Dire Predictions
Hate to be the bearer of bad news but...
The Healthcare bill WILL pass. It will be signed. Also, the Supreme Court will NOT overturn it based on the "Slaughter" situation because the Court generally will avoid any interference with how the legislative branch accomplishes its "voting" on bills.
So, I think its time we start game planning for what we do next. Constitutionality of the insurance mandate? State resistance? Riot?
Update: This comment got out of control so here it is in an update...
1) It isn't my job to motivate you.
2) You being motivated will have literally 0 impact on whether a bunch
of crapweasel Democrats do what they want to do instead of what they
think they need to do to keep their jobs.
3) Eat my shit.
4) If I or you or anyone in the American electorate had ANY power in
the matter I'd be in front of the line screaming and fucking pushing
those fucktards toward the correct decision but they have CLEARLY
decided that what the public WANTS is irrelevant. They're going for
it. The goals of the socialist party can finally be realized and if a
few heads have to roll, it'll be okay. They've set the self destruct
mechanism and killed the only guy with the code.
Its just a matter of how shiteously they rape the Constitution before
they're done. Hopefully they are egregious enough to motivate the
populace into supporting a complete undoing of this piece of shit.
Probably by two years into the higher taxes with no benefits the
economy will be so unbelievably fucked up that it'll be destroyed.
But this bill this week? Passing. Get used to the idea. Its like
when people say "Iran won't nuke us because they'll be destroyed."
That stupid statement only makes sense when Iran is a rational actor.
The Democrats, similarly, aren't rational actors so it will be equally
invalid as an argument.
And if that won't stop them, then go ahead and tell me what will. I
can't think of anything we have to offer that they want more than this.
There's still hope here. The whip tally is a tight computation as it is, and there may just be too many Democrats who would rather live to fight another day. The Democrat representative from the next district over has been running ads assuring his constituents that he is totally against the bill and has had nothing to do with it passing and please please please please don't hold it against him.
This isn't a done deal yet. There's still hope it can be killed here. Even if it passes, there's still the Virginia AG's impending suit, the possibility that a Republican 2010 House will rip the guts out of it, and a variety of state defiance measures that may spring up. Let's take this one step at a time and not skip over any possibilities until each one is exhausted.
Posted by: Wolfwood at March 19, 2010 04:01 PM (NyqJb)
2
You absolutely suck at motivation. Defeatism is state of mind. If you were in my foxhole in battle, I'd shoot your ass myself and use your body to shield the rim. Yeah, we've gotta have contingencies, but quitting before the battle's over is weak. Pussy.
Posted by: Jazz at March 19, 2010 04:06 PM (hnq5i)
3
I don't think we should give up the ship yet, but it's always smart to plan for contingencies. So if this turd sandwich passes, I think the next steps should definitely be liquor and loose women.
Posted by: Bru at March 19, 2010 04:15 PM (agNa6)
4
Agreed, <b>Bru</b>. Accordingly, I'd like to propose that if the bill is successfully killed, the next steps should definitely be liquor and loose women.
Posted by: Wolfwood at March 19, 2010 04:17 PM (NyqJb)
Hey, MP has a valid point - although I haven't given up the fight yet, we've got to face the fact that there's a good chance this shit's fucking happening, without a byyourleave or a thankyouverymuch. And fucking right we need to have some kind of damn game plan to fight this thing if it does pass. We cannot allow America to become an entitlement nannarchy, and we have to do everything in our power to fight back if this shit gets deemed as cool.
It's not cool, and these are our representatives, and we should have a plan to let them know just how not fucking cool it is and where exactly they can shove it. Right around the same place they're fucking us right now.
As for what that plan should be, I'm the wrong girl to ask. I'll show up to the party and bring some chips and dip, but I've never been good at planning the party.
Posted by: Ember at March 19, 2010 04:58 PM (LdRAG)
6
I will oppose and work against any politician that votes for this crap sandwich.
I will oppose and work against any politician that does not pledge to repeal this crap
sandwich.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at March 19, 2010 05:23 PM (Zn88K)
7
So What i'm wondering is now, what will be done? If we act truly as the constitution intended, will we be written off, rounded up, and hid away? If people are worrying about the consequences, then we've already lost. The time when pitchforks and tar are needed are past. I do firmly believe before this is over, we'll have to remind them that the second amendment does actually guarantee the whole constitution. And if we go down in flames, lets see if we cant bring the whole mess with us!!!!!!!
Posted by: treestump at March 19, 2010 06:00 PM (dwCIX)
8
Sooooooo, party at Embers? She's bringing the whiskey and hookers?
