Right Thinking From The Left Coast
I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have. - Thomas Jefferson

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Douches, Turds, and Evil Gases
by Lee

It has been said that environmentalism is a religion, at least the Al Gore-style radical moonbat variety.  The theory goes that man has an inherent need for some kind of religion, and that by rejecting standard faiths like Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism a void is created, and this void is then filled with a belief in environmental disaster equally as fervent and fundamentalist as any back woods snake handling Pentecostal.  I personally think there’s something to this.  Anyone who disagrees with the prevailing religion is held out for contempt and ridicule as a heretic, a witch to be burned, an example to be made for anyone who would dare question the One True Faith. 

Which makes the following story all the more fascinating.  By all accounts the Bush administration is already filled with the fervor and intensity of fundamentalist Christian dogma.  But they take just as religious, just as fundamentalist a view of environmental issues as even the dirtiest hippie treehugger, only they do it from the other side.

Researchers for the non-profit watchdog Government Accountability Project reviewed thousands of e-mails, memos and other documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests and from government whistle-blowers and conducted dozens of interviews with public affairs staff, scientists, reporters and others.

The group says it has identified hundreds of instances where White House-appointed officials interfered with government scientists’ efforts to convey their research findings to the public, at the behest of top administration officials.

The report is slated to be released tomorrow at a hearing before the House Science Committee, which is investigating the issue.

“The evidence suggests that incidents of interference are often top-down reactions to science that has negative policy or public relations implications for the administration,” the group says in its report.

Some of the alleged interference—including restricting scientists’ ability to talk with the press and Congress—may have violated federal laws protecting their right to speak, the group concludes.

“Directives and signals” from White House offices, like the Council on Environmental Quality, the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Office of Management and Budget, are handed down to political appointees and politically-aligned civil servants through off-the-record conversations, the report says. Frequently, those giving the direction have little or no scientific background, according to the report.

The alleged interference took the form of “delaying, monitoring, screening, and denying interviews” between government scientists and media outlets, as well as delaying, denying or “inappropriate[ly] editing” press releases conveying scientific findings to the public.

Now, we all know that the Bush administration would never let a pesky little thing like the Constitution or the law or tradition or a sense of decorum get in the way of enacting their agenda.  I just find it fascinating that so many Bushbots™ will wail and gnash their teeth at the idea of the hippie moonbats treating environmentalism like a secular religion (again, this is entirely accurate) but will refuse to apply the same standard to the Bush administration, who have clearly identified the heretics in their administration and are using the full force of government to silence them, lest their heresy dare to undercut the legitimacy of the One True Faith.

So, you choose.  Who is more illogical and fundamentalist, the Giant Douche or the Turd Sandwich?

Posted by Lee on 03/27/07 at 11:11 AM in Science and Technology  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Corned Beef Hash
by Lee

Once again, the shortsightedness of environmentalist lunatics will doom us all.

Increased production of biofuels such as ethanol might help farmers’ bottom lines and address climate-change concerns, but it could inflate food prices worldwide, warns a former White House economist.

“Worldwide, especially in developing countries ... food price increases are definitely something we’re going to have to come to grips with,” said David Sunding, who served on former President Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Ah, from the Clinton administration.  Obviously now part of Bush’s oil-and-blood junta.

The combination of rising energy prices and the demand for corn, which is used to produce ethanol, will continue to drive up commodity prices, he said.

Corn prices have already begun to soar. A rush to turn more acres into corn production could decrease supplies of other commodities, driving up prices of them as well.

The resulting higher market prices could then dampen the public’s support for government subsidies that are designed to help farmers reap profits when markets are down.

Sunding envisioned a scenario in which price supports for farmers are replaced by another government program — one to purchase food to keep prices affordable and prevent hunger.

Because wherever there is a problem, no matter what it is, there is a politician willing to spent hundreds of millions of your tax dollars to solve it.

Posted by Lee on 03/27/07 at 09:16 AM in Left Wing Idiocy  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, March 26, 2007

Baa Baa Black Chimera
by Lee

As you have undoubtedly heard, science has created an organism that is 15% human and 85% Michael Moore fan. 

The sheep have 15 per cent human cells and 85 per cent animal cells - and their evolution brings the prospect of animal organs being transplanted into humans one step closer.

Professor Esmail Zanjani, of the University of Nevada, has spent seven years and £5million perfecting the technique, which involves injecting adult human cells into a sheep’s foetus.

