
In response, our POD from somebody calling themself "2goats":
Karl Rove is, I respectfully submit, more evil genius than Lord Cheney. He first managed to sell the pampered wealthy son of a failed President as ‘the kind of guy you could have a beer with.’ AND got him elected despite losing. Then, after 4 years of awful governance, including the largest casualties on U.S. soil since the Civil War, the complete destruction of American foreign policy and getting us trapped in a land war in Asia, the S.O.B. got his AWOL reservist buddy elected as more fiercely patriotic than a multi-decorated hero of the last fiasco. Won a majority of votes on a “safety” platform for the guy who sat in stunned ignorance while the Twin Towers fell. Making a pot smokin’, hoop playin’ Chicago community organizer/pol come off as an arrogant country club martini swiller, that’s just a morning’s work for Karl. What a guy!
We will talk some other time about why John F. Kennedy is my hero. For now, we will simply stipulate that he is.
I posted an excerpt from President Kennedy's acceptance speech at the 1960 Democratic National Convention on Jesus' General a while back and have decided to reprint the entire speech here.
As I read it, I am amazed at how relevant the remarks Mr. Kennedy delivered on that July night at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum nearly 50 years ago now remain to we Democrats today. As you will see, by merely updating of some of the historical references and by changing the name Nixon to McCain, it is a speech that could be delivered (and to great effect) by the Democratic nominee for president in 2008.
One note of interest. The speech as written was better than the speech as delivered. This surprised me, given John F. Kennedy's well-deserved reputation as a one of the greatest orators in American history. However, listening to a tape of the speech reveals that he strayed from the text a few times, and I think to his detriment. Still, it was a very effective presentation. But it could have been better, would have been better, had he delivered it word-for-word.
The link to the speech is: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=25966
The link to the recording is: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/mediaplay.php?id=25966&admin=35
Address of Senator John F. Kennedy Accepting the Democratic Party Nomination for the Presidency of the United States - Memorial Coliseum, Los Angeles
July 15th, 1960
(Except for proper names, BOLD type has been added by the author of this post)
Governor Stevenson, Senator Johnson, Mr. Butler, Senator Symington, Senator Humphrey, Speaker Rayburn, Fellow Democrats, I want to express my thanks to Governor Stevenson for his generous and heart-warming introduction.
It was my great honor to place his name in nomination at the 1956 Democratic Convention, and I am delighted to have his support and his counsel and his advice in the coming months ahead.
With a deep sense of duty and high resolve, I accept your nomination.
I accept it with a full and grateful heart--without reservation--and with only one obligation--the obligation to devote every effort of body, mind and spirit to lead our Party back to victory and our Nation back to greatness.
I am grateful, too, that you have provided me with such an eloquent statement of our Party's platform. Pledges which are made so eloquently are made to be kept. "The Rights of Man"--the civil and economic rights essential to the human dignity of all men--are indeed our goal and our first principles. This is a Platform on which I can run with enthusiasm and conviction.
And I am grateful, finally, that I can rely in the coming months on so many others--on a distinguished running-mate who brings unity to our ticket and strength to our Platform, Lyndon Johnson--on one of the most articulate statesmen of our time, Adlai Stevenson--on a great spokesman for our needs as a Nation and a people, Stuart Symington--and on that fighting campaigner whose support I welcome, President Harry S. Truman-- on my traveling companion in Wisconsin and West Virginia, Senator Hubert Humphrey. On Paul Butler, our devoted and courageous Chairman.
I feel a lot safer now that they are on my side again. And I am proud of the contrast with our Republican competitors. For their ranks are apparently so thin that not one challenger has come forth with both the competence and the courage to make theirs an open convention.
I am fully aware of the fact that the Democratic Party, by nominating someone of my faith, has taken on what many regard as a new and hazardous risk--new, at least since 1928. But I look at it this way: the Democratic Party has once again placed its confidence in the American people, and in their ability to render a free, fair judgment. And you have, at the same time, placed your confidence in me, and in my ability to render a free, fair judgment--to uphold the Constitution and my oath of office--and to reject any kind of religious pressure or obligation that might directly or indirectly interfere with my conduct of the Presidency in the national interest. My record of fourteen years supporting public education--supporting complete separation of church and state--and resisting pressure from any source on any issue should be clear by now to everyone.
