The neoCon into neoConvict mechanism is working ... even in the face of massive resistance to it.

LOVE it! The criminals are falling, the criminals are falling! Great phrase, too, Dredd --- neoCons into neoConvicts.

I sure hope that the election fraud conspiracy will be exposed _somewhere_ in the investigation of all of this corruption.

Maybe Abramoff and Kidan were planning on using the boats after Katrina? Oh wait... that would actually be showing human compassion and emotion.

That's three down, and how many to go?

Thanks Brad. I always knew I was a genius.

I thought it wasn't about left or right, but right and wrong.

Brad goes on about boatloads of connected GOP pols, but 90% of senate Democrats have taken Abramoff connected money.

So, is it about right and wrong, or left and left?

abramoff.noagenda.org

LOL............Democrats just love when Republicans get indicted. Guess Abramoff and Libby weren't enough.

Speaking of Republicans getting arrested, one should read Ann Coulter's latest column.

www.anncoulter.com

Name of the column: "Why Can't I Get Arrested?"

Her absolute best. It's columns like this that remind me why liberals really hate her. LOL.

"Liberals are more optimistic about the charges against Tom DeLay than they are about the charges against Saddam Hussein — and the only living things Tom DeLay ever exterminated were rats and bugs."

I love it!

"Brad goes on about boatloads of connected GOP pols, but 90% of senate Democrats have taken Abramoff connected money."

Taking Abramoff connected money. Lot's of money is connected. My money is connected to the bank because I put it in there. Does that mean that my money in the bank is somehow connected to the CEO and thus that would make me a money launderer. Uh oh... better watch for the feds.

On the same note how much money has been siphoned from GOP coffers to Abramoff friendly firms. Have you heard half as many stories of corruption from the Dems. I'm not saying they're corruption free but at least they don't all sell their souls.

Let us also be aware that Mohamed Atta (drug mover) was known to be livin' it up on a SunCruz ship a week prior to 9/11 (see Daniel Hopsicker's work)...hmmm...

Oh, and in response to NoMoreHypocrisy, Abramoff did not give money to Dems (like I care; they're all elitist shills) according to this anyway:
http://hotlineblog.natio...5/12/abramoff_was_a.html

I detest the GOP because they do, in fact, have a "culture of corruption" as Dean put it. But if any Democrats are involved in this, I say take 'em out - clean house if need be. That goes for other scandals also. I don't think the Democrats (I am not one of them) are as tied up in the kind of skullduggery as the Rs are - but any that are should be gone. Period. If a Republican is elected fairly and carries out his term honestly, than as a participant in a democracy, I will be satisfied - at least satisfied that the system is working. It is entirely obvious that the system is NOT working under this administration and congress.

In Response to EMPTY GROUND. Thanks for hammering that nail in the coffin. Keep it coming.

why must members of congress be democrat or republican (or other party)? logically, their purpose is to represent constituents in their states. being members of parties seems to make them follow the party leaders rather than the interests of their constituents.

george - good point. The founding fathers did not envision a "party" system anyway.

Oh, puleeeeeze, Empty Ground. Your ground is about as empty as your argument.

Abramoff was directly responsible for funneling money to Democrats.

The double standards here are amazing.

NoMoreHypocricy, what part of SEVERAL posts here saying "bust the Dems too" are you not seeing?

I hate Rethugs with a passion.. mostly because of their distinct lack of being able to see the truth, or admit it when it bashes their skulls in.. Yet, I -dispise- the -same- thing when it happens to rear it's ugly head in a DEM too.. get it?

The -fact- is, the "people driving" this scandal (and most in our government) are REPUBLICANS.. And, -any- DEM involved SHOULD BE PROSECUTED..

There.. did the caps help you see the important bits? I"m guessing not.. one of those seeming birth defects of "right-wingers" is they are BLIND to things that don't fit their agenda/mold.

