In2 the weekend 3.11-3.14

on

Sucks to be in Japan

Ellison is a disgrace to Congress,America and Muslims

Wisconsin Rules

Advertisements

44 Comments

  1. Rutherford says:

    That’s your best shot at analysis? OK ….

    Sucks to be in Japan — true

    King is a disgrace to Congress, America and the human race

    Wisconsin is FUBAR

  2. bvilleyellowdog says:

    The regressives always need someone to fear and hate. Keeps the rabble in line voting against thier own interests. King is a bigot and an IRA terrorist supporter. He is a disgrace to Congress and should be removed.

  3. bvilleyellowdog says:

    The Wisconsin story has just begun – and it is now far beyond the state. The regressives have seriously over reached. The same appears to be happening in the US Congress. Probably the best thing that could happen – for the Democrats is to see the GOP vote to take an ax to Social Security, Medicare, and yes Health care reform. They are setting themselves up for slaughter.

    Meanwhile Walker and his GOP legislators are toasted.
    ***emphasis added by Alfie to speak to the fact that indeed the GOP are toasted as opposed to being toast

  4. Alfie says:

    The regressive thing is so old and tired dog. As for King I find him comical and his being hell bent on an action that was so obviously destined to McCarthyism comparisons proves it. With that said though the concept of looking at radicalization in America is long overdue and deserving of being conducted in a no circus manner.

  5. Alfie says:

    That’s your best shot at analysis?
    No! It was simply three things that were on my mind prior to heading off to work.
    We’re agreed on the Japan thing so lets move on.
    Ellison is a disgrace because his theatrics were absolute bullshit plain and simple. As for King well quite simply I infer you have enjoyed a big o cup of crazy partisan rhetoric and therefore cheapen your position. King is a disgrace but not for holding these hearings. He of course could still prove to be a disgrace per how the hearings play out. As for his being a disgrace to the human race,well that’s up to others since I actually don’t have much use for humanity,honest to God R I don’t.
    My belief that Ellison is a disgrace to Muslims is directly linked to his pathetic cry baby fest. The story he recounted was done poorly which sucks cuz the plot was good. Just as would the fact that their are tombstones at Arlington with the crescent & star on ‘em.
    Wisconsin……FUBAR???? Absolutely not. No matter the ending it is the state willing to have the discussion the other 49 (or 56) need to and inevitably will have.

  6. Rutherford says:

    I could agree with you about Wisconsin if a discussion had actually taken place. This is an example of dysfunctional government at its worst. Dems play the dirty trick of fleeing the state. The GOP shoots back by playing the ‘let’s take the budget stuff out, leave the nasty part and vote anyway” game. A curse on both their houses. This is not how government is supposed to work.

    As for Ellison, this is simply the 21st century “sensitive man” version of “Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?”

  7. Tex Taylor says:

    Alfie,

    As I am sure you’ve figured out by now, the reason “Transgressives” like Dawg are so disrespectful to you on your own blog while the bottle filler tucks tail and runs when I show up, is that you’re too nice a guy. But you’re a good man and an asset to the cause. Anybody that makes the continual attempt to educate a dysfunctional misfit like Yeller is a better man than me. 🙂

    The regressives have seriously over reached.

    That what you imbeciles were telling us in Jan. 2009 too. Dawg, you’re a broken record and a farce. Haven’t you figured out yet, we think you the snarky clown on the dunk tank, and you don’t even have the sense to charge?

    The fleebaggers ran, and you got your just desserts. A lowly paid old union man like you should have known the ultimate result was the pointed boot in the rectum, but no, you’re still doubling down on stupid.

  8. bvilleyellowdog says:

    The King hears are an attempt to tar the whole Muslim community and religion. If that kind of bigotry is ok – where are teh investigations of the Christians for “pro life” murders or for the KKK or for armed militias….? Same thing.

    Don’t like “regressive”? then stop being that way – it is highly descriptive – that is YOUR probem.

  9. Alfie says:

    yellow your comments shallowness is indicative that you’re tied too tightly to your party.The House hearings are underway and can be a lot of things. It remains to be seen. That the USA HAS NOT had this discussion long before now is more worthy of scorn but that doesn’t ravel well in your circles either.
    As forr the “other” investigations perhaps you’ve all ready forgotten the actions and antics of say the last DoJ’s of recent administrations.
    As for the word regressive….I love it as it shows you to be a complete tool. Keep using it as it assures your comment/opinions are moot.

  10. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “The GOP shoots back by playing the ‘let’s take the budget stuff out, leave the nasty part and vote anyway” game.”

    You can’t tell me you don’t see the irony in that…

    The King stuff is government doing what the Muslim community should be doing. Shame on both.