I hope that no American, considering the really critical issues facing this country, will waste his franchise by voting either for me or against me solely on account of my religious affiliation. It is not relevant. I want to stress, what some other political or religious leader may have said on this subject. It is not relevant what abuses may have existed in other countries or in other times. It is not relevant what pressures, if any, might conceivably be brought to bear on me. I am telling you now what you are entitled to know: that my decisions on any public policy will be my own--as an American, a Democrat and a free man.
Under any circumstances, however, the victory we seek in November will not be easy. We all know that in our hearts. We recognize the power of the forces that will be aligned against us. We know they will invoke the name of Abraham Lincoln on behalf of their candidate--despite the fact that the political career of their candidate has often seemed to show charity toward none and malice for all.
We know that it will not be easy to campaign against a man who has spoken or voted on every known side of every known issue. Mr. Nixon may feel it is his turn now, after the New Deal and the Fair Deal--but before he deals, someone had better cut the cards.
That "someone" may be the millions of Americans who voted for President Eisenhower but balk at his would be, self-appointed successor. For just as historians tell us that Richard I was not fit to fill the shoes of bold Henry II--and that Richard Cromwell was not fit to wear the mantle of his uncle--they might add in future years that Richard Nixon did not measure to the footsteps of Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Perhaps he could carry on the party policies--the policies of Nixon, Benson, Dirksen and Goldwater. But this Nation cannot afford such a luxury. Perhaps we could better afford a Coolidge following Harding. And perhaps we could afford a Pierce following Fillmore. But after Buchanan this nation needed a Lincoln--after Taft we needed a Wilson--after Hoover we needed Franklin Roosevelt. . . . And after eight years of drugged and fitful sleep, this nation needs strong, creative Democratic leadership in the White House.
But we are not merely running against Mr. Nixon. Our task is not merely one of itemizing Republican failures. Nor is that wholly necessary. For the families forced from the farm will know how to vote without our telling them. The unemployed miners and textile workers will know how to vote. The old people without medical care--the families without a decent home--the parents of children without adequate food or schools--they all know that it's time for a change.
But I think the American people expect more from us than cries of indignation and attack. The times are too grave, the challenge too urgent, and the stakes too high--to permit the customary passions of political debate. We are not here to curse the darkness, but to light the candle that can guide us through that darkness to a safe and sane future. As Winston Churchill said on taking office some twenty years ago: if we open a quarrel between the present and the past, we shall be in danger of losing the future.
Today our concern must be with that future. For the world is changing. The old era is ending. The old ways will not do.
Abroad, the balance of power is shifting. There are new and more terrible weapons--new and uncertain nations--new pressures of population and deprivation. One-third of the world, it has been said, may be free--but one-third is the victim of cruel repression--and the other one- third is rocked by the pangs of poverty, hunger and envy. More energy is released by the awakening of these new nations than by the fission of the atom itself.
Meanwhile, Communist influence has penetrated further into Asia, stood astride the Middle East and now festers some ninety miles off the coast of Florida. Friends have slipped into neutrality--and neutrals into hostility. As our keynoter reminded us, the President who began his career by going to Korea ends it by staying away from Japan.
The world has been close to war before--but now man, who has survived all previous threats to his existence, has taken into his mortal hands the power to exterminate the entire species some seven times over.
Here at home, the changing face of the future is equally revolutionary. The New Deal and the Fair Deal were bold measures for their generations--but this is a new generation.
A technological revolution on the farm has led to an output explosion--but we have not yet learned to harness that explosion usefully, while protecting our farmers' right to full parity income.
An urban population explosion has overcrowded our schools, cluttered up our suburbs, and increased the squalor of our slums.
A peaceful revolution for human rights--demanding an end to racial discrimination in all parts of our community life--has strained at the leashes imposed by timid executive leadership.