Speaking of "dont fit", let's look at that ignorant bitch Coulter and her statement about "Saddam versus DeLay".. She said "Liberals are more optimistic about the charges against Tom DeLay than they are about the charges against Saddam Hussein", yet, I've NEVER heard ANY "liberal" (or intelligent person) suggest Saddam isn't guilty of heinous crimes (including "crimes against humanity").. yet, the right-wing-psychopaths keep trying to put those words in "liberal's" mouths. I don't get it.. I really don't.. AND, what's more pathetic is, Saddam has NOTHING to do with AMERICA, or our right to vote, or people in THIS country trying to RIG ELECTIONS and DISENFRANCHISE VOTERS to make sure they hold onto power. In fact, if you want to try and bring up Saddam and DeLay in the same sentance, the ONLY context I can think of is "they both want to make sure they controll everything so they can use the people to their own ends". DeLay a heinous killer of 100s of thousands? Not even close.. DeLay a despicable human being (by American standards) for trying to take advantage of millions of Americans for his own personal gain? You bet.. But, one is "wow, that guy is one of the worst kinds of people alive", and the other is "wow, that guy sure has no conscience and is a greedy selfish cunt".. You try to figure out which is which..

#16,

Your ground is about as empty as your argument.

Abramoff was directly responsible for funneling money to Democrats.

An excellent rebuttal with sound reasoning. This is why Republicans win elections - they are the party of Ideas! It's a shame liberals can't formulate such solid argument arguments and crumble in any debate.

Well Bvac.. I'm inclined to agree.. it's a very compelling point.. Though, I wondering if perhaps we should at least see -some- kind of documented evidence that suggests "Democrats" have had money funneled to them. I mean, we all -know- those dirt-bag liberals are guilty, but maybe some kind of ... hmm.. evidence should be shown? Just to support the allegation?

Well.. I don't want to step on party toes.. so if having any kind of evidence shown is asking too much, I'll just shush.. Though, I would also say, if there is evidence, we should prosecute all the Dems that might have even heard that there was money going to Dems from Abramoff since they clearly didn't do the ethical things and report it.. and we need to get all those Dems prosecuted before we start going after the people who actually -committed the crime- or -directly conspired- to committ the crimes.. Gawd knows we need to get those damn Libs first so they can't stand in the way of the Pardons... erm.. um.. what? I'm sorry, we're having technical difficulties..

Concerning the extraordinary analogy between DeLay and Saddam - only a twisted member of the neocon wing of the GOP like Coulter could come up with it. That having been said, I'll go along with the irrational and extremist neocon thought process with this argument. FunnyConservative, besides rats and bugs, DeLay has exterminated our right to vote in Texas by having driven the successful effort to illegally gerrymander the state. You probably are not aware of the fact that the case is being presented to the U.S. Supreme Court. Blocking our right to vote essentially kills our rights as American citizens and renders democracy null and void. You shouldn’t be laughing. You should be fearful – no matter party you belong to. Check out my blog if you want a hard reality check where our right to vote is concerned. Libby Shaw

nomorehypocrisy #6

Here's a Graph of the donations. If you've been around here much you will realize this is not neccessarily a Democrat blog. If the dems are feeding at the trough we don't condone that either.
The fact remains that the repups are much more involeved in this than the dems as can be seen in the chart.

I admit to being a very liberal, but I am no Democrat for life! I don't care if they find fraud, bribery or money laundering charges on the most liberal democrat out there. I just want my country back from anyone who would stomp on our rights and betray the public trust. That is the difference between liberals and neoconservatives. Neo-cons think anything is fair game if it furthers their cause. That is why they have power, but those who believe in what is right with the U.S are those who stand for truth and justice. Didn't Superman teach you anything?

You say you want proof? Absolutely. The National Republican Senatorial Committee Documented it all out WITH SOURCES.

Play close attention to that part about WITH SOURCES.

#23

Link it. Show me. What are the sources (yes, they need to be credible, and no, the Heritage Foundation doesn't count)?

#23,

Excellent! So your own sources admit to taking more than twice the amount of crooked money than Democrats! Now that you've shown, WITH SOURCES! that corruption runs deep in Washington, let's start running these overwhelmingly republican crooks OUT OF TOWN!

NoMoreHypocrisy #23

The key words here are "The National Republican Senatorial Committee." Who thinks that this might have something to do with the fact that there is a big fat GOP stamp all over it? And about these sources. Who are these sources? Maybe Karl Rove? Scooter Libby perhaps?