Posted by: Elliott at March 19, 2010 06:53 PM (bYTjt)
9
You want some motivation? After they ram this through, they'll do it with Carbon Taxes, Union Card Check and Unrestricted Immigration. When everything's free, no one is. It's very close to Michael Corleone time. How close, is up to them.
.
Posted by: cbullitt at March 19, 2010 06:57 PM (AipKT)
The Conservative Soul
That's the title of one of Excitable Andi's Books. And he should know all about that after one of his "readers" assures him that "If Obama outlasts [conservative critics of his health insurance takeover--ed.] -- if he takes every punch and emerges victorious -- then two key things will happen."
Quoth St. Andrew's reader (who totally isn't one of the voices in his head):
First, the voices on the right advocating opposition will have to account for their failing. Second, Obama will gain more leeway and tolerance from the middle-of-the-road voter, further strengthening his hand. In effect, succeeding grants Obama the right to move even slower in the future, as it suits him. Trust is (re)born.
Riiiiiiiight. If this hugely unpopular bill gets rammed through, everything will be FUCKING AWESOME for Obama and a disaster for the GOP. Because they failed somehow to stop a gigantic, expensive overhaul of the nation's health insurance system. And if the Dems ram this piece of shit through, Obama gets to claim victories when his deadlines expire. Because...um, shut up, that's why.
Oh, and what does the sage of "The Conservative Soul" have to say in response?
Do what you can to get healthcare passed. Yeah. I'm talking to you. Call your congressman and Senator. Organize.
I Hate Rude Behavior In A Man. I Won't Tolerate It
Last week, a commenter came over here and in the course of one of the discussions, decided to cross the line and demean, insult, and otherwise cast malice upon people who are members of the GLBT community, not for their views, but for their lifestyle. The comments this fellow made went beyond legitimate policy arguments and went to the pointless, cruel, and stupid route, and hurt and offended several people who come here to participate in our slice of Moronia.
I was so angry, I actually wrote down in MS-Word (fuck you, MS-Word!) a response that I was itching to give to this person, should he choose to reappear. Sadly, the guy did not, and I now can't find the response (fuck you, My Mad Computer Haxxor Skillz!), but it was passionate. I was and continue to be angry that people with whom I share a common bond (opposing leftism) and a Fake Internet Friendship were told they were not worthy of consideration based not on their political views, but on the fact their sexuality is different than his.
Fuck that. Fuck it with a Roast Beef Combo with rocket AIDS in place of au jus. While this is not my site, I do not look kindly upon somebody coming along and demeaning my friends and cohorts. I will not tolerate those who wish to go beyond legitimate political debate and into bigotry directed at or about my friends. I fucking look at people based on whether or not they are decent people, share my views, and just want to be left the fuck alone by the Nannyarchy, and not other things. Maybe I am wrong and naive, but fuck it. I just don't like seeing any of my friends hurt.
And since I can't duplicate what I wrote, please allow me to present an audio visual portrayal of how to handle people who are assholes.
1
Thank you. I've admitted before that I'm not nearly as badass as I pretend to be on ye olde internets and it's getting really really tiring to keep being told how I'm not actually a conservative just because of how I want to bang.
You know, maybe it's time that I stop being a better person and show the exact same lack of respect to those who do so as is shown to me.
Posted by: alexthechick at March 05, 2010 10:16 AM (8WZWv)
2
Before you start railing on bigots, tell me more about "how you want to bang." Do you have a newsletter?
I was just talking to Alice today about how we must be the most gay Conservative blog that isn't specifically gay in nature. Even the straight bloggers here have strong ties to gay people in one way or another, for the most part.
I think we need to make it more clear to the readers that this ISN'T the kind of place you go to bash on teh gheys.
Posted by: Moron Pundit at March 05, 2010 10:52 AM (GC5S2)
3
Yeah, that sucks when someone decides to share their suppurating soul pus with everyone in a thread.
Posted by: Dan Collins at March 05, 2010 10:56 AM (BPs+6)
4Before you start railing on bigots, tell me more about "how you want to bang." Do you have a newsletter?
Damn intermittent dyslexia! Who. Who. I think I've already disclosed enough about how.
I was just talking to Alice today about how we must be the most gay Conservative blog that isn't specifically gay in nature.
I was thinking about that too. From what I can tell this is, hands down, the most homocon friendly blog that isn't explicitly run by them thar ebil queers. All credit and kudos to DPud for that.
Posted by: alexthechick at March 05, 2010 11:12 AM (8WZWv)
5
I'm certain MP'd accept a newsletter about who instead of how, alex.
DPUD's just hoping that alex will slip up and post some of her homemade videos. If it wasn't for that, he'd be raving about the homasecksul agenda too.