He has already created a sheep liver which has a large proportion of human cells and eventually hopes to precisely match a sheep to a transplant patient, using their own stem cells to create their own flock of sheep.

A couple of years ago when President Bush mentioned prohibitions on animal/human hybrids during his State of the Union speech the liberals, as espected, scoffed and laughed.  I agreed with him, and it looks like I have once again been shown to be right.  There are issues here which we cannot even yet begin to comprehend.  As someone whose father died needing a heart transplant you’ll never find anyone more sympathetic than me to the concept of growing replacement human organs inside animals.  I think this is a critical step in scientific evolution and I am totally in favor of it.  That being said, there are MAJOR ethical issues here which need to be considered.

First, there has to be a supposition that there is something special about human life and humanity itself.  It’s the reason that killing a dog is a property crime, whereas killing a human is murder.  Eating animal flesh is perfectly acceptable, whereas eating human flesh is cannibalism.  It’s perfectly acceptable to bury a dead cat in your backyard, but doing so to a human is a violation of a number of laws. You get the idea.  The concept that humans are special transcends all cultures, societies, laws, and nations.

The concept of humanity has traditionally been a philosophical one. What makes someone a human?  Since interspecies breeding is impossible, this was never an issue.  Two human parents would have a human baby.  It doesn’t matter if that baby was retarded or blind or a vegetable, it is still a human and entitled to the rights of every other human.  A child born with no arms, legs, or eyesight is still considered just as human as a child with no medical complications.

As we began to study apes and other primates there were calls for them to be granted some of the same protections that humans enjoy.  For example, you know Koko the gorilla who could communicate with sign language?  Many people believed that Koko (and other primates like her) should be granted the same level of protection that we would give to severely mentally handicapped children, since their level of communication was the same.

Prior to the advent of DNA there was really no scientific way to quantify humanity.  Now there is.  As this story shows us, we can say that a sheep is “15% human.” So, does this sheep now qualify for 15% of the protections that humans enjoy?  What about if the sheep were 50% human?

When does an animal cease being an animal with human DNA and actually become a human?  There’s no easy answer to that question.

We’ve all seen The Fly, the Jeff Goldblum version.  Remember Brundlefly?  Well, we now have the technology to create Brundlefly.  Should Brundlefly qualify as human under the law?  Is an organism which is 60% fly and 40% human considered a person?  How about the same organism which is 40% fly and 60% human?  Is Brundlefly ethically entitled to the same legal rights and protections that other humans enjoy?  If not, why not?

You certainly wouldn’t support performing genetic experiments on humans against their will, would you?  Remember Tuskegee?  That’s what we’re looking at here.  In any scientific endeavor there will be mistakes and errors.  How do you call something partially human an “error” if its humanity entitles it to certain human rights?  Does an organism which is 65% human qualify for human rights, or can it be slaughtered at will by its owners like any other animal?  Can an organism which is 75% human be sold in a market like a slave?  How about one which is 90% human and 10% pack mule?

In Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” certain humans are bred to be an intellectually inferior servant class.  If you have no ethical problems using DNA science to improve the lives of certain humans, do you have a problem using that same science to worsen the lives of others?  Or does our shared humanity prevent us from ethically doing this?

I think by this point you get the idea.  The road down which we are now embarking can usher in a new era of medical science which can greatly improve the lives of all mankind.  And it can also unleash depravity and evil which will make Hitler look like a piker by comparison.  I’m not against the technology in any sense of the word, but this is something we as humans need to evaluate and exercise extreme caution before we unleash it on the world.

Posted by Lee on 03/26/07 at 08:10 PM in Science and Technology  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

by Lee

Of course, Gonzo and Bush have done nothing at all wrong, and have been completely forthright in everything they have said regarding the dismissal of the US Attorneys.  Which, therefore, explains this.

The senior counselor to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales will refuse to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the unfolding U.S. attorneys scandal, invoking her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, her attorneys said today.

Monica M. Goodling—who is on an indefinite leave of absence from Gonzales’s office—also alleges in a sworn declaration that a “senior Department of Justice official” has admitted he was “not entirely candid” in his Senate testimony and has blamed Goodling and others for not fully briefing him.

That durn librul conspiracy to bring down the Bush administration really knows no limits, does it?