I completely agree with Meowomom (hope I spelled it right) I don't care what party a politician belongs to. If they took stolen or corrupted money, they need to refuse it or return it. If a Democrat knowingly accepted shady funds, let them go down the sewer with their fellow corrupted Republicans. By the way, speaking of sewers and corruption, DeLay is trying a new stunt. He's suing for the grand jury's testimony. The guy can't accept the fact that he's going down and going down hard. I live in Texas, near his district and I can assure you that this man is not only a bug and rat exterminator - he is an exterminator of our right to vote in Texas. He led the successful drive to illegally gerrymander the state.

The righties are so precious when they are all freaked out, aren't they? Running around and around, doing EVERYTHING their teeny, tiny, and oh so limited little minds can conjure up, to (they hope) point the people away from the GINORMO pile of doo-doo they are standing in front of. but there is that whole "STANK" thing going on at the same time. Poor righties, they just cannot plan ahead! OH! The Joy!!! Can I get a witness!?! heh.....

We need a law requiring all officials and appointees convicted of crimes to serve all of their time in a maximum security federal lockdown instead of prisons with golf courses and night clubs. These people are much more dangerous to us than pot growers and sucicide assistors.
LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY

#17

"I hate Rethugs with a passion"

Be careful, someone may write about you and call it "hate speech".

That darn religious-left.

NoMoreHipocricy, I hope you can understand the satire I was imparting. And, given the graph posted, it certianly looks like just over 1/3 of all that dirty money went to Dems.. And, I say -again-, if -any- of those dems were involved with the "crimes involved", they NEED to be busted and put in prison, as well as the people who 'organized the crimes'..

However, Dems and Repubs that got money and had NO IDEA that it came from illegal schemes should give that money back, but no crimes/charges brought.. We don't prosecute people for receiving stolen goods when they have on reason to believe those goods were stolen.. Note the bit where I INCLUDE REPUGS in the "tell them they were naughty and let them go".. I only want CRIMINALS (on BOTH sides) to go to jail.. but then, isn't that what Justice is -supposed- to be about? Punishing the GUILTY, -all- the guilty, and -only- the guilty?

Can the right-wing say the same as us "progressives" and "independants" and, to your chagrin, most Demacrats?

funnyconservative #30

Speaking of religious left has everyone heard how ford is withdrawing all it's ads from gay friendly magazines because of pressure from the religious left. Seems to me that Evangelism is about Jesus and God and not about where people buy they're trucks from. Guess they're saying "Ford tough" for all of them. (Ohh that pun was just plain bad)

#30, saying you despise (or hate) someone/something is not the same as calling for an end to it's rights. That's the fundamental difference between "left and right".. on the Left, we understand shit-bags like Coulter are out there, and WE fight to protect HER right to free speach, even while SHE tries to remove OURS.. Go figure, eh? An entire philosophy that doesn't get hung up on appearances and only deals with "facts"..

The FACT is, it's ok to hate in this country.. it's ok to tell people you hate.. it's even ok for some psycho like Ann to try and get people to hate with her.. but, it's NOT ok to "act on that hate".. that is, you can't violate someone elses rights just because you "hate" them.. The Left gets that, the Right-wing doesn't. And, that's what's the most sad and pathetic.

More to your "point".. "hate speach" isn't about saying you hate something, it's about trying to "incite".. or to get people to act.. My saying I hate Rethugs with a passion is not the same as calling for action against them (because I hate them, or for any other reason). I'm simply stating my opinion.. now, if my opinion is that we should violate someone's rights, that's "wrong".. Coulter, and the rest of the despicable humans like her, DO call for the removal of people's rights. -that- is what makes her "wrong", despite being a talking head for the "right[-wing]"

#32 Ford is reinstating the ads.

#33 There is no difference. Hate is hate. You write in a hateful way toward conservatives.

Coulter isn't advocating taking CIVIL rights away from anyone. AND PLEASE don't tell me about the Republican speech in Florida that Lydia Cornell wrote about.

You take a joke out of context, I'm amazed nobody has taken her other joke (in response to Cornell, Coulter said "I didn't even tell her about the prison camps I have planned for the democrats") out of context and called her Hitler. LOL.

But someone should I suppose. Guess it's all to be taken seriously.

