In the movie about Australians in the Outback who sign up to fight in the Great War, they say the same thing: "If we don't fight the Germans and Turks over there, they could come here!"

To which an old codger, looking at the endless, barren desert, says: "They are welcome to it."

If it was good enough for Sen. Charles Sumner to denounce a pro-slavery member of Congress as a whore-monger who had taken "a mistress who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight—I mean, the harlot, Slavery.", then it's good enough for Grayson to denounce the wicked people of modern times who do vile things to other people for money.

If people squeal it's because the truth hurts.

"Obama is not your boyfriend!"

People still react to Obama like dopey adolescent girls do for brooding teen vampires in Twilight. The man has done nothing substantial to reverse the crimes and atrocities of the Cheney-Bush Junta and is now an accomplice after the fact by covering them up.

You're still a dick.

Polanski was already convicted, so there's no need for the victim to testify or anything else. If the media harasses her, it's their fault -not the fault of the criminal justice system.

It's just a matter of throwing Polanski's sorry ass in jail where he belongs.

I'm not surprised that Huffington Post would run two columns supporting a convicted child molester. After all, star-fucking and child abuse (just look at all the anti-vaccination horseshit on the site) have always been a big part of that site's material, so why wouldn't they combine the two?

But then, what did HE know about being a "good American"?

I keep hearing pro-torture concern trolls whining that an investigation would "distract" the government. I find this somewhat amusing since the US Government tried, convicted and executed 141 American soldiers, sailors and Marines for the crimes of kidnapping, rape and murder. Not only did this not affect the war effort, it didn't cause a distraction for President Roosevelt, who was disabled by numerous illnesses -including being crippled by polio.

Now that's how you kick media whore ass!

Ratings still matter.

Tell that to Phil Donahue. His show was the highest-rated show on MSNBC and they canceled it.

This is the same BS they pulled with Donahue's show seven years ago. The bosses at GE demanded that two pro-war guests be booked for every anti-war guest -and three if a prominent left-winger such as Michael Moore or Gore Vidal was booked.

When the neutered version of the show took a hit in the ratings it was finally canceled, though it was still the highest-rated show on MSNBC. They're doing the same thing to Olbermann now.

This is the same network that demanded Jeff Cohen (Phil Donahue's producer) book three pro-war guests for every anti-war guest.

If a prosecutor doesn't come up with the murder weapon or eyewitnesses they lose, yes? Wouldn't the state forfeit its case if it refuses to produce subpoenaed evidence? What's to prevent the court from ruling that since the government refuses to produce evidence it is known to have in its possession, that they not only forfeit the case, but that they have confessed to all charges made against them?

Any prosecutions for torture, kidnapping and murder would land too many members of The Village in the dock.

What do you expect from the daughter of the same Dick Cheney who supported the Apartheid regime in South Africa? The "birthers" are a bunch of racist morons and so are those who pander to them.

I get the impression that if John Yoo had written a memo saying that human sacrifice was legal, Chuck Todd would have gone on TV claiming that it's debatable whether ripping the heart from the chest of a human being strapped to an altar is a crime.

What a servile weasel!

I have a very simple standard as to whether a movie is any good:

Would I pay to watch it again?

Out of the top 10, the only two I'd watch again are Godfather and Seven Samurai.

These critics are morons.

Here he is on The View:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSra-McRZEc

I'm still searching for any pro-photo-suppression Democrats who criticized Obama when he triggered controversy by originally announcing he would release them.

You might as well search for five-pound pearls while you're at it. Most Dems are still infatuated with Obama, so pointing out that he hasn't DONE anything differently than Bush when it comes to the war, torture or other crimes is futile as of now -even though it's necessary to call him out for it.

Some of the stuff here is getting ridiculous. O first went wrong by throwing Rev Wright under the bus? well, first he defended his relationship in a pretty decent speech - you may remember it? then, when Rev Wright showed himself to be all about him, he was cut loose.

It showed that Obama was five gallons of shit in a ten-gallon hat. He said in his speech that he could no more denounce Wright than he could his own grandmother. Then he did it. The logical conclusion: Obama is willing to throw his own grandmother over the side if he thinks it will help him politically.

Not that it matters: Speeches are hot air. DEEDS are what matters and Obama has done NOTHING different from Bush when it comes to torture, illegal wiretapping, gay rights and just about every other issue. And this is while he's still popular. If he doesn't have the nerve or desire to anything positive now, he never will.