Posted by Lee on 03/26/07 at 03:04 PM in Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

T-Shirt Hell
by Lee

The next time this woman goes to the gynecologist, I think her doctor is going to be startled by the size of her balls.

A woman who lost her husband in the 2004 Madrid train bombings displayed an infamous cartoon mocking the Prophet Mohammad on her T-shirt in front of 29, mostly Muslim, suspects on trial for the attacks on Monday.

The woman’s white T-shirt showed Mohammad wearing a bomb as a turban—one of a series published by Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten which unleashed violent protests by some Muslims last year.

Ten bombs ripped through four commuter trains on March 11, 2004, killing 191 people—attacks which public prosecutors blame on a group of Islamist militants inspired by al-Qaeda.

The woman sat in the front row of the court wearing the T-shirt for around half-an-hour before getting up, walking up to the glass cage containing the defendants and finally walking out of the court, judicial sources said.

The lead judge in the case, Javier Gomez Bermudez, asked security staff to identify the woman as she left the court. She later received support from psychologists drafted to help victims’ families through the trial, Spanish media reported.

Awesome.  I stand and applaud.  Bravo.

Posted by Lee on 03/26/07 at 02:22 PM in The Religion of Peace™  • (8) TrackbacksPermalink

Home to Roost
by Lee

In he great torture debate that has been taking place on this blog over the past three years or so, one point I have made repeatedly is to imagine if the tables were turned, and US troops were captured by an enemy power.  Say our troops were subjected to exactly the same treatment we have been using, using the euphemism of “coercive techniques.” Would any of you be perfectly okay with that?  You know, since it’s not torture and all, you shouldn’t lose so much as a moment’s sleep.  And then, suppose they held a show trial, where the outcome was predetermined, and the troops weren’t allowed to present any kind of defense.  Again, we’re doing this right now and none of you seem to have a problem with it, so why should you have a problem with it when it’s done to us?  Well, with the recent capture of British sailors by Iran, we now face the very real prospect of this exact scenario happening.  On this point Sullivan nails it.

They are being ”interrogated," apparently. The news reports put that word in quotation marks. I wonder if it emerges that they are being subject to George W. Bush’s preferred euphemism “coercive interrogations.” And if that turns out to be the case, and we have to pray it isn’t, then what will the United States and its ally Great Britain say in complaint? After all, Iran is only doing to Western soldiers in captivity what the U.S. has been doing to “enemy combatants” since the war began. Then there’s a question of what kind of trial they might face. One in which their defense gets a chance to see all the evidence against them? Oh, wait ... we don’t do that either.

The first strategic crisis created by the Bush-Cheney torture regime is now occurring. It won’t be the last. And if these British sailors are found to have been mistreated and their “trials” tainted, who in the international community is now going to come to Britain’s and America’s defense?

This is why it is so imperative that we act with honor, and lead by example.  Because Iran can now rightfully torture these sailors, hold them indefinitely in prison without access to legal counsel or trial, then try them for crimes against the Iranian state without showing them the evidence against them.

And, thanks to Bush and those of you who have supported these techniques, there isn’t a goddamned thing we can say or do about it.  Why?  BECAUSE WE DO EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

There you have it, folks.  We’re now officially no better than Iran.  How proud we all must feel.

Update: I just had another thought.  You know what I would do if I was Ahmadinejad?  I would interrogate these men using established Geneva Convention protocols.  I’d allow them access to legal counsel, to the Red Cross, and to the world media.  If there is to be a trial I would make it as transparent as possible.  And I’d gleefully point out that the Iranian Republic has far more respect for the rights of soldiers than the United States does.

A propaganda move?  You bet your ass.  But sadly, thanks to our president, one that would unfortunately be all too true.

Posted by Lee on 03/26/07 at 10:52 AM in War on Terror/Axis of Evil  • (1) TrackbacksPermalink

The Talking Butt
by Lee

Did you see the talking Butt on 60 Minutes last night?  No, not John Edwards, this guy, who used to be one of the jihadists’ biggest fundraisers in the UK.  I’ve quoted a few significant sections, but be sure to read the whole thing if you didn’t see it last night.

We’d talk about the suffering of the Muslims all over the world,” Butt tells Simon. “We were very well-versed in the Koran, in the verses of the Koran, in the sayings of the Prophet and show that how it was permissible for people to go around killing innocent men, women and children.”