I know someone as fallen as you (who HATES republicans) cannot think or speak objectively. I don't hate you and think that you're only hurting the Democratic party with your ethical flip flopping so I really don't care - though it's entertaining to talk to you.

Hey, do you have a post on here where you are equally as vitriolic toward an extreme leftist speaker? Don't tell me you don't believe there are any, do you?

Sorry it's off topic, but I had to comment on that line.

Let's see now, the "Democrats-who-shall-be-nameless, who have absolutely no power to legislate in favor of Abramoff's clients received 90% of the Abramoff's bribes? So Abramoff is stupid as well as corrupt?
But the Republicans who did receive money and did legislate or speak in favor of Abramoff's clients whose names and deeds are common knowledge are not the problem?
The mock trial (the Iraqis have no justice system worthy of the name that isn't being stage managed by the US) of a the former leader of Iraq for crimes committed in the 1980's when he was being generously armed and supported by the United States is more important than the selling of the US government right here and now?

#34

I come from Canada where the politics are always a joke so if you can't laugh at the Dems... laugh at us.

"You take a joke out of context," You mean, there's a context for Ann? or that she's just a joke? cause just a joke I get.

And her comment had nothing to do with Lydia, I've not paid any real attention to that, other than your hero Ann is a cunt who has no ethics.. talk about "ethical flip flopping".. she bitches and screams about her personal info being posted, but does it to someone else?

And, as I (thought it was pretty clearly) pointed out. Hating is not the same as calling to action based on that hate. It's your lack of ability to comprehend such subtlties that defines you as a Rethug.. though, I don't honestly believe that all Repugs are truely that ignorant, I think they just try to deny the truth that hard.. which is why I have no respect for them. I can say "it would be nice if you died", but I can't kill you.. don't you see the difference? Feelings are something we have, no matter what.. actions we can control. I can't control the fact that the right-wing hipocricy and ignorance and constant call for dismantling of American Freedoms for "the left" pisses me off. But, I can control my actions. That is, when I see someone intentionally trying to manipulate the system in a way as to fuck over millions for their own personal gain, I can't help that I'm offended, but I -can- avoid breaking their neck.. Are you really that dense that you can't understand that fundamental difference? Again, I don't think you're that desne, I think you're that much of a prick that you won't admit to it.. as I posted above, it would appear to be a birth defect that makes you blind to any truth or fact that is outside your agenda.

I don't have the link handy from that guy (a conservative, mind you) who did that story/book? about how Ann doesn't speak for "Christians or Conservatives".. I think it was here, I"ll try to find it.. It was in some of those quotes/clips, things in the MSM no less (if I recall it right), where Ann was advocating removing freedom of speach of Democrats.. See, you can say "she's joking, can't you see that?" till you're blue in the face, but it doesn't make it so. Ann (and the other right-wing extremists slime) DO adovate removing rights from Dems, and from Americans in general. They support the Patriot Act (like they are some how exempt from it) in all of it's UnConstitutionality, and support an illegal invasion of foriegn countries that have done NOTHING to the United States..

Not sure what you mean by "extreme leftist speaker", perhaps you could give me some examples of people and what they said, and I'll tell you how I feal about it.. But, how's this for a starter.. I can't stand Hillary Clinton.. I think she's an ignorant bitch who doesn't care about the "real" issues in this country (elections being stolen, illegal war in Iraq, not sure where she stand on the Patriot Act, but I'd guess she's for it) and is spending her time spewing bullshit about video games. How about we talk about the undermining of our entire society by corperations, and stop whining about video games? The "games" aren't the problem, the total lack of parental intervention is more likely the culprit. If I could get a grant, I would do the research and show what 90% of the Sociologists and Pshychologists already know..

"I know someone as fallen as you (who HATES republicans) cannot think or speak objectively."

I fail to see any logical connection to "hates republicans" and "think or speak objectiely".. course, it's not like most right-wingers bother to use sound logic in their arguments.. not that I've seen, and save 2 'questionably republican' posters I've seen here, especially on this board. I hate rapists too.. does that mean I can't think 'objectively' on them? See, being "objective" means weighing facts.. What facts are you presenting that I'm dismissing? OH! wait.. one of yours pointed out that Dems got money from Abramoff and I -conceded the point, and said "yes, and if -any- of them were in on the crime, HANG THEM"-.. did you miss that bit? Am I not being "objective" in calling for the prosecution of ALL THE CRIMINALS? OR, are you being dismissive of facts that don't fit your agenda? Hmm..