A medical revolution has extended the life of our elder citizens without providing the dignity and security those later years deserve. And a revolution of automation finds machines replacing men in the mines and mills of America, without replacing their incomes or their training or their needs to pay the family doctor, grocer and landlord.
There has also been a change--a slippage--in our intellectual and moral strength. Seven lean years of drouth and famine have withered a field of ideas. Blight has descended on our regulatory agencies--and a dry rot, beginning in Washington, is seeping into every corner of America--in the payola mentality, the expense account way of life, the confusion between what is legal and what is right. Too many Americans have lost their way, their will and their sense of historic purpose.
It is a time, in short, for a new generation of leadership--new men to cope with new problems and new opportunities.
All over the world, particularly in the newer nations, young men are coming to power--men who are not bound by the traditions of the past--men who are not blinded by the old fears and hates and rivalries--young men who can cast off the old slogans and delusions and suspicions.
The Republican nominee-to-be, of course, is also a young man. But his approach is as old as McKinley. His party is the party of the past. His speeches are generalities from Poor Richard's Almanac. Their platform, made up of left-over Democratic planks, has the courage of our old convictions. Their pledge is a pledge to the status quo--and today there can be no status quo.
For I stand tonight facing west on what was once the last frontier. From the lands that stretch three thousand miles behind me, the pioneers of old gave up their safety, their comfort and sometimes their lives to build a new world here in the West. They were not the captives of their own doubts, the prisoners of their own price tags. Their motto was not "every man for himself" --but "all for the common cause." They were determined to make that new world strong and free, to overcome its hazards and its hardships, to conquer the enemies that threatened from without and within.
Today some would say that those struggles are all over--that all the horizons have been explored--that all the battles have been won-- that there is no longer an American frontier.
But I trust that no one in this vast assemblage will agree with those sentiments. For the problems are not all solved and the battles are not all won--and we stand today on the edge of a New Frontier--the frontier of the 1960's--a frontier of unknown opportunities and perils-- a frontier of unfulfilled hopes and threats.
Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom promised our nation a new political and economic framework. Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal promised security and succor to those in need. But the New Frontier of which I speak is not a set of promises--it is a set of challenges. It sums up not what I intend to offer the American people, but what I intend to ask of them. It appeals to their pride, not to their pocketbook--it holds out the promise of more sacrifice instead of more security.
But I tell you the New Frontier is here, whether we seek it or not. Beyond that frontier are the uncharted areas of science and space, unsolved problems of peace and war, unconquered pockets of ignorance and prejudice, unanswered questions of poverty and surplus. It would be easier to shrink back from that frontier, to look to the safe mediocrity of the past, to be lulled by good intentions and high rhetoric--and those who prefer that course should not cast their votes for me, regardless of party.
But I believe the times demand new invention, innovation, imagination, decision. I am asking each of you to be pioneers on that New Frontier. My call is to the young in heart, regardless of age--to all who respond to the Scriptural call: "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed."
For courage--not complacency--is our need today--leadership--not salesmanship. And the only valid test of leadership is the ability to lead, and lead vigorously. A tired nation, said David Lloyd George, is a Tory nation--and the United States today cannot afford to be either tired or Tory.
There may be those who wish to hear more--more promises to this group or that--more harsh rhetoric about the men in the Kremlin--more assurances of a golden future, where taxes are always low and subsidies ever high. But my promises are in the platform you have adopted--our ends will not be won by rhetoric and we can have faith in the future only if we have faith in ourselves.
For the harsh facts of the matter are that we stand on this frontier at a turning-point in history. We must prove all over again whether this nation--or any nation so conceived--can long endure--whether our society--with its freedom of choice, its breadth of opportunity, its range of alternatives--can compete with the single-minded advance of the Communist system.
Can a nation organized and governed such as ours endure? That is the real question. Have we the nerve and the will? Can we carry through in an age where we will witness not only new breakthroughs in weapons of destruction--but also a race for mastery of the sky and the rain, the ocean and the tides, the far side of space and the inside of men's minds?