Posted by: Alice H at March 05, 2010 12:18 PM (qJHYy)
6
I'm always torn between thinking the people who hate gays are mobys looking to make righties look bad or angry social cons bitter over the rejection of the Labarbera agenda. Either way they're vomiting out venom all over the place is childish and disgusting.
Posted by: Rob Taylor at March 05, 2010 12:56 PM (c0v44)
jeezus, alex' ...I'm a slightly-to-the-right-of-Herod fundie Christian (and proud of it), and you're one of the reasons I stay at, and daily read, this blog.
...been busy lately. VERY! Uh, still am. But I read that guy's post last week, and he was ...simply ...an a$$hole AND an idiot.
Back to work, slave!
...ah dammit, I've been caught out ...again ....
Posted by: davis,br at March 05, 2010 11:55 PM (uCShA)
8
Dan: heh. You have had to deal with some real nutters at PW and POWIP. I know of which you speak.
And I appreciate Davis for his comment. I hope we can debate and disagree, often vigorously, but remind ourselves that those who wish to treat others as below them based on their "banging" choices should be treated with malice and a branding iron to the face.
Posted by: eddiebear at March 06, 2010 12:04 AM (X+t3I)
Commie troofer idiot is "an American treasure"The president of the NAACP hearts Van Jones,
who he says "may be the most misunderstood man in America." He's
giving Jones the NAACP's President's Award at the 41st Image Awards on
Friday.
Far
from the divisive caricature painted by some
cable news outlets [Some? I don't seem to remember any net but Fox News
mentioning teh crazee that is Van Jones, but I guess you'd rather not
mention them by name, especially since you're writing this for
Completelyignored News Network--ed], Van has been one of America's most
effective and
inspiring bridge-builders. He has successfully brought together labor
leaders, business executives, civil rights champions, students and
environmentalists to find creative solutions to the ecological and
economic crises. His efforts earned him designation as a Young Global
Leader by the World Economic Forum in 2004.
Not mentioned anywhere in the article is Jones's trooferism. What a shock.
1
since he's such a "national treasure", I recommend we crate him up and stick him in the warehouse with the ark of the covennant like in the Indiana Jones movie...
Posted by: mrfixit at February 25, 2010 08:58 AM (Bsm1s)
A Seattle fortune company cookie has unveiled a line of cookies bearing messages on behalf of the U.S. Census Bureau.
Yes, really. They're actually spending money—your money—to put Census crap in fucking fortune cookies.
At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if they've come up with some kind of program to hire high school kids to stand next to everyone's mailboxes on weekends, twirling those stupid arrow signs that property managers normally use to point people toward condos for sale.
So, from now on we add "if you participate in the 2010 census" to all fortunes instead of "in bed?"
How about one that says "Bad luck and extreme misfortune will infest your pathetic soul for all eternity unless you let the 2010 Census into your private business."
Pathetic. Jobs saved or created - gettin' 'em wherever they can.
Posted by: Nicole at February 19, 2010 08:35 AM (Lgaa+)
Change your facetweetspace pic! For Him!
You can do so here, Obama's continuing campaign organization (complete with Obama's personal logo) assures you.
Know how you can tell how unpopular John McCain is?
I can't find another conservative site that has mentioned JD Hayworth's birth certificate comments. I did find some comments at Pajamas Media in response to a post about how great JD Hayworth is, but that's it.
Whose line is it, anyway?
Well, that's not the only question. We also have to deduce who the shrieking, hysterical person it is. Here's a clu—oh, for fuck's sake it's Andrew Sullivan...
I have to say I fear her. Or, rather, I fear a country that has allowed such a person to come so close to power and to dominate its discourse quite so powerfully. It is a sign that all is not well.
You might want to take some medication, there, Andrew. And, even if the medical marijuana clinics are legal there in P-Town, something from the pharmaceutical industry might help.
Former Liberian President Charles Taylor, testifying in his own war crimes trial today, said that the American conservative evangelist Pat Robertson was awarded a Liberian gold-mining concession in 1999 and subsequently offered to lobby the Bush administration to support his government.
The revelations came in the midst of a U.N.-backed trial of Taylor at The Hague on 11 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity during Sierra Leone's 1990s civil war. Taylor is accused of directing a Sierra Leone rebel group, the United Revolutionary Front (RUF), in a campaign aimed at securing access to the country's diamond mines. The rebel movement stands accused of committing mass atrocities in the late 1990s in the West African country, including the mutilation of thousands of civilians.
