I usually don't give Arlen Specter a lot of credit. Mostly because he's never deserved much credit. But I have to give him props for sticking it out through that hostile townhall meeting in Lebanon, PA this afternoon.
Dick Cheney certainly never had guts like that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Ric,
You should have ended your comments at the end of the second sentence. I don't think Arlen Specter ever stood for anything except getting elected. Fortunately, it looks like he may be at the end of his career.
On the other hand, Dick Cheney is a consistent true American Patriot and always has defended this country and our Constitution.
Anonymous,
I can only guess you are engaged in sarcasm in describing Richard Cheney as a,"consistent true American Patriot and always has defended this country and our Constitution."
If you are serious I refer you to the following as I have neither the time, nor the inclination to innumerate Cheney's crimes (I refer only to those committed as Vice President. I do not have the stomach nor does Ric have the space for the links alone of Mr. Cheney's lifetime of criminal activities.)
Cheney Throws Down Gauntlet, Defies Prosecution for War Crimes:http://www.truthout.org/121908J
(THIS REFERS TO CHENEY'S ROLE IN 'OUTING' CIA AGENT VALERIE PLAME WILSON)Cheney Told Aide of C.I.A. Officer, Lawyers Report:http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/25/politics/25leak.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1130299200&en=56e9496be92c9d2a&ei=...
A Halliburton Primer:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/articles/halliburtonprimer.html
Dick Cheney: Washington trembles at the return of 'Darth Vader':http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/24/dick-cheney-washington-return
Mr. Cheney's Imperial Presidency:http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/23/opinion/23fri1.html
Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Cheney:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/24/AR2007042401542.html
Cheney Impeachment Gains Traction in House Judiciary Committee:http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7875
SEE? I could go on and on but why? Even if only one allegation made here is true, your Messiah is fatally flawed.
Todd, I don't have the stomach to read through you garbage. I glanced at your first site address. The greeting of "Hello everysoul!" & then "Love is the new religion of the 21st century." No references to Cheney.
Come out of the clouds my friend. You will be a much happier productive member of society if you will go to work. Maybe it will help tame your entitlement mentality.
You must have some marketable skills.
You didn't look at the items from The New York Times, or The Washington Post at all? You decided to go straight to personal insults. I had no idea my comments would anger you so. I should like to extend my apologies to you if I came across as arrogant or condenscending by suggesting that you were,"engaged in sarcasm" simply for expressing a point-of-view. That is your right. This blog is not mine, it is Ric's. If he is alright with your comments, then your comments are alright.
I must admit as well that while I consider The New York Times, The Wahington Post, and perhaps above both The Guardian reputable sources, some of the other sources I cited could quite easily be called into question. No harm done. You simply called me on out weak sources. I do object to this very personal comment:"Come out of the clouds my friend. You will be a much happier productive member of society if you will go to work. Maybe it will help tame your entitlement mentality."
I'm not sure why you felt the need to suggest that my value to society is insufficient or that I have some sort of "entitlement mentality." Obviously I deeply insulted you and so you responded in kind. Your characterization of me is not accurate but that is irrelevant. You do not know me nor I you.
At any rate, I think it rather unproductive to engage in insult-trading. Feel free to malign me if you so choose. I will not respond. I've obviously offended you more than I realized given the tone and tenor of your remarks and again, I do apologize.
To Ric, my apologies for my part in so severly lowering the level of discourse on RSI. I should not respond directly to other people's comments. Whatever comments other people make here, in future I will be far more respectful to you and will refrain from responding to the conservatives at all. Regards.
TM
Todd,
You are correct that us letting the dialogue degenerate to this is a waste of time.
My ire comes from another post where you said "The problem with health care reform that includes a strong public option is that Americans are not used to viewing high quality health care as a human right." There is no such right. I challenge you to show me where this "right" exists in our Constitution or in the founding fathers intent. Quite the opposite. The framers gave the Federal Government 20 very specific areas of power and giving you or any other citizen health care paid for by someone else is not in there. The Founders also feared that the fed would try to increase their powers over the states and included the 10th Amendment to remind the fed that it had no authority in any area not specifically described in the Constitution.
I suggest that all socialists read the Constitution and really understand what the Founding Fathers meant by their words. I do not think you will do this, because all that you are interested in is reaching into someone elses pocket. It really is a shame, what an entitlement mentality we have developed in our country. We are so uneducated as to what a unique and special place the USA is. There has never been a society in history that has accomplished so much in such a short span of time and I fear it is slipping away from us. There is no place on earth that has ever provided so much opportunity for all of it's people. If we become a socialist society (and we are half way there) these opportunities will evaporate.
One of my weaknesses as a blogger is that I tend not to engage with comments as much as I should.
I did have a comment though. I let the "get a job" comment from anonymous be posted, but I didn't like it and would prefer not to see that kind of personal baiting in the future. I'm not saying that I'll refuse to post this kind of insult, but I'm definitely thinking about the issue.
On a more positive note, I thought the most recent comment from "anonymous" was a well-stated version of a conservative position and appreciate the effort.
Post a Comment