Letters to the Editor
-
What would be different if Pravda did the interview
But if the Brezhnev-era Soviet Communist government were attempting to convince Russian citizens that they needed more domestic spying powers or greater benefits for government-allied corporations, and they wanted to use Pravda to achieve that end, what would be different?
They would ask the questions in Russian.
-
Shooter..
Your image of Christ is a person with nothing but disdain?
You haven't read the Bible much, have you?
The Christ had a great deal of disdain.
For hypocrites.
Matthew 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Oh, and the scribes and Pharisees were the powerful of His day, the movers and shakers of Judea if you will.
-
One More Thing About The Bloody English
Every time I've ever heard someone (like me) hold up the House of Commons as a model of good, tough debate, pointing out in particular that the prime minister must appear in front of members, regularly, to take questions and defend policies - suggesting we would benefit by doing something here - the answer is: "Well! Harrumphh! Harrummmphh! WE don't have a parliamentary system!!!! Harrrummmmpphhh!
Who gives a sh*** !!!
Can you imagine George W. Bush having to stand in the well of the House, answering questions? And, defending himself in open session?
And he went to a school where he had some, at least SOME, Oxford debate course work.
Yep.
Harrrrrrummmmppphhh!
-
@ liberal wb - Totally awesome blog, d00d!
http://homo-sapien-underground.blogspot.com/
And your endorsement of Nader is admirable, if misguided, assuming you really do like his platform...
http://www.votenader.org/issues/
And not just because you hate Hillary and mistrust Obama.
Speaking of Hillary that picture of her is one I'm used to seeing on Right Wing websites. Shooter probably has one. And getting your information from websites like What Really Happened:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spyring.html
Puts you in a class with Bucky1! Maybe lower and that's no mean feat. I don't even think Freepers pay attention to that conspiracist nonsense. Rivero was banned from Freep.
How Jews Spy on American Citizens
http://christianparty.net/amdocs.htm
All I can say is - Weird.
-
I finally figured out who John King reminds me of....
Lantern-jawed, vapid, jocular, empty talking head...No, not Stone Phillips...Then, suddenly it came to me: He's Max Headroom! Moronically cheerful computer generated TV anchor, alleged possessor of Artificial Intelligence, but really just a mindless mouthpiece for government propoganda and corporate marketing, interspersed with randomly generated, wildly inappropriate wisecracks ("With friends like this, who needs enemas?!?").
To his enduring credit, Max Headroom was an acerbic parody of a news-anchor-type that John King, in his galling smugness, doesn't actually realise is ridiculous: the grinning, brainless media shill, conducting interviews on topics he doesn't understand, nodding delightedly at lies he doesn't recognise and repeating slogans he's not programmed to question.
Between his fawning softballs for John McCain ("Why ARE you so brave and manly, Senator?") his breezy, blithe confession of ignorance to McConnell and his weathermanly platitudes on Super Tuesday ("See, these are the Cities, where lots of voters live!") it's a complete mystery to me that he's allowed on-air. Anywhere. He doesn't seem remotely bright. He clearly isn't hardworking ("Research FISA issues & McConnell's background? Nah, I'll just wing it!")) And the camera, to put it kindly, is not his friend. And yet inexplicably there he is, a dumber, lazier, uglier Max Headroom, unfunnily brought to life.
-
John King's Ignorance
Where is an Izzy Stone when you need one?
-
Dirigo
Can you imagine George W. Bush having to stand in the well of the House, answering questions? And, defending himself in open session?
-- Dirigo
If that would be anything like some of the hearings we have been treated to and disappointed in I don't think it would be all that devastating for George W. Bush. Platitudes and ramblings would be rebutted with, "Thank you for appearing here today, Mr. President. You've been very candid and helpful".
I know what you mean, Dirigo. But the House members and Senate members have been afforded the opportunity to grill administration officials and lackeys. They waste a lot of time falling in love with the sound of their own voices.
What I think you mean is what if our House and Senate could be as raucous as in the United Kingdom. Watching Tony Blair deal with them has always left me holding some respect for the guy, no matter how much of a poodle he is.
-
casual observer
Here was Dodd's chance to get these issues a little visibility, via Obama's campaign. Instead, it's as if these issues mean nothing to him.
Wouldn't want to upset the Obama hypocrisy express by raising these divisive kinds of issues.
-
@ Casual Observer - Maybe that is your "central theme" for his campaign
What's inexplicably missing? Any reference, of any kind, regarding the central theme of Dodd's campaign. Civil liberties, executive overreach, constitutional malfeasance, rule of law. Nothing. Not a single word.
Here was Dodd's chance to get these issues a little visibility, via Obama's campaign. Instead, it's as if these issues mean nothing to him.
-- casual_observer
If you look at his website, he listed the multiple issues he was championing.
Ending Iraq War and Restoring America's World Leadership
Restoring the Constitution
Energy
National Service
Education
Health Care
Bankruptcy Reform
Our Families, Our Future: Putting Women and Families First
Veterans
Seniors and Retirement Security
Labor and Economic Opportunity
A Renewed American Heartland: Revitalizing Rural America
Supporting our First Responders
I don't suppose he needs a campaign manager now.
-
It's only fair
So, we now have explicit declarations of ignorance and incompetence in the face of FISA/PAA from both John King AND Joe Klein.
I can understand it AND explain it to others. Can I have both their salaries, please?
(Maybe it's just reporters with the inititals "JK" who are unable to figure this out...)
-
@shooter
Now, also obviously you DO want McConnell cross examined, preferably under oath under pain of prosecution of perjury. And that would differ from a classic USSR kangaroo court with Commissar Waxman how exactly?
ROFLOL!
Dear, dear shooter. There really is not a single thing you know anything at all about, is there!?
They didn't have cross-examination in USSR "kangaroo" courts. The charge was read out. The "evidence" from the "witnesses" was presented. And then the "judge" said "So. We all know you're guilty. NOW READ YOUR CONFESSION!"
So, yeah, actually, I would like McConnell cross-examined, actually. Because that's what we do in a democracy, dumbass.
But what actually happened was this: King said "we all know this is complex" and "we all know how honest and impartial you are" and McConnell gave his "evidence" without a single interruption. What was it you were saying about USSR kangaroo courts, again?
Heckuva metaphor you picked there, bub! Great job!