The international prosecutors contend that Taylor offered concessions to Western individuals in exchange for lobbying work aimed at enhancing his image in the United States. The prosecution maintains that Taylor also spent $2.6 million on lobbying firms and public relations outfits in the hopes of influencing the policies of former President Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
Under cross-examination, Taylor said that Robertson had volunteered to make Liberia's case before U.S. administration officials, and had spoken directly to President Bush about Taylor. He also confirmed that Robertson's company, Freedom Gold Limited, signed an agreement to exploit gold in southeastern Liberia, but that it never generated any profit.
Seriously, lobbying on behalf of third world thugs in exchange for gold mining rights? What the fuck? This shit is fucking bad enough when a regular citizen does it, but when a man of the cloth does it? Last time I fucking checked, clergy were supposed to be looking out for the souls of folks, not pocketing blood money in exchange for anything.
Ugh. I could ignore some of Robertson's foolish comments about a lot of things, but working on behalf of a guy like Taylor? Fuck. No.
Posted by: Veeshir at January 29, 2010 01:30 PM (CNMEV)
2
There is not enough brain bleach in the world just for the thought of that existing. ewewewewewewewewewewew
Posted by: alexthechick at January 29, 2010 01:40 PM (8WZWv)
3
Oh come on. There's a huge market for that video. Between the Huffington Post and DKos alone that thing would be one of the most downloaded vids ever. It would probably even pass "dramatic chipmunk".
Then fark gets hold of it and it'll start being redubbed sorta like that Hitler scene. Mix that with the vid of him combing his hair from 2004 and you'll have comedy gold.
Some stuff is funny and endy all at once, you have to quell your revulsion and go with teh funny. Don't think too hard about it though, it'll take you ugly places.
Posted by: Veeshir at January 29, 2010 01:53 PM (CNMEV)
I think that there is a lot missing from his biography.
If that isn't a photoshopped shot, I see at least three scars, each of them significant..
I'm realitvely smooth faced, but my face is COVERED in scars if I chose to show them(I heal well) Obama, if this image is true, has scars, and significant ones, what is their source?
Posted by: Douglas at January 22, 2010 05:21 AM (uU+Ss)
5
One of the reasons I don't like obama? he PRETENDED to live like I do, but he did it well enough to convince those who live like I do. Now I see it.
the horizontial crease, that's not a genetic aspect, that's a scar.
The line across the chin? that's not a form, that's a scar, he's been punched in the face, more specifically the chin. I have that scar. It's a scar.
See the discoloration on his cheek? That's not a trait of being mixed race ir whatever, That's a scar.
Where did he get them?
Posted by: Douglas at January 22, 2010 05:26 AM (uU+Ss)
6
I actually think he has more scars on his chin, but I am only pointing out the obvious ones. The other "wrinkles" might be just wrinkles, but I doubt it, but they aren't obvious, in comparisson to the others.
If those other "wrinkles" are actually Scars, then exactly WHAT did he do in his life to earn them? He never served, he was never arrested (that we know of, remember, he has connections since columbia deap into the chicago machine) and yet he looks like that randomly.
I'm covered in scars, it doesn't much affect my visage, but. . . .
looking at the pictures of obama, he would likely protest this picture, if it's honest.
Posted by: Douglas at January 22, 2010 05:31 AM (uU+Ss)
imho, they both look like crap in that pic, but Bill especially looks like death warmed over, kinda like Ted Kennedy used to, before he became a Dead Kennedy( insert rimshot here).
Posted by: mrfixit at January 22, 2010 05:44 AM (Bsm1s)
Posted by: cbullitt at January 22, 2010 05:57 AM (0BEkJ)
9
teddy looked like a drunk. So does bill. I've said this many times.
The world feels strong when their leaders are drunks. I think we had two teetotlalers in the history of the US. Jackson, and WHH, who died (THANK GOD!)
England had an uabashed drunk as a leader, churchill, where did that get the empire, and the US?
Posted by: Douglas at January 22, 2010 06:33 AM (uU+Ss)
10
BTW, hitler was a teetotaler, and (supposedly) was stalin, Churchill was a DRUNK!
Vive la Drunks.
Posted by: Douglas at January 22, 2010 06:34 AM (uU+Ss)
11
Is that a picture of teddy talking to the nice black boy?
Posted by: Douglas at January 22, 2010 06:45 AM (uU+Ss)
12
Bill:"Check out the ass on that one." Obama:"Dude, the first worf is watching"
Posted by: Veeshir at January 22, 2010 09:13 AM (xmnp0)
13
Let me tell ya somethin' Barry, you are makin' me look better and better. Keep it up.
Posted by: JoeCollins at January 22, 2010 12:55 PM (jtJig)
I wasn't aware lies were protected speech
I'm surprised the ACLU isn't behind this.
Rick Strandlof may have lied about being a decorated Iraq War veteran, but those lies are protected by the First Amendment, according to his attorney and a civil liberties organization.