  11. bvilleyellowdog says:

    “The King stuff is government doing what the Muslim community should be doing”
    I don’t see the “pro-life” community going after murders – on the contrary they cheer them on through silent support.
    Nor do I see those people give one donkey poo about kids after they are born. Let’s cut school lunches, Head-Start etc etc.

  12. Alfie says:

    Well Elliott is shameless pig pseudo journalist blogger who at least knows to link to his sources. I would suggest to anyone who follows not to bother with dogs link to the semi libelous Elliot at Salon but instead go directly to the puff piece excreted from the Brennan Center itself.I’d also invite the dog to do the same since he obviously only gobbled Elliotts goo and dropped the linkage here.
    I find the sourcing of Rand and UK MI5 to be dubious at best. By that I mean they seem to be counters to other credible sources allowing one to pick and choose or just sit back and weigh opposing views. In the case of UK intelligence sources there are a number of counters within the intelligence system,some seeing great value in the “conveyor belt theory” as the US FBI and NYPD follow.
    The funny thing about the Muslim author of the Brennan piece and the pos Elliott is that I highly suspect they ( and those that share their larger world view) believe in the conveyor belt theory whence it comes to abortion clinic bombers and Christian identity militias but not if it assaults their twisted multiculturalist delusions.
    Read the fucking “report” dog

  13. Alfie says:

    With your two latest you show how in bed you are with the mindless progressive group think. You need to rip the blinders off!
    On one hand you champion the likes of Elliott who denounces (wrongly) how the House is demonizing the ENTIRE US Muslim population yet are guilty of believing the entire Christian faith,all the denominations somehow owns abortion clinic bombers etc.
    Also like a good liberal you continue to use labels this time “pro-life” community” in your fight. be wary of embracing the blind silent support argument.
    As for the school lunch Head Start argument….get the jizz out of your cranium its killing the last of your brain cells. That line is so blatantly false it crazy.
    Faith based adoption services,although those are hunted to near extinction from liberal zealots over the homosexual couple issue. Like they’re the only place to adopt from.
    Church shelters and schools,food programs and on and on. Give your fingers a break and get away from the keyboard.

  14. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Dog, I’m afraid I don’t understand what you’re trying to say regarding my comment.

    Do you disagree that it’s Muslims, and not the government, that should be looking at the Muslim community and asking why do some of them get attracted to radicalism?

    Because that is pretty much what I said.

  15. Alfie says:

    In the course of less than an hour off and on as domestic duties have dictated I’ve found how MI5 chief is on a talking circuit,been implicated in dropping the ball all in all unimpressive. Also of course as indicated earlier how elements of MI 5 and to an extent 6 are of a non-Elliot/Dog camp re radicalization.
    I’ve found two papers from rand (07 and 10 in dates) that both applaud elements of the NYPD analysis and the depth and truth it evolved. Classically as one looks into this whole thing one sees that the conveyor belt theory is more in line with the stages that the widely acknowledged jihadi networks use in recruitment at schools,mosques and community centers.
    I am so done with this. it reminds me of the days of E66 when he’d drop Spencer garbage links and not think they’d be acted on.

  16. bvilleyellowdog says:

    I disagree that Congress should be taring one whole community with the actions of a few – any more that all Catholics should be investigated because of killers of abortion doctors or McVeigh.

    That hearing is nothing about that anyway. It is a way to show off to the regressives and to keep the rabble scared.

  17. bvilleyellowdog says:

    Progressive comments on regressive blogs are always “moot”.
    The truth has a progressive bias.

  18. Alfie says:

    You continue to show yourself as a punk with the label-fest.
    First and foremost there is absolutely NOTHING progressive about your ideology.
    The progressive truth is based in deceit,see Ida Tarbell v Standard Oil.
    You are nothing but a muckraker. I know you may see that label as a badge of honor but it really isn’t. You are a creature standing in its own waste and tossing it about hoping it will stick.
    You and yours have decided what the King/DHS hearings are all about and that’s the end of the story. Too funny.

  19. Rutherford says:

    I still haven’t seen anyone point out just what good came out of the King hearing or could possibly have come out of the King hearing. Yes we had a misstep with Nidal Hasan. Other than that, our law enforcement officials have proven quite effective in combating this radicalization. King’s hearing was a “solution” in search of a problem.

  20. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Radicalization is a problem.

    It’s just not congress’s problem.

  21. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    I would like to remind everyone about the DHS report on right-wing extremists and then ask the panel…is Islamic radicalization DHS’s problem, like right-wing radicalization was/is?

  22. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    I predict there will be no takers on the above discussion.

  23. Rutherford says:

    Huck …. radicalization within any community is the problem of DHS if I understand their mission correctly so your answer is yes.