"I don't hate you and think that you're only hurting the Democratic party with your ethical flip flopping so I really don't care "

Hmm.. well, I think I've shown (again) that you are mistaken with your assertion(s).. first, I did no flip flopping.. you lack of comprehension does not equal my flopping of flipping, sorry.. Secondly, I don't like Democrats either.. Not the "party" anyway.. Personally, I think we need to DO AWAY with all this party bullshit.. course, that wouldn't leave people like you anyone to latch on to and would remove your perceived enemy.. I get the feeling that you just wouldn't know what to do with yourself if you had to step out of the group (dare I say it? gang?) mentality and think for yourself. The -fact- that you and all those like you just can't get your head out of your asses long enough to stop making this partisan is all that needs to be said. And, before you blow a gasket, yes.. there are some (though, it's been -my- expierence that it's a MUCH MUCH MUCH smaller percentage) in the Democratic party that are just as pathetic as most in the Repug party.. who just can't get their heads out of their asses and see that some of their leaders are just flat out bad people.. crooks and liars, just like the BULK of the Republican party.. Shame, isn't it? Most of "the right" and some of "the left" just don't want to deal with facts and reality, and in order to further their bullshit positions, they pretend like -only- they actually do? When the truth is, there are a lot of us sitting here looking at "the parties" and going "damn, what a bunch of partisan assholes.. they should just be honest for 2 seconds, the world would end up being a better place". Oh, wait.. is that being too objective?

About our old friend not-yet-resigned Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH), "Mayor of Capitol Hill" and king of his well-gerrymandered Ohio district --- who held phony "hearings" last March on the 2004 Ohio Presidential Election "Irregularities", and who's also on the hook for his cooperation with Abramoff and Kidan in the SunCruz matter.
Let us not forget that it was his heartless, mindless, mighty pen, along with DeLay's "hammer" that helped create and push through HAVA (choke, sputter) "election reform." This is the same HAVA that was supposed to open the gates of riches to O'Dell when he bought Global Election Systems while the Ney's HAVA was still a gleam in the committee's eye...(talk about inisde info!) And the same HAVA that the GOP apparently gleefully thought would promise them assured "wins" forevermore (with maybe some evertightening military control in between.) Quite a plan that's backfiring.
Funny that after taking $32,000 from the Tigua Indians to legislate their casinos back onto their reservation, and getting a good golf trip with Abramoff for it too, Ney tried to put that casino legislation into HAVA "election reform!"
Though Ney seems to have the game of Monopoly down pat enough to cheat relentlessly... maybe someone ought to start him with a remedial game of "Categories." I mean casinos and election reform...?
Luckily DeLay caught the gaff before it come to the floor. He knew it didn't fit. How could the GOP risk offending their right-wing fundamentalists by legislating GAMBLING!, of all things. The heck with using the handicapped as a front for a complete election takeover, the heck with holding up Native Americans and anyone else from whom they could exact their gifts on Abramoff's K-Street. The heck with elections altogether..
So now poor Ney is claiming smear-tactics from the Left, just because Abramoff oh so victimized him.... Give me a break! And being from Ohio, I hope his hard-to-contest stretched Ohio District also can get a break, by taking Ney off the streets before his campaign can go much farther. (But then with Diebold machines, even if behind bars, Ney could still win! Soon in Ohio with HB3, no EX-felons will be able to circulate candidate petitions ... But why should that mean that current felons can't be a House Rep?)

I'm still waiting for TooMuchHyprocrisy to link his/her Republican report. I'd still like to see those sources. At least give me the URL or something. You brought it up, now back it up.

Watching Conservatives get Investigated makes me
* Interested.

Watching Conservatives get Indicted makes me
* Aroused.

Watching Conservatives get Convicted makes me
* _ _ _.

Watching Conservatives get _ _ _ _ _ _ _ makes me
* Clean the Ceiling.

oops _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ not _ _ _ _ _ _ _

it's been a long Day.