...
He is accused of posing as "Rick Duncan," a wounded Marine captain who received a Purple Heart and a Silver Star. Strandlof used that persona to found the Colorado Veterans Alliance and solicit funds for the organization.
...
Rutherford Institute attorney Douglas McKusick argues that Strandlof's lies did not "inflict harm" upon the medals he lied about or debase the meaning of the medals for the veterans who actually earned them.
I suppose it's true, lawyers don't have to actually make any sense.
I think this defense has been tried before and laughed out of court but I'm not sure about that. Really, I don't blame his lawyer for trying this, it's not like there are a lot of other options.
Posted by: alexthechick at January 20, 2010 12:55 PM (8WZWv)
2
Rick Strandlof will not learn from any court what he needs to learn. Drop him off at a VFW or American Legion on a Friday night. I'm sure he'd see the error of his way in short order.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at January 20, 2010 01:42 PM (k5nPY)
3
I think it will depend on what he is actually being charged with. If it's faud for the fund raising probably not but if it is just about claiming to be a vet I bet he gets away with it.
Posted by: chad98036 at January 20, 2010 01:46 PM (WNcvq)
4
You'd think that IVAW and VoteVets would speak up on this since he was a member of IVAW and appeared in VoteVets political ads and certainly must've done some damage to their otherwise impeccable reputations. I'll be holding my breath while waiting for their amicus briefs.
Posted by: Jonn Lilyea at January 20, 2010 04:37 PM (PXLXp)
In which I piss off everyone
Disclosure: I think the conception of separation of church and state that gets bandied about by most of those attempting to use it to force what is, in effect, pure secularism in the public sphere is absolutely wrong and ignores both the language and intent of the Constitution. Also, if I ever have to hear or talk about the Lemon test again I'm going to curl up in a ball and cry. Also, I think the group that is bringing all this to attention is full of crap.
If you want the military's business, then you play by the miltary's rules. There are specific rules in place about proselytizing in the Middle East to try to keep that whole pesky Crusade/Holy War thing from gaining credence. It should also be obvious to anyone with an above room temperature IQ that doing this will open huge huge problems with church and state issues. We're not talking about a soldier choosing on his own to put these there. We're talking about a company shipping out the parts with Bible references already on them. From looking at the pictures, you couldn't get this off absent some major filing work.
Look, if the company doesn't like the rules or doesn't like the idea that it can't ship it's product without some Biblical reference, then try to change the rules. You'd have my support on that. Hell, the Scientologists would have my support on that. But don't go doing this and then whine about help help you're being oppressed. It infuriates me that organizations that are trying to keep any reference to God out of the public sphere entirely turn around and get support for their claim that there are those who are specifically trying to make there be state support for religion.
It's not okay for the manufacturer of a weapon being sold to the military to put a Biblical reference on that weapon. Note I'm limiting this to that situation, if a solider wants to write whatever on it, that's different. But, yeah, this is not that situation. The company should have known better. And if the company wanted to do this anyway, then the company bears the costs of doing that. I'm sorry, but I can't get worked up about this the way I can about kids praying in school. This is a company who is getting directly paid by the US government to provide a good. Accepting that contract means accepting all kinds of limitations.
Btw, I really don't believe the guy about the whole Jesus rifles thing. But still.
Yeah, the company shouldn't be putting that on their scopes, but.......
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Posted by: Rich at January 18, 2010 01:31 PM (Qrjpn)
2
Yeah, it's a bad idea. But the "spiritually transformed firearm of Jesus Christ"
thing is hilarious. Especially if it's said in a Southern Baptist preacher-at-the-pulpit voice.
Probably be better if they chose their verses carefully. Besides the obvious Ezekiel 25:17, maybe throw in Numbers 31:3, Deuteronomy 28:47-48, that sort of thing. Verses carefully selected for the inspiration to vengeance. And it could be expanded to include various inspirational quotes from movies or from real life - everything from "Let's roll" to "Well, do ya, punk?" could serve as inspiration to our troops.
Posted by: Alice H at January 18, 2010 01:51 PM (qJHYy)
3
wow, putting an s in brackets will strikethrough all the following content.
Posted by: Alice H at January 18, 2010 01:51 PM (qJHYy)
4
Alice, I was wondering what you were on strike about.
It's even funnier if you hear the Southern Baptist preacher guy be all "In the Power of Jeeeeeeeebbbbuuuusss I anoint these rifles" while sporting old skool James Baker hair.
Actually, it's really really really funny if you picture Olbermann saying it. Go ahead, think about it. I dare you not to laugh and laugh and laugh.
