I'm with Norm on this one.

SteveFromHell, you are full of shit.

Steve fears we wimmins can insert them, and the, er, loss that would mean for him.

And then there are men like Richard Pryor who lived in awe and went in search of "The Elusive Snappin' Pussy".

http://search.music.aol.com/song/snappin-pussy/1381085

Not to mention, we have enough around here that may take your jape seriously....

Let me go on record as saying that I'm all for having sane people in the new administration, regardless of their ethnic or religious background.

Ever done any fishing? Salt water bay-and-inlet bottom fishing?

Ever seen a "bloodworm"?

Bravo Glen - the fierce urgency of yesterday still dominates your 1960's culture war brain. We all would like to see 43 rot in hell, or at least in prison. The difference between you and the rest of us is that for the rest of us, it is way, way down on the "to do" list.

I'm glad people with your smarmy, craven attitude weren't in charge at Nuremberg. Goering & Co. would have been allowed to retire to their estates, sign book deals, rake in speaking fees and pensions, etc rather than being tried and punished.

It would have been a lot easier for the Allies to rebuild Germany and Japan if they had let the war criminals off instead of "looking to the past".

Getting healthcare reform and an economic stimulus package is way more important, and to do that, smart people know that you need to not aggravate the opposition party - whether you like it or not, their votes count too.

Republitards are going to try to block anything Obama wants to do anyway. Prosecuting war crimes won't change that. If anything, failure to prosecute will be construed (rightly) as weakness and cowardice, and they will pounce as all bullies do when they smell fear.

Maybe someday, when the economy is strong and I can get health insurance on my own (as a self-employed cancer survivor, my wife's employer is my only option), I will be able to afford myself all of the self-righteous indignation that you seem to be so full of.

General George S. Patton summed it up better than I ever could:

Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack.

Case in point:

You're like a progressive Bill O'Reilly. Unlike Bill, your anger may be justified and based on facts, but your tone is identical to his.

If anyone doubted that you are a smarmy concern troll, this little jab should set them straight. Someone who calls for war criminals to be prosecuted is the equivalent of someone who supports war crimes. Only in the diseased mind of the Concern Troll.

The Vagina Monologue

Enough said.

Except this: I think I love you.

Let me go on record as saying that I'm all for having sane people in the new administration, regardless of their ethnic or religious background.

I knew that. Others (passers-by, etc.) might not. I think that the salient feature of Lederman's appointment should be that he's been an unremitting opponent of torture, and that should be the headline.

For all that want to see what he's written (along with the other fine folks at Balkinization):

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2006/12/anti-torture-memos.html

(or click sig).

Go read it (start anywhere, there's tons there). Powerful stuff.

Regular Unclaimed Territory readers should be heartened.

Cheers,

"It may be reasonable to assume all Gazans want to kill you, therefore, you can shoot teenage boys and girls in Gaza. That is a rational justification. But can it be justified on moral grounds?"

Its not at all reasonable to assume that. In fact, its highly unlikely that all Gazans want to kill anyone. Its more reasonable to assume that all Gazans DON'T want to kill you, and there may be some that do. I don't assume that ALL Israelis want to kill Palestinians. I can only infer that there are some that do and some that don't and a great many who probably never think about it either way.

I didn't say it WAS reasonable to assume; I said it MAY BE reasonable to assume. I submitted the possiblity for arguments sake, in order to create a hypothetical. Hypothetical - a fictitious scenario used to illustrate a point. The validity of the assumption was not the point of the argument - the indiscriminate killing of teenagers was. I was focusing on the minor premise and the conclusion.

Major premise: All Gazans want to kill me and my family.

Minor premise: That 12-year old girl running away from me is a Gazan.

Conclusion: It is moral that I kill her.

This seems to be the thought process of those pro-Israel supporters on the streets of New york the other day.

It would have been a lot easier for the