I read a few days ago, but can't locate it that Duncan Hunter, so prevalent in the news yesterday morning, roaring from the House that the Senate's decisions would be unacceptable to him, was next in the sites of the Federal Prosecutor who took down Duke Cunningham. Now.

Just look at these boys!

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.; House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis, R-Calif.: Both of these positions normally are preceded by the prefix, "the very powerful" Chairmen of their committees. Due to the culture of corruption in the GOP, it would follow that they have received funds from defense contractors, and the Patriot Act would line the pockets of .... you guessed it.

I did find some interesting articles for your perusal, which include a quite a variety of "amounts: from: to:" etc...

http://www.alphaliberal....rvened-on-behalf-of.html
http://www.tpmcafe.com/s...ory/2005/12/14/122847/69
http://news.yahoo.com/s/...o_co/congressman_bribery

And, just one more:

http://www.thehill.com/t...page/113005/fallout.html

There's a graph in The Washington Post: Must register

http://www.washingtonpos.../12/GR2005121200286.html
How Abramoff Spread the Wealth - Where it came from - Where it Went : TOP TWENTY NAMED :

63.7% Republicans $3.41 M

35.1 Democrats $1.88 M

A total of $5,355,039 1999-2004

I understand that some have returned, or are in the process of returning funds.

Lindsey Graham, if I am not mistaken, Meowoman, pretty as he is, (I agree), is married. His wife has had a bout with cancer.

I overlooked in my excitement Re: #45 - included in the graph total of $5,355,039: George W. Bush, himself, received $34,250!!!! and National Party were recipients. Breaking down a total of $1.04 M = Republicans $1.04 M; Democrats $758,980. Remember the years are 1999 - 2004. Breakdowns refined:

National Republican Senatorial Committee: $395,000;

National Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $353,480;

National Republican Congressional Committee: $337,500;

National Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee: $332,000;

Republican National Committee $307,000;

Democratic National Committee $73,500.

SO, THIS COULD EXPLAIN A LOT OF THINGS, EH? A BIT TOO MUCH. I'M GOING TO RETIRE AND WATCH THE NUMBERS JUMP LIKE SHEEP AND I'LL COUNT THEM.

Meowomon #44

You wouln't be outing "confirmed pretty boy bachelor Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)" now would ya?

Isn't that classified info so the neoCon ministers preaching hate the gays and lesbians don't slap his cheeks til they are red and puffy?

The Right Reverened Pat "The Hack" Robertson may just ask for your tushie on a platter if you don't leave the prettie boys alone. Or perhaps Jeffie Gannon will sick his bull dog on ya?

#37 Good lord, talk about babble.

"other than your hero Ann is a cunt who has no ethics"

I think that sums up your eye on Ann's politics. Horrible derogatory names, but nothing specific. I was making a comparison of "jokes". I was basically saying that Coulter's second joke was worse than her first joke - and I am surprised some brilliant liberal has not written a twenty paragraph blathering article about it.

"Hating is not the same as calling to action based on that hate. It's your lack of ability to comprehend such subtlties that defines you as a Rethug.. though, I don't honestly believe that all Repugs are truely that ignorant,"

LOL - More liberal (Next you can tell me you're not a liberal - just a "progressive") intellectualism. Let me do a simple translation for ya:

"You cannot comprehend and you are stupid because you are a Republican, but not all Republicans are stupid." LOL.

Savanster - "I know you are but what am I".

Hating is hating - writing about it, calling people stupid is the exact same thing. Coulter did not call for any action. (again why didn't anyone prattle on about her "prison camp" joke about the Democrats?) The only difference is, she can take her distaste for Democrat ideas and formulate a joke. Don't be angry with her because she's wittier than you.

Well, you and I both agree that Hillary is a rotten candidate - which is a good thing. But the things you hate her for - I think are her good points. LOL.
She's flip flopping....changing her words, getting new consituents daily, dumping old ones, consulting with Bill. Blah Blah Blah. What this means? That Hillary knows that Dean, Pelosi, and Kerry are nuts, and that nobody is taking them seriously.

"See, being "objective" means weighing facts.. "

Okay and which ONE fact did you even mention in your long blather? Before you weigh them, you must acknowledge them first.