    I actually think you have at least partly captured what is objectionable about King’s hearing. It’s not Congress’ problem.

  24. Alfie says:

    OK I’ll bite….How isn’t radicalization a DHS problem? Better still how is it something Congress should address.

    Any form of radical group activity is within the purview of DHS. There is of course needs for boundaries and clear thinking which is not always found within a bureaucracy.

    As for Congress…well it is as important that they initiate discussion on topics or maintain focus on public concerns as it is for them to legislate. If We The People want to actually be part of the system this needs to happen. I think most Americans would welcome the environment of discussion and common sense as opposed to the relentless release of laws,ordinances and dictates from executive bureaus etc.
    The King hearings have played out much like many expected,and not a thing like some. A discussion we needed just not in the way we needed it.

  25. bvilleyellowdog says:

    “I would like to remind everyone about the DHS report on right-wing extremists and then ask the panel…is Islamic radicalization DHS’s problem, like right-wing radicalization was/is?”

    Did the DHS report cover all christians?

  26. bvilleyellowdog says:

    “On one hand you champion the likes of Elliott who denounces (wrongly) how the House is demonizing the ENTIRE US Muslim population ”

    Go look up the title of the hearings – that is EXACTLY what he did.

  27. bvilleyellowdog says:

    “Faith based adoption services,although those are hunted to near extinction from liberal zealots over the homosexual couple issue. Like they’re the only place to adopt from.”

    probably more importantly they misrepresent themselves to young women in distress. Meanwhile the rethugs try to shut down planned Parenthood – never mind that over 90% of its work is in birth control and prenatal care. if PP died the net result would be many more abortions. Luckily that cannot happen because public money is a very small part of thier budget.

  28. bvilleyellowdog says:

    The formal title of teh heaing is :”The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and That Community’s Response.” Have we had any congressional hearings on “The Extent of Radicalization in the American Christian Anti-abortion Community and That Community’s Response.”

  29. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “Did the DHS report cover all christians?”

    No it didn’t. It did, however, cover all former military personnel, citing that every one of them was a potential for radicalism.

    Now would you like to have the discussion I prompted?

    Is the radicalization of Muslims an issue for DHS the same way that right wing extremism is/was an issue for DHS?

    (That’s a “yes” or “no” kind of question, dog)

  30. bvilleyellowdog says:

    everything is black / white for regressives…. too simple to go further…bozo.

    Now about those catholics…

  31. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Fine, gray the lines if you want to. You haven’t even done that.

    Is the radicalization of Muslims a DHS issue that even resembles the way right-wing extremism was a DHS issue?

    It’s a very simple question that can be answered with a very simple answer, provided that someone isn’t afraid to actually engage in the conversation.

    I have no problems going further with the discussion. That’s why I took the 2 seconds to answer the question you posed in place of an actual answer to mine. It is obvious that, as usual, you are not willing to reciprocate.

  32. bvilleyellowdog says:

    In what is believed to be the first time in the history of the Roman Catholic priest sexual abuse scandal in the United States, a senior church official is to appear in court Monday on charges of covering up the activities of predator priests.

    investigate catholic perverts

    Should doctor killer religions be investigated? – you have not answered…

  33. Tex Taylor says:

    Nor do I see those people give one donkey poo about kids after they are born. Let’s cut school lunches, Head-Start etc etc.

    What do you do punk? I’ll tell you what you do for kids, neighbors, or anybody else. Jack shit, besides your moronic cliches and demands that others do what you preach but don’t participate. McVeigh as an atheist dickhead like you Dawg. You’re wrong. You’re always wrong – and always a liar PHD (snicker).

  34. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “Should doctor killer religions be investigated? – you have not answered…”

    You never asked me “should” there be investigations of them. You asked “have” there been any investigations of them. And the answer is probably “no.” I have also stated in this thread that radicalization is a problem, but not congress’ problem.

    That makes 2 of your questions I have addressed with multiple replies.

    Now it is your turn to answer the only question I have asked: “Is the radicalization of Muslims a DHS issue that even resembles the way right-wing extremism was a DHS issue?”

  35. bvilleyellowdog says:

    “Is the radicalization of Muslims a DHS issue that even resembles the way right-wing extremism was a DHS issue?”

    NO totally false equivalency. The investigation of right wing radicals investigated right win radicals playing soldier in the forest and shooting cops – not the whole right wing, not the whole white race or even white christian fundies. And the rigth went carzy over it. Perhaps they are all in the forest?

    “Should doctor killer religions be investigated?” If I did not ask before I am asking you now. No you have not answered -always evading – by plan – the truth hurts.