Are we up to the task--are we equal to the challenge? Are we willing to match the Russian sacrifice of the present for the future--or must we sacrifice our future in order to enjoy the present?
That is the question of the New Frontier. That is the choice our nation must make--a choice that lies not merely between two men or two parties, but between the public interest and private comfort--between national greatness and national decline--between the fresh air of progress and the stale, dank atmosphere of "normalcy"--between determined dedication and creeping mediocrity.
All mankind waits upon our decision. A whole world looks to see what we will do. We cannot fail their trust, we cannot fail to try.
It has been a long road from that first snowy day in New Hampshire to this crowded convention city. Now begins another long journey, taking me into your cities and homes all over America. Give me your help, your hand, your voice, your vote. Recall with me the words of Isaiah: "They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run and not be weary."
As we face the coming challenge, we too, shall wait upon the Lord, and ask that he renew our strength. Then shall we be equal to the test. Then we shall not be weary. And then we shall prevail.
Citation: John T. Woolley and Gerhard Peters,The American Presidency Project [online]. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California (hosted), Gerhard Peters (database). Available from World Wide Web: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=25966.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
I often, in my on-line life and elsewhere, deal with people who most assuredly do not believe in Jesus and who therefore think that the Christian faith is ridiculous and wholly without merit.
I am totally okay with that. Yes, I am aware of the Great Commission. I know Jesus said we are to go forth into all the world and teach His Gospel to every creature. But, believe me, given all the shitty things I've done in my life, with all the mistakes I've made, I am in no position to proselytize. Besides, this is America. You can believe what you want to believe. Hell, you can believe a horse fell out of a tree. Richie? He don't give a fuck.
For whatever reason, I just wanted to get that on the record. And, for the record, I am a Christian. I'm just not very good at it.
When I lived in Grand Rapids I used to play hockey twice a week with a bunch of right-wing nutbag fundies. I mean, hardcore nutbag fundies. Don't believe me? Check this out: One morning after the skate when the endorphins had kicked in and I'd engage all of them in spirited debate, one of 'em said to me, "God hates abortionists and fags." I said, "Show me where it says that in the Gospel!"
They all supported Bush and they were all hot for the war and they were all hot for all the rest of it. The tax cuts for the rich, you name it. In short, they were all for all the things I hate. They stood for everything I stand against. But, to a man, I loved those guys. They weren't bad people. They'd just been fed a line of bullshit and, like all of those good Germans in the 1930's, fell for it. Propaganda is a heavy thing and because propaganda is a heavy thing, these things happen. And, of course, some people are simply stupid. Again, these things happen.
As far as the religion part of it, I can assure you that they absolutely did not think I was a follower of Christ. Once, one of them asked what my church's position (I'm Lutheran) was on homosexuality and I said, "It's interesting you'd ask me that. I was having butt sex with my pastor last week and I asked him the same thing!"
They'd hold that homosexuality was a choice. A choice! I'd ask them when precisely they chose to have sex with girls instead of boys and whether they'd found the decision difficult. Was it, in other words, a close call? Also, if it's a choice, doesn't that mean that one can change ones mind? Could I, for example, decide all of a sudden that I no longer wanted to have sex with a woman and get all hot for one of them?
I told them one day after the skate that I prayed out there on the ice virtually every morning. They didn't believe it. "Oh, yes," I said. "When the puck is down at the other end (I'm a goalie) at least once a game I thank God for giving me the opportunity to get some much-needed exercise doing something I find challenging, doing something I love doing, and I thank Him for giving me the chance to have fellowship with you idiots".
But, as it turns out, I digress. I know, it is hard (some would suggest impossible is more like it) for one to digress when one has yet to make the original point that one is digressing from but bear with me.
My church--only two weeks after we celebrated our 50th Anniversary as a congregation--lost a founding member this week. Not only a founding member, one of our most important members. Marie was the Music Director at our church for over 30 years. She was my Sunday School teacher when I was in the 3rd or 4th grade. I'd known her a long time. Long enough to know that without her and her husband, we might not even have a church. Mind you, this is the church where I was confirmed, where I was married and where my daughter was baptized.
