Letters to the Editor
totallyblase
Published Letters: 351 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Anonymoose Warning
[Read the article: David Brooks and the deceitful tactics of the Beltway pundit]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sheesh, you freaks (wish you'd stick to one pseudonym,but like most liars and crooks you need a whole pile of aliases) keep popping up like a really persistent pimple. Criminey, you and your Rudy. What is it with that scrawny chicken-necked lying SOS that gives you losers such a hard-on.
-
High Point of the Day
[Read the article: David Brooks and the deceitful tactics of the Beltway pundit]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]When Shooter & Anonymoose pop up at the same time. Talk about whacking moles.
Hmmm. Shooter asks who is greedier. The guy who wants to keep more for himself or the person who coverts wealth. I think we're getting a lesson in free enterprise here, but somehow the message is so muddled that it doesn't make much sense. Is that a Jimmy Carter kind of thing where lusting in one's mind is actually worse than doing the dirty deed in the flesh??
And all you need to know about Anonymoose: "One point that for some curious reason hasn't been mentioned is that Abizaid should never have been appointed CENTCOM commander in the first place, since he lacks the required objectivity to serve in such a sensitive post. For Abizaid not only is of Arabic ethnicity, but he apparently attended some kind of madrassa as a child, where he learned to speak Arabic. How can a man of such divided loyalties have been entrusted with US military policy in the Middle East?"
Speaks volumes about this POS.
-
Anonymoose Out Of The Closet!!
[Read the article: David Brooks and the deceitful tactics of the Beltway pundit]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"And I have no truck for fat high school educated bitches, midwestern or otherwise, who feast on popcorn and ice cream while watching soaps and Oprah and idolizing Hillary."
Yep, another wide-stanced, wide-assed, self-loathing, toe-tapping closeted Republican male says what he means and means what he says . . . .
-
You Don't Have To Be Much Of Anything
[Read the article: Ahmadinejad's New York state of mind]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Really, I mean. How smart do you have to be to make the current mal-administration (remember John Bolton?), the mumumumuedia, or your average Joe-"Hoppin' Angry"-guy-on-the-street blow their collective cools and just reinforce the image around the world that America really ain't that cool? Not even in their own minds, it would appear . . .
-
If not Elephantmmmman . . .
[Read the article: The war president "at peace" with himself]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]tangerine writes:
"But I'll bet 'Elephantman' will come up with something to make us all amazed."
If not him, then his cohorts and partners in imbecility such as shooter, or anonymoose, or the ever trolling anonymouses. And I don't think 'amazed' is quite the correct adjective. More like perplexed' as one tries to figure WTF is going on in these idjits' brainpan. Usually something to tie Clinton in . . . .
-
Strong Language
[Read the article: Fox News' attack on the honor and integrity of our war generals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not. Glenn writes: "That is why I was so shocked and outraged -- and more than a little upset . . . "
While I agree with much of what you say, let's leave the 'shock' & 'outrage' to the Nervous Nellies when they are coming to grips with Annie Coulter's ever-escalating latest stupidity or to Rush when he says something so foreheadingly slapping bugphawk silly . . .
let's leave the 'outrage' & 'shock' to the wingnuts when they get their wattles a'waggle with indignition over gay marriage or whatever 'liberal' in-their-face activity that sets wingnut's into indignation. 'Shock', 'outrage', and the other cliches that are being bandied about have lost any bite or meaning. Why? Because we see that the emotion behind them is more likely than not false, empty, hollow. As likely as not it is feigned. To paraphrase: "I'm shocked, Rick, shocked to hear that there is gambling going on here. BTW, send my winnings over to my office later." So what do we do? Well, in the case of Fox, not much. Ignore them, refuse to engage them, give them the old cold shoulder. Tell 'em to go phawk themselves, and don't give them the attention they crave. Dismiss them. Let them wave their bloody shirts and feed the red meat to the dittoheads. Oh, and it wouldn't hurt to tell their corporate sponsors that none of their products are going to be in your grocery cart.
-
Sir, Yes Sir
[Read the article: Charlie Savage at FDL Book Salon]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm sorry, but has having 'worn the uniform' or 'been in battle' got to do with anything?? Sheesh, but I don't salute people or things like flags, and I'm not about to submit myself to any man, or woman, especially if they're going to ask me to do silly stuff for a third party. And I'm especially not going to kneel for anybody's gawd, and if She's going to invoke her wrath on me, so be it. Wubya may be the President, and we should respect the office at least, but I'm not, under any circumstance going to call this guy my C-in-C and doff my hat for him and his hare-brained schemes. Not in my genetic make-up, I'm afraid. Most folks have evolved beyond that or grown out of that(except for that danged recessive gene in knuckle-draggers like Ollie North). I'm pretty sure that I, like my father (and mom) can arise to the ocassion as need be (your basically necessary conflict like defending the world against fascism), but I really can't see putting on a uniform only to project big business' interests and protecting money and property for the rich. Which is,k as far as I can see, what the military does. So what the heck, and why the heck does having worked for the government's own Pinkertons, or Brinks or Blackwater or whatever have to do with having a say in how we live our lives and run our government. These folks in uniform, as far as I can recall are here at our beck and call, n'est ce pas? Is this Burma? The bigger the hat, the more power you wield??? I say, it's time to hold the military, and the police, and the folks that are elected to task . . .
Rant over, sir.