“You would explain to them why it’s permissible to kill innocent men, women and children?” Simon asks.

“Well, a better way to put it is, we would take away the innocence from the person so they were no longer innocent men, women and children,” Butt explains.

“So, men, women and children would become non-innocents?” Simon asks.

“Become non-innocent and hence, combatants and allowed to be targeted,” Butt says.

To put this in context, it would be roughly like saying, “We might as well go ahead and kill black babies now, because they’re just going to grow up to be criminals anyway.” So, who finances the jihad?  It’s the poor, the ignorant, the downtrodden, those whom western capitalist democracy has passed by, right?

He became one of the network’s star fundraisers. Over the next couple of years, he says he raised $300,000.

His biggest contributors? “Doctors. People who were businessmen. Professional people basically who wanted to donate substantial amounts of money,” Butt tells Simon.

Butt says he openly told them he was raising funds for Jihad.

It goes without saying that these were all Islamic doctors and businessmen.  But what of the oft-repeated phrase that Islam has nothing to do with it?

“The position of moderate Muslims is that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. Do you buy that?” Simon asks.

“No, absolutely not. By completely being in denial about it’s like an alcoholic basically. Unless an alcoholic acknowledges that he has a problem with alcohol, he’s never gonna be able to go forward,” Butt argues. “And as long as we, as Muslims, do not acknowledge that there is a violent streak in Islam, unless we acknowledge that, then we are gonna always lose the battle to the militants, by being in complete denial about it.”

The very fact that this young man has had this conversion is reason enough to give us hope that the cancer of radicalized Islam can be fought on ideological grounds.  But we first have to get past this idiotic PC notion that there is nothing in Islam itself which encourages violence.  As he said, the first step to curing alcoholism is recognizing that you have a problem, and the first step to fighting Islamic violence is recognizing that there is a strong violent tendency in that faith.

Posted by Lee on 03/26/07 at 10:37 AM in The Religion of Peace™  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Stealing from Ted Nugent
by Lee

At a time when the United States has a direct, distinct need for patriotic Americans to don their nation’s uniform and willingly put themselves in harm’s way, this is the type of communications military recruiters send out to potential recruits who might happen to be gay.

-- U.S. Army recruiter Sgt. Marcia Ramode, using her military email address to respond to Jersey City resident Corey Andrew, after Ramode learned Andrew was gay.

Go to the site and read the emails in their entirety.  It’s simply disgusting, and the fact that Sgt. Ramode actually felt comfortable using her name and an official Army email address speaks volumes about the culture of the military when it comes to gay enlistees.

Look, I’m on record stating that the ban on gays in the military is stupid and counterproductive.  Gay blood is just as red as straight blood, and often times it’s a hell of a lot more brave.  If some jihadists were taking shots at me or my men, I sure as hell wouldn’t complain that the medic dragging me to safety and saving my life happened to be attracted to men.  This woman could have easily written a professional email explaining the rules of military enlisting, and that at this time homosexuality was not fit for military service, and so on.  Instead we get the “Go back to Africa and do your wango tango dance” comment.

It’s just fucking despicable, there’s really no other word for it.  As a former servicemember myself, I’d rather serve with 100 honorable gay men and women than one bigoted scumbag like Marcia Ramode.

Posted by Lee on 03/26/07 at 08:50 AM in Decline of Western Civilization  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Sunday, March 25, 2007

A Little Breather
by Lee

No, I’m not talking about Hervé Villechaize in Airplane II.  I’ve had a busy week, and I just decided to hang with my honey and get my relaxation on this weekend.  I’ll be back tomorrow with more trenchant political analysis and maggot-like whining.  Consider this an open thread.

Boo yah!

Update: If you haven’t noticed the Giuliani campaign has bought some advertising here on the site.  Click the image or click here and check it out.

Posted by Lee on 03/25/07 at 11:02 PM in Etcetera  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

by Lee

Just got back from party.  Waaaaaay too much to drink, waaaaay not enough sleep.  See you tomorrow sometime, I hope.

Posted by Lee on 03/25/07 at 12:09 AM in Decline of Western Civilization  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Saturday, March 24, 2007

Explaining the Disaster
by Lee

In many of the books detaining the utter disaster that the Bush administration has made of Iraq there are a number of references to a war games scenario from the late 90s named Desert Crossing, which stipulated that we would need close to half a million troops for any operation to have a chance of success.  Now new information is coming to light about Desert Crossing and, you’ll be shocked to hear this, but the Bush administration ignored all of it.