Posted by: alexthechick at January 18, 2010 01:57 PM (8WZWv)
5
The only problem with that is that I don't think I've ever actually heard Olbermann talk. I like my ears, sticky-outy as they may be, and I try not to torture them too much.
Posted by: Alice H at January 18, 2010 02:15 PM (qJHYy)
Like LTC Verischagin, I sometimes find myself choosing sides based on whom I would most like to associate with.
Or, in this case, least. Given a choice between the Trijicon folks and tards like Weinstein, I know where I'll stand.
'Praise the Lord, and pass the ammunition...!'
Posted by: DaveP. at January 18, 2010 02:32 PM (q6tuN)
7
I'm with Dave on this, if my choice is between Trijicon and the leftist twat Weinstein, and he is, an Opensecrets search shows he, his lobby group and his wife donate actively to Democrats, I'm going with Trijicon.
As for the Biblical references, as I understand it, they all refer to light in some form or another, because Trijicon's optics make use of tritium illuminated reticles. Let's not forget, Trijicon has been adding the references since the beginning of their existence. It took someone this fucking long to notice and make a stink about it? Note, the military had no fucking clue it was there until ABC approached them, this is something Trijicon adds to the end of the serial number, it's not like they have a Jerusalem Cross etched on the side of the optic. Sorry, this reeks of Newdow-ish militant atheist bitching. No one had a problem with this until Weinstein got all butthurt about it, and ABC decided to cause a distracting shitstorm.
And "Jesus rifles", that ranks up there with this,
level of retarded.
So I ask, there's probably hundreds of thousands (millions?) of ACOGs in theater and in various armories across the world, what are we gonna do, recall all of them and replace them? They run usually $1000-$1500 for you to buy one, military probably gets 'em for much cheaper because of bulk purchase, but that's still a lot of fucking money to throw around for a few whiny atheists. And I'm guessing that grinding off part of the serial isn't gonna fly either.
Posted by: doubleplusundead at January 18, 2010 03:49 PM (KkX89)
8
One thing about the article, what the hell is a "high powered rifle sight"?
Is the "sight" high-powered (it doesn't look like a high-powered scope) or the rifle? And if it's the rifle, how do they know? Define "high powered rifle". I'll admit a .308 is high-powered, I don't know about a .223. I know, a .22 is a high powered rifle. I even saw Shep Smith hyperventilating about a guy with a "high powered rifle" running around Cleveland. They caught the dastard, it was a BB gun, for his kid or something.
Kudos to the idiot they find to say it's against the Constitution. That's pretty darn funny.
The same "Separation of Church and State" guy also says they broke "laws" but doesn't mention which ones. I figure he knows as much about relevant laws as your average Brady Buncher knows about gun laws.
I doubt they broke any laws. The military doesn't want the public relations nightmare, but that's about it.
Luckily this didn't happen under Bush, our fine media betters would have written about a brazillion articles with headlines like "Was Osama right, are we in a Crusade against Islam?" They would have whipped up such an uproar so as to ensure a whole lot of innocent people died to make Bush look bad, under their God-President, they have to be more circumspect.
Posted by: Veeshir at January 18, 2010 04:04 PM (DH2fI)
9
Maybe this is just one of the reasons why God is on our side?
Posted by: davis,br at January 18, 2010 07:18 PM (uCShA)
Nothing in their contract that they cannot put references to the bible on their product. If it has been always there and the samples that the military tested had the references, and the military still purchased it, then there is even less complaint. But in any event don't the Muslims claim that Jesus is one of their prophets and they "respect" the Bible?
What the liberals are crying about is that there is nothing in law that prohibits what this company from doing what they are doing. And it might even be unconstitutional for Congress to prohibit this.
To stop it the government will either have to make it illegal or put such an standard in the contract.
Posted by: Federale at January 18, 2010 07:37 PM (9gRn0)
11
Lemme tell you why you are wrong on this one, ATC.
1. The contracts for virtually all Trijicon sights have been COTS- Commercial Off The Shelf. That is, Uncle Sam looked in the Trijicon catalog and said "Great stuff, we'd like 150,000 of 'em. If the government had held an open competition for a gunsight, and Trijicon had offered up a sight, that would be a different matter. Then it would have to meet any and all specifications the government set.
2. As to the rule regarding proselytizing, it doesn't apply outside the CentCom area of operations. It is a General Order applicable to US military personnel, and any other persons under military jurisdiction. It is NOT in the federal code for acquisitions. Nutjobs telling you that laws have been broken have their heads up their asses and/or a political agenda to advance.
Posted by: XBradTC at January 18, 2010 11:13 PM (cB95w)
12
and the references are so vague to anyone who isn't a practicing christian already. How different this innocuous reference that virtually noone notices than the riflemans creed? Or other invocations learned by infantry all over the place?