I agree with you about doing away with parties. BUT ONLY the liberal party. See, as much as they have cried like babies since losing the 2000 election - even after they could not prove that Bush "stole the election illegally" they just picked random issues to cry about for the last 5 years.

Alan Colmes and Bill Maher imply everyday that sites like this that have people calling conservaties like Ann Coulter a "whore" and other vulgar names (such as the one you used) and that students at colleges who shout her down and won't let her speak ARE NOT acting in a liberal or progressive way. There are a few "good" democrats. Zell Miller, Joe Lieberman, Richard Daley even....but they aren't in the same party anymore as these ninnies who are still stamping their feet like a bunch of sore losers from 2000.

Sounds to me like decent progressives who know how to argue need to start their own party and disassociate themselves from these kooks.

Sweet little old Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is on the hook for $11,250. He has such pretty blue eyes and is a lifelong bachelor who voted for the Marriage Amendment. I wonder why such a confirmed pretty boy bachelor would be so against Gay people? Why do you think he hates himself sooo much?

How can conservatives/rightwingers keep defending criminals??? A criminal is a criminal...it's just not right!

"I think that sums up your eye on Ann's politics. Horrible derogatory names, but nothing specific."

Hmm.. again with your cherry-picking and leaving things out to try and make a (invalid) point. First, I DID give specifics, so you are either a) really really stupid and can't read (I doubt that, but it's one viable postulation), or b) trying to distort and lie so as to make your point. Luckily for me, most on these boards aren't ignorant enough to fall for your trap (I know you're used to confusing 'average intelligence' people with your lies and poor logic). The specifics I gave were that I've seen Ann call for the removal of free-speach rights (and no, not from your Lydia example.. kind of screws you up when you don't have the exact wording to try and manipulate, right? But, Ann has made this claim/statement several times.. not just in the speach Lydia was talking about.. Oh.. right.. she's telling the same "witty" joke over and over). Here's another specific.. Ever watch Fahren-hype 911, the idiot's response to Moore? I did.. Here's another example of her "wit".. When they interviewed her in there and said "what do you say to those that say the Iraq war is about oil", she said "If this is about oil, why aren't gas prices dropping like a rock?" (paraphrased). Here's a reason, for one.. first off, at -that- point, the oil wasn't flowing from Iraq.. that's ONE point.. Secondly, when we're dealing with Peak Oil, having your hands on massive amounts of oil isn't about "lowering gas prices", it's about tactical advantage.. in the end, he with the oil wins (but only because those intellectual gnats in power refuse to invest in finding alternatives). ANOTHER reason for the oils is, we use it for a LOT more than just "gas".. In fact, MOST of the oil we use doesn't go to 'gas', it's used in other things.. like plastics? rubber? fertilizer? lots of things. Getting oil isn't about "lowering gas prices", it's about keeping our system moving.. Yet, your "brilliant" Ann chose to try and "look valid" by saying something that smart people knows is irrelavant.. Get it? So, based on seeing her either a) being a total idiot and having no clue what oil means to our entire economy.. or b) intentionally trying to confuse and distract/distort perceptions of the masses.. I have -another- reason to despise Ann.

"I agree with you about doing away with parties. BUT ONLY the liberal party"

See, no wonder you like Ann. You and her both agree that liberals and Democrats should be "removed".. Oh, wait.. next you'll tell me that you only meant it as a joke..

Go home troll.. nothing you say here can shed any light on any of the facts. Nor can you change the opinion of people who don't practice hate for a living (not to be confused with someone despising/hating certian things.. but it seems to be more of a cultural thing with Republicans.. at least the whack-jobs in office, and the people still supporting them.. luckilly, that's down to only about 35% of our society). We here are trying to see the "truth" and "do the right thing", concepts that are in exact opposition to Ann, Rush, Hannity, YOU, etc etc.

Spin on!

# 51 Huh....................... say what ..........................

Savantster #51

Well said.

Even tho it is over the head of the frogs and the trolls. We need not speak at their level.

I'm listening to Air America Radio here in Prague, and just heard Jerry's sub saying something about Abramof copping a plea. If that's true, this whole can of worms is about to really hit the fan. Cheers!

RRRRivet ............ RRivet ............. RRRRivet ...........

Air America Radio is #1