The war games looked at “worst case” and “most likely” scenarios after a war that removed then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from power. Some are similar to what actually occurred after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003:

_"A change in regimes does not guarantee stability,” the 1999 seminar briefings said. “A number of factors including aggressive neighbors, fragmentation along religious and/or ethnic lines, and chaos created by rival forces bidding for power could adversely affect regional stability.”

_"Even when civil order is restored and borders are secured, the replacement regime could be problematic _ especially if perceived as weak, a puppet, or out-of-step with prevailing regional governments.”

_"Iran’s anti-Americanism could be enflamed by a U.S.-led intervention in Iraq,” the briefings read. “The influx of U.S. and other western forces into Iraq would exacerbate worries in Tehran, as would the installation of a pro-western government in Baghdad.”

_"The debate on post-Saddam Iraq also reveals the paucity of information about the potential and capabilities of the external Iraqi opposition groups. The lack of intelligence concerning their roles hampers U.S. policy development.”

_"Also, some participants believe that no Arab government will welcome the kind of lengthy U.S. presence that would be required to install and sustain a democratic government.”

_"A long-term, large-scale military intervention may be at odds with many coalition partners.”

Now, keep in mind one thing.  Throughout this entire fiasco our “support the troops” president has stated that his decisions are based on the sound judgment of senior military staff.  What he doesn’t tell you is that the only senior military staff he ever bothered to listen to were the ones who told him what he wanted to hear.  And those troops who dared tell the emperor he had no clothes, well, they were conveniently relieved of duty or “retired.”

But, as usual, the reason the war isn’t going well is because of them durn libruls.

Posted by Lee on 03/24/07 at 01:15 PM in War on Terror/Axis of Evil  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Gonzo Chronicles
by Lee

Those of you who are convinced this is nothing more than a nefarious plot by them durn libruls aren’t going to be too happy.  First we have today’s NYT.  (All emphasis added.)

“So far as I knew, my chief of staff was involved in the process of determining who were the weak performers,’ he said. “Where were the districts around the country where we could do better for the people in that district, and that’s what I knew… That is in essence what I knew about the process; was not involved in seeing any memos, was not involved in any discussions about what was going on,” he said. “That’s basically what I knew as the attorney general.”

Let’s recap:  he didn’t see the memos, he knew nothing, he had nothing to do with it. 

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and senior advisers discussed the plan to remove seven United States attorneys at a meeting last Nov. 27, 10 days before the dismissals were carried out, according to a Justice Department calendar entry disclosed Friday.

The previously undisclosed meeting appeared to contradict Mr. Gonzales’s previous statements about his knowledge of the dismissals. He said at a news conference on March 13 that he had not participated in any discussions about the removals, but knew in general that his aides were working on personnel changes involving United States attorneys.

Hmmm.  So he was at a meeting, did know about it, did see the memos, and had something to do with it.  Now let’s go to the WaPo.

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales met with senior aides on Nov. 27 to review a plan to fire a group of U.S. attorneys, according to documents released last night, a disclosure that contradicts Gonzales’s previous statement that he was not involved in “any discussions” about the dismissals.

Now, let’s recap what Gonzo said.

“I was not involved in seeing any memos, was not involved in any discussions about what was going on,” Gonzales said.

As I have written extensively over the past week, I was just a jury foreman in a civil trial.  I was sworn in to tell the truth and uphold the law, and I carried out that task to the best of my ability.  This man is the ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  He’s the head son of a bitch when it comes to law enforcement.  And he is clearly lying his ass off.

Strange, isn’t it, that some unknown numbnuts in Los Angeles seems to have a higher respect for the Constitution and the law than AG Gonzales.  But that’s about what I’ve come to expect from this administration.  When they can use the Constitution as a cudgel against their political enemies then, of course, it’s the supreme law of the land and must be followed to the letter.  But when it gets in the way of their nefarious activities, all of a sudden it becomes a list of suggestions which can be bent, broken, or flat-out ignored as they see fit.