Not to mention it's part of their serial numbers, which means, it's a serial number. Don't think I was ever handed a rifle scope while accepting sacrement at the local catholic church. It's just an "in joke." used by the company.
Posted by: Douglas at January 18, 2010 11:33 PM (uU+Ss)
Well, what I have pretty much decided from all this is that if I ever need to buy enhanced tsights (a possibility, since I'm in the market for a handgun), I'm going to give the nod to Trijicon.
When it comes to aiming, I need all the help I can get ...supernatural included.
...tho' I suspect this is prob'ly not the outcome the ABC News authors originally intended from the article.
Fuck 'em.
Heh.
Posted by: davis,br at January 19, 2010 04:15 AM (uCShA)
Gee, guess who's upset that Palin has a new Fox News gig?
His name rhymes with "Brandrew Grullivan," he's not getting a link, and he seems to think that this is proof of Roger Ailes setting up a "New Political-Media Party" and orchestrating some kind of "FNC-RNC Hostile Take-Over," all the while failing to recognize that he's writing about himself, in part (with my emphasis):
Ailes' new political-media party is fueled by Beck's integration into the paranoid far right, aided by O'Reilly's fading but still significant grip on ageing Reagan-Democrats, and galvanized by Hannity's nightly unvarnished propaganda and endless demonization of all things not-Republican. But until Ailes found Palin - a figure who instantly short-circuits rational thinking in those who support and oppose her, he had not yet found the sub-rational rallying point.
Um, do we know anybody who fits that description? Bueller? Bueller?
This FNC/RNC merger is another threat to reasoned discourse in public life, because it is a showman's concoction of very powerful emotional elements: resentment, sex, religion, anger.
Aaaaaand...is it just me, or does that sound strikingly similar to the blog of a certain somebody? Emotion, resentment, sex, religion, and anger? The only thing that's missing is amateur gynecology.
He then goes on to describe several positions that Fox News has supposedly taken, including that "Obama wants to ignore the war in order to effect a radical transformation of America into some kind of scary version of France and Waziristan" (um, okay, that must have been during their morning show, which I don't really watch, or from the voices in Andrew's head, which only he can hear) before saying...
I'm not exaggerating. Listen to these maniacs.
Those are Andrew Sullivan's italics. And while it kind of sucks to have to descend to the schoolyard level, I don't think it's inappropriate to say, hey, it takes one to know one, you fucking maniac.
An Amateur gynecologist might have actually seen a pooter.
However, he likely has an advanced research degree in proctology.
Posted by: Douglas at January 15, 2010 01:43 AM (uU+Ss)
2
But Andrew, going on Joy Behar's "show" and spending an hour making the case for: "she faked her pregnancy and only I am brave enough, smart enough, bold enough, to speak of the evil genius/raving lunatic that is Sarah Palin-that's totally cool.
Posted by: ktgreat at January 15, 2010 03:07 PM (kJmfs)
3
I'm thinking it's time to read AS again. He's fast approaching the point of no return.
I want to be one of the few people who gets to read his last post before they pull it. It's like when Howard Stern was at W Aynnnn Beee Ceeee. You knew it was coming and one bestiality dial a date later and Poof! off to commercial and come back to the Soupy Sales Show! Yay!
Posted by: Veeshir at January 15, 2010 05:27 PM (dVk3E)
4642-453 : 642-453 Value Pack 640-721 : CCNP's Building Cisco Remote Access Networks (BCRAN) 350-001 : 350-001 HardCopy
Posted by: nini at January 15, 2010 09:14 PM (i2+VQ)
5646-230 If you are 646-588 aleady work in IT industry, passed 646-563exam and got CCNP certification mean you are a person know self-driven and self still know how 642-661a goals and 642-105
Posted by: nini at January 15, 2010 09:15 PM (i2+VQ)
6jn0-350showcase 1z0-146the wisdom and ability of most people on the earth, in the first place, are nearly on the same 650-393 level.But 650-621 why does everyone have such a different life experience? ec0-350
Posted by: nini at January 15, 2010 09:16 PM (i2+VQ)
7350-029 test and got an CCNP certificate.This certification helps you leave your competitors behind, jn0-400securing the 642-566 opportunities before you.Today 642-426 for jobs is so fierce, you must first have the opportunity to join in order to exercise JN0-342
Posted by: nini at January 15, 2010 09:16 PM (i2+VQ)
Posted by: nini at January 15, 2010 09:16 PM (i2+VQ)
9640-822 analog test software, you can buy, or you can find it online. These things can help you understand the situation of your mastery of knowledge.642-873Make clear and vcp-410arrange the appropriate training courses. This step is optional, but one of the 642-812
Posted by: nini at January 15, 2010 09:17 PM (i2+VQ)
10N10-004to help to encourage us and achieve our goals. The seven steps of this route chart is as follows, set CompTIA as the example:642-892 Develop a schedule for the examination. Once you've set yourself a deadline, it is very easy for you to motivate yourself.640-802
Posted by: nini at January 15, 2010 09:17 PM (i2+VQ)
11642-901 At this time, you must “step out of the door” bravely and never turn back. 642-825The seven steps that divide640-816 process of 642-642achieving IT certificate into642-436
Posted by: nini at January 15, 2010 09:17 PM (i2+VQ)
Heh, I was ordering out lunch at the lunch of Friday and mentioned to one person that I was getting cheese fries. Next thing you know, I was placing an order for 9 people.