Now, just a note on deaths. I write this crap for myself. I don't even know why I bother to post it if you want me to be honest since the writing is often merely a personal catharsis for the author. For that reason, because I am sharing thoughts of a personal nature and am trying to be honest, when I am talking about the death of someone I know, I usually will not use the persons full name or even the persons real name. I don't want embarrass the decedent or the surviving family members in any way, even inadvertently.
I had a girl who I thought was a friend (all right, an ex-girlfriend from 30 years ago; all right, a girl I loved more than anything in the world Back in the Day) go behind my back and find out the name of someone I had written about who died not long ago and now (in Sparky Anderson speak) I don't talk to her no more. That's how angry at and disappointed in her I am. I was stunned that as nice as I'd tried to be to her after she had gone through a divorce and a job loss, pumping up her tires whenever and however I could, that she was nonetheless unable to respect my wishes. So, like I said, now I don't talk to her no more. And I don't give (SparkySpeak, again) no kind of a fuck if I never speak to her again. If there is one thing I learned in 30 years years of not having her in my life, it is that I can live without having her in my life. Besides, she once told me she was "fascinated" by Insane John McCain and when she said that I immediately thought to myself, "Why am I even talking to this broad?" But, I'm digressing again...
For Marie's funeral yesterday a lot of people who sang when she was the Choir Director down through the years came back to honor her by singing in the choir at the service. Bottom line: our choir which numbers 15-18 members on a typical Sunday numbered about fifty for the funeral. We had a little bit of trouble just finding room for everyone where the choir sits.
Was it ever something! Among the songs we sang (Marie had picked them all out before she died, not that she could have after she died, of course) was When I Survey The Wondrous Cross. A song about Civil Engineering, apparently.
Now, I've only been in the choir for a couple of years and the only thing I know about the music they hand me every week is that it seems that it is supposed to have some bearing on the sounds I am supposed to make. How, exactly, is not at all clear to me.
At the start of When I Survey The Wondrous Cross, there is a small italic "p" on the score. Since in rehearsal everyone was singing this part about as softly as they could, I assumed the "p" means you are supposed to sing softly.
Towards the end, however, there was not one, but two "f's" in italics. Now, I have learned the italic "f" means "forte" and that means to sing loudly and with gusto. This, as I said, had "ff". Forte, forte. The directions were telling me and everyone else to sing as loudly and with as much enthusiasm as we could muster. So you had fifty people all singing as hard as they could. What a sound! It was a powerful thing. I've never heard anything like it, much less been part of making something like that happen. I was singing my ass off. We all were. I remember thinking, right in the middle of it, "God damn, Marie. What do you think of us now?"
Like I said, I'm a Christian. I'm just not very good at it.
A final note. That girl I referenced earlier. There was a note posted to my MySpace page from her which said, "I moved to (sic) Cheboygan Tuesday." We don't even know where that is, but we wish her well.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
One does not, in the strictest sense, "graduate", from Middle School. Instead, one completes a three-year course of study with an eye towards matriculating from High School at a later date. So, tonight, it was not Graduation Night at my daughter's Middle School (the initials of which are, unfortunately, PMS) but rather it was "Recognition Night". My daughter was recognized in a way which amused the entire family. Laura got herself a certificate signed by none other than our hero George W. Bush!
"Look at that signature, I said. "The poor man's handwriting is that of a sociopath!" It is. His is the signature on the right. I suppose that could be a "G", the "w" is little-tiny (just the opposite of what you'd expect, isn't it?) and in lower case, and only the "Bush" is legible.
Anyway, I'm glad my daughter was lauded by the President of the United States. I'm sorry it had to be this one. It's like I told her: Odds are this is the worst president you will see holding that office in your entire lifetime.