The Bush administration should know (as any administration of any party should) that their political enemies are going to use any weapon at their disposal to try and bring the administration down.  The only way to mitigate this is to try, as always, to be as ethical as possible.  Then, when an issue arises, you can point to your history of ethical behavior and say, “Hey, I have respect for the law, look at my record.” There is nothing, nothing that this administration has done in almost seven years which leads me to believe that they have a shred of belief in the law or the Constitution.  This is, interestingly enough, much like the torture issue.  We know that al-Qaeda and the anti-war moonbats are always going to claim that the US is mistreating prisoners.  The only way to counter this is to make prisoner interrogation and treatment as open, public, and transparent as reasonably possible.  By acting secretively and ignoring laws at the drop of a hat Bush has not given the world, or any rational person, a single reason to believe them.

Here’s my challenge.  Name a single instance at all from the entire time Bush has been in office which clearly shows that he believes that the Constitution grants the other branches of government the right to check and balance executive power.  Just one.  Because I sure as hell can’t think of one.  I can, however, rattle off maybe 20 or 30 clear instances where this administration has blatantly wiped their ass with it.

Or, as usual, you can believe this is a plot by them durn libruls.

Posted by Lee on 03/24/07 at 11:32 AM in Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Friday, March 23, 2007

The System from the Inside
by Lee

This is kinda cool.  A group called Jury Experiences has provided a link to my jury service summary below.  They describe their site as follows.

This site is premised on a belief in the importance of the jury system as a bulwark of civil liberties, particularly in the English-speaking world, and in the value of understanding better how that system actually works.

Many of us serve on juries. Our experiences are often both extremely interesting and much different from what we expected. We emerge from our service with stories that we share with our families and friends. However, with the exception of notorious trials, and rare cases in which ex-jurors are interviewed for research purposes, most of these stories are eventually lost.

The Internet provides an ideal medium for collecting and discussing our experiences. While there are numerous jury-related Web sites and, increasingly, blogs where individuals discuss their jury service, few if any of these sites provide an open forum where ex-jurors and other interested citizens can discuss their experiences and exchange ideas.

Jury Experiences is an attempt to create such a forum. By facilitating discussion about what really happens in jury rooms, court rooms and in the jury selection process, in various courts and jurisdictions and especially from the juror’s perspective, we hope to contribute to better understanding of our government and legal system by the public and legal specialists alike.

What a great idea for a site.  There’s no direct permalink to their post which references me, but as of this writing it’s right at the top.

Posted by Lee on 03/23/07 at 11:51 PM in Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Legally Pooped
by Lee

Sorry for the lack of posting.  After doing a full week of jury duty during the day, then going to work every night until the week hours, I’m fucking exhausted.  I’m hitting the sack.  See you tomorrow.

Posted by Lee on 03/23/07 at 10:43 PM in Etcetera  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

One in the Code Pink, One in the Stink
by Lee

The honeymoon that the barking moonbat lefties gave the Democrats is over.

Four members of the anti-war group CODEPINK were arrested outside the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) Thursday afternoon, following an announcement that they would seek to take over the office.  … CODEPINK members were crying outside Pelosi’s office. When asked why, Rae Abileah, 24, said she was crying out of “outrage that this is all we can get from the Democrats,” referring to the Iraq supplemental funding bill, scheduled for a vote Friday.

“We’re just heartbroken that Nancy Pelosi has decided to keep funding George Bush’s war, and now the war belongs to the Democrats as well as the Republicans,” said CODEPINK co-founder Medea Benjamin. “We thought we were going to get a change when they came into power.”

So basically they were standing outside the teacher’s office, whining and wailing like a bunch of spoiled little girls.  Note that they’re not concerned with the people dying in Sudan at the hands of the ROP, or the poor people dying of malaria the world over due to the asinine ban on DDT, or any of the other countless places the world over where “lots of people [are] dying.” Gee, it’s almost like they’ve fetishized the deaths in Iraq to the point where they honestly couldn’t give a shit, except to use those deaths as ploys in their little propaganda campaign.

They’re whining because Pelosi, who they thought was “one of theirs” isn’t as active in implementing their radical far-left agenda, and they’re acting just like spoiled little children.

Iwonder how casually they’ll take the genocidal bloodshed that the Shi’ites will unleash on the Sunnis the second we leave.  If they think “lots of people [are] dying” now, wait until we leave.

Anyone want to bet how many fits they’ll throw outside Pelosi’s office when that happens? 

Posted by Lee on 03/23/07 at 07:40 PM in Left Wing Idiocy  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink
Page 3 of 12 pages « First  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  Last »