Posted by: alexthechick at January 11, 2010 08:56 AM (8WZWv)
Rules are made to be broken
Editorial policy here at DPUD is such that we're not supposed to send any traffic toward Andrew Sullivan, and I'm one of the strongest proponents of that policy, but this has to be seen to be believed.
I'm not going to even bother to excerpt any of it. Read it all.
...either Sully is a very, very stupid (as in unintelligent) person, or we don't live in anything remotely resembling the same reality.
There would have to be this tiny little dimensional shift that has "just this much" leakage between our respective multiverses ...which is "just this much" too much ...to be able to explain that column.
Posted by: davis,br at December 24, 2009 10:21 AM (uCShA)
4
well we're living in either 'the 'bearded spock universe' or one of those multiverses on Sliders, that much is certain. I'm sure there in the real world, there is an Andrew Sullivan castigating Obama for his utter fecklessness, well I'm fairly confident of that
Posted by: ian cormac at December 24, 2009 11:19 AM (AjYb4)
5
I should get a medal--I made it to the second paragraph. Had to stop there because he was making absolutely no sense even by his standards. He spent most of the paragraph ripping on Bush/Cheney for their war crimes and militant irresponsibility, only to go on to give attaboys to Obama for (temporarily) escalating a war in Afghanistan even at the risk of increased civilian casualties.
Dude needs a shrink. Alternating alternate realities.
Posted by: observer at December 24, 2009 03:56 PM (FUPRM)
Apparently, Santa needs a makeover. All sorts of things in the Santa-mythos could be damaging to the children, and, well, when it comes to the children, there's nothing we won't do. You see, Santa's fat, which may encourage obesity. Santa also climbs around on rooftops and breaks into houses, which may encourage lawless behavior. Some people leave cookies and brandy for Santa, which means that Santa drives his sleigh drunk. (How does Rudolph's nose glow quite so bright, you wonder? Booze.) And this is not the image we should be promoting to the children.
With his portly belly and a fondness for a brandy-fuelled spin on the sleigh, Santa Claus is hardly the picture of health or safety.
Now his wild ways are catching up with him, with calls for a radical overhaul of his bad boy image. A study by Monash University public health expert Dr Nathan Grills found Santa could be promoting obesity, speeding and drink-driving, and damaging millions of lives.
The childhood legend should be used to promote a healthy lifestyle, the study, published in the British Medical Journal, found.
It suggested Santa slim down by ditching the cookies, mince pies and milk, and instead snacking on his reindeers' carrots and celery sticks. Santa also should trade in the sleigh for a bike or throw his sack over his shoulder and hit the global road on foot.
And the brandy should definitely be banished, because of its pound-piling potential.
It could also put Santa at risk of drink-driving, given that he visits billions of houses and takes a tipple at each.
His reckless behaviour could also encourage extreme sports such as roof surfing and chimney jumping - not to mention speeding.
At the very least he should buckle up or don a helmet, the study says.
Seriously, people? This is definitely in the top 50 dumbest fucking things I have ever heard. Stupid drunk-driving Santa, eating cookies and climbing through chimneys. Obviously, this kind of reckless behavior cannot be condoned, and should be immediately stopped. Furthermore, I've decided that it is evident that Santa Claus must be a pedophile. After all, he sneaks into houses to give presents to young children. Aren't people always telling their kids not to accept things from strangers?
As such, I motion that we ban Santa Claus permanently. Anyone showing his likeness, referring to, or behaving in any manner reminiscent of Santa Claus (e.g., giving gifts to children, eating cookies, wearing red, using the word "ho" in a sentence) should be immediately executed for being a bad role-model to the children.
After all, we can't have anyone corrupting the children with a message of good cheer, charity, and kindness, during this - or any other - time of the year.
4
And by that I mean, who knows what's going to happen to him. I don't want my kids celebrating some weird helmet-wearing, non-booze-drinking, skinny, pedophile.