It was hot inside the gymnasium, so after Laura got her Recognition and I had enough pictures, I went outside and sat in my car and, as a cool breeze wafted through I was mesmerized--mesmerized, I tell you--by the sound of Dennis Kucinich (I am so glad I was one of the 3% who voted for him in the Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary, inasmuch as my vote didn't mean anything anyway and I thought he'd earned it by running a hard campaign and by saying NOTHING I didn't agree with) reading Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush. Air America Radio was replaying, unedited, his floor speech from last night. Everyone should listen. I know he spoke for 4-and-a-half hours last night, but even listening to some of it will lift your heart. I know it did mine.
That and having a daughter I am so proud of.
My Inner Frenchman heard that skank biscuit Stephanie Miller today on her mediocre LA-based radio "programme" read aloud excerpts lifted from "The Mirror" article linked to in a routinely outstanding post on Jesus' General titled (and linked to): "The McCain Justification".
Does Stephanie Miller read Jesus' General?
Whether she does or not, it’s good, really good, to see this particular story get some legs.
McCain's marital history is, of course, an issue in this campaign.
Because nobody likes an ass hole. And because women especially dislike this kind of an ass hole.
So, “Who's,” you ask, “An ass hole?” Okay, how about a guy who starts steppin' out on his crippled wife, who starts screwing a broad 17 years his junior, (who just happens to be rich, too), who then tells the first wife to fuck off, (just as she's learning to walk again), etc., who leaves her, crippled and alone, he leaves her for the man-stealer. Except for the part where hubby and the Trophy Wife get what’s coming to them, isn’t this pretty much the plot of “The Betty Broderick Story?”
Does the guy sound like an ass hole to you? . He is.
Women think so, too. Unless I misread the female heart (I was not staring at your boobs! I was reading your heart!) women regard infidelity as shocking and as “in-your-face” as that engaged in by Mr. McCain to be clear evidence that the man who engaged in that infidelity is an ass hole and nothing but an ass hole, so help me God (Harry Thunderer or Cosmic Muffin or whoever you conceive him to be).
Ergo, women will, upon hearing the truth, this truth, come to the (correct) conclusion that John McCain is an ass hole.
After that, all we can do is hope and pray that our mothers and sisters and daughters won't vote for an ass hole for President of the United States and we should be good to go.
Thanks, and I'm glad I could be of help.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Instead I would like to thanks Pittsburgh for a great Cup Final.
Pittsburgh, if you want to do it again next year, I'm up for it, as long as you know that all that's gonna happen is we will kick your ass all over again. Really, it will be great fun! God knows it was this year! Have a great off-season.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Besides, we are a bit, shall we say, logey as we have just today returned to Detroit from a trip by motor car from Fort Lauderdale, Florida, during which 1350 miles of the American landscape was sightseen in a mere 36 hours. (Less sightseeing than that though if you insist that of necessity "sightseeing" must be done during daylight hours only: that since Florida and Ohio appear identical to people when viewed through the windshield of a moving car at night because people can't see in the dark, people cannot be said to be "sightseeing" per se while they are in a car in the dark.) And, for the record, the simultaneous use of italics and latin--which for the record I did just use together and at the same time, makes it all legal. Legal as hell, in other words. Just ask noted lawyer Dave von Ebers of Journal of the Plague Year fame. But, even if he could shoot down my "Time Spent Sightseeing" claim, the 1350 miles worth of solo driving was real enough. And I'm kinda tired. I don't know how those over-the-road guys do it.
So, for now, this inelegant expression of our thanks and gratefulness to you, the reader, will have to suffice.
Also, a final decision on just how, exactly, the dickhead at issue will be responded to is still pending. An answer could come in the soon-to-be-posted "Memories of Wapakoneta". " Keep watchin' for that and, of course--as per some great advice I got from reading Jesus' General-- keep watchin' the skies.
May I post links to your guys' blogs on mine? You don't have to answer. I'll just put 'em up there as soon as I figger out how to do that and if you don't want them to appear on my site you can send an angry e-mail and call me a bad name if you want to.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Somebody I know professionally (and like, actually) apparently does not know me very well as he was the source the day before yesterday of an e-mail of which he was apparently very proud and which I considered to be asinine in the extreme. Or, as we used to say when dinosaurs ruled the earth, asinine to the maximum. See also: To the Max.