  36. bvilleyellowdog says:

    It is safe to assume the FBI or others in the Federal government investigate everyone they think is capable of violence. Regrettably in the Bushco years some of thier methods themselves were illegal. Wire tapping et al.
    Where investigations do not belong is in grandstanding witch hunts in Congress.

    I see no cooperation from the right In weeding out bad apples – no they attack the messenger whether it me Homeland Security or the SPLC. Attack every time. The telling part is that they cannot point out any errors in the listings of radical groups – which are accurate – they attack the messenger.

  37. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    It took me multiple posts of goading you over the course of 2 days to get you to give a simple answer to a simple question, and I am the one who is evasive?

    I am not religious and am pro-choice, so I am not sure what makes you believe I have any reason to evade that question or what truth is going to hurt me.

    Nor do I know of any religion called “doctor killer.”

    But I will indulge your weakly-posed question to show that I am in favor of fair play.

    Yes. If doctors start being murdered, and their murders are tied back to a particular religious affiliation, then what drove those people to radicalization needs to be investigated. But it needs to be investigated by the right entity. And that is not the idiots in congress.

    However, let’s not forget that there have been a lot more incidents of Americans being radicalized through Islam than there have been of abortion doctors being murdered. It isn’t just Nidal Hasan. There have been other incidents of fratricide by US Muslims of their fellow US servicemen and there have been Americans take to the battlefield against US troops. That doesn’t even begin to count all of the terrorist activity that has been squashed before it got going.

    “NO totally false equivalency. The investigation of right wing radicals investigated right win radicals playing soldier in the forest and shooting cop”

    Oh it did, huh?

    Let’s take a look at what the actual DHS report says was its scope…

    “This product is one of a series of intelligence assessments published by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch to facilitate a greater understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalization in the United States.”

    Is there anything there that says a certain people should be excluded based on anything?

    Do you deny that there are Muslims in America who are driven to radicalization by the way they interpret the teachings of their religion? Yet they aren’t included.

    Who does it include?….

    “The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.”

    These guys didn’t “play” soldier. They were soldiers. And simply because Timothy McVeigh was a vet, the DHS feels that they are a risk for radicalization, and need to be mentioned in a report on the topic.

  38. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “Wire tapping et al.”

    Has Barack Obama ended the practice of wire-tapping?

    “Where investigations do not belong is in grandstanding witch hunts in Congress.”

    I am pretty sure I said that multiple times.

    “The telling part is that they cannot point out any errors in the listings of radical groups ”

    I can. 1 major error is that Muslims aren’t being included in the potential for radicalization.

  39. bvilleyellowdog says:

    “I can. 1 major error is that Muslims aren’t being included in the potential for radicalization.”
    FALSE – are you really really that stupid? Does the FBI tell you about every investigation? They have caught tried and convicted a Muslims.
    The bottom line is that there are a lot more “christian” hate groups.

  40. bvilleyellowdog says:

    Typical “Muslim terror incident”:
    Bomb found in Spokane Washington in crowd at MLK Day parade. Disarmed.
    Police say is could have killed many.

    Headlines: “MUSLIM TERROR” tick tock tick tock

    Reality: Neo-Nazi right wing whacknut arrested.

  41. bvilleyellowdog says:

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/03/18/110535/commentary-kings-muslim-hearing.html

    “He races into traffic screaming. “You fools,” he cries, “you’re in danger!’”

    Horns are blasting, brakes are screeching, drivers are swerving to avoid the disheveled man running down the road. “Can’t you see?” he howls. “They’re after you! They’re after all of us! Our wives, our children, everyone! They’re here already!”

    To understand the paranoiac terror that has gripped much of the nation where Muslims are concerned, it is helpful to recall Invasion of the Body Snatchers, “

  42. jonolan says:

    Alfie, again why speak to America’s domestic enemies? They deserve death, not a validation of their worth as they were fully human by responding to them?

    The only use for their sort is as fertilizer and then only after you’ve sterilized their remains

  43. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “It is safe to assume the FBI or others in the Federal government investigate everyone they think is capable of violence.”

    I doubt your confidence and assumptions will pacify the families of those who have been murdered by violent Islamic extremists.

    “FALSE – are you really really that stupid? Does the FBI tell you about every investigation?”

    The topic was the DHS report on potential right-wing extremists. Show me where the words “Islam” or “Muslim” appear in it, and stow your appeal-to-authority rhetoric.

    “The bottom line is that there are a lot more “christian” hate groups.”

    I have no problems accepting this unsubstantiated claim. I don’t see where that makes any difference. Radicalism is radicalism, which is what the DHS report was supposed to be addressing.

    I notice you ignored the part about Obama continuing most of the Bush-era domestic policies regarding investigations. Since you brought it up, would you care to comment?

Comments are closed.