It was titled, "If Patton Were Alive Today". If I had great computerin' skills I'd simply re-post it here but I don't, so I will copy the more "salient" portions. Back in a moment....
Ah. Here we go:To ALL those whining, panty-waisted, pathetic Maggots, it's time for a little refresher course on exactly why we Americans occasionally have to fight wars.
Abu Ghraib is not 'torture' or an 'atrocity'. This is the kind of thing frat boys, sorority girls, and academy cadets do to newcomers A little fun at someone else's expense. Certainly no reason to wring your hands or get your panties in a wad. Got that?
Islam a peaceful religion??? My Ass!Millions of these sons-of-bitches are plotting, as we speak, to destroy our country and our way of life any way they can. Some of them are here among us now. They don't want to convert you and don't want to rule you. You are a vile infestation of Allah's paradise. They don't give a shit how 'progressive' you are, how peace-loving you are, or how much you sympathize with their cause. They want your ass dead , and they think it is God's will for them to do it. Some think if we give them a hug or listen to them, then they'll like us... and if you agree? Then you are a pathetic dumb ass! If they manage to get their hands on a nuke, chemical agents, or even some anthrax -- you will wish to God we had hunted them down and killed THEM while we had the chance. How many more Americans must be beheaded ??You've fallen asleep AGAIN, maggots! And you may not get another chance! NOW GET OFF YOUR SORRY ASS - and pass this on to any and every person you give a damn about.. if you ever gave a damn about anything
I think the content of an e-mail says something about the person who sent it, so when I received your e-mail "If Patton were alive today," I found myself wondering, "just how big a dickhead is this guy?" And, "How would one quantify that, exactly?"
Not that it matters. We're all Americans here and because of that I will defend with every fiber of my being and until my last breath etc., your right to be as stupid as you care to be.
And make no mistake about it. You, sir, are stupid. Mercy, land's sake and Oh, My... God...in...Heaven stupid. Anyone who thinks the war in Iraq had anything to do with 9-11 is stupid or willfully ignorant, but to be honest I don't see a distinction between the two worth drawing.
Get a handle on a fact somewhere, anywhere, before you send bullshit emails like this to me.
I found it particularly vulgar and offensive that you would send this to me the same week in which we learned that our Moron-in-Chief undertook the war in Iraq for his personal aggrandizement. He wanted to be a wartime president because he thought it would make him appear in the eyes of history to be a great president. How pathetic and sad is that? What a fucking sociopath. He's mentally ill. 4,084 Iraqi war dead, 4,084 of my brothers and sisters, my fellow Americans, lie mouldering in their graves--murdered by George W. Bush. Because he thought a war would make him look like a great president.
Answer me this: Besides the dead. the wounded and the three trillion dollar tab--what is it we've gotten out of this war? Oh, yeah, I forgot. $4.00/gallon gasoline. Thanks for that.
If you think Abu Garib was a frat hazing--let them put a hood over your head and hook the battery clamps to your nipples and give it a go. Party on, dude!
But not my country and not in my name. This is America. We are the best people on earth. That, numb nuts, is why we don't torture people.
You were right about one thing. That picture of Daniel Pearl's beheading was obscene.
DO NOT SEND OBSCENE MATERIAL TO THIS COMPUTER. I WILL SUE YOU! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
Thanks. Hate to go all CAPS LOCK on your ass and all--but I mean it.
Now go somewhere and fuck yourself. Better yet, if this is how you feel, why don't you grab a rifle, head on over to Iraq and shoot yourself some Muslims? Hell, you don't want to be the one wishing he'd "killed them when he had the chance" after the atom bomb goes off, do you? And don't feel bad if you have to murder a child or two while you're at it. Or a woman. Women car bomb, too. So shooting them? That's not being a coward. That's just doing all of us a favor. Shit, the Nazis didn't feel bad about killing kids. A mere expediency is all that was. Kid would just grow up to be one of the enemy, anyway. Right? If it was good enough for Nazis it should be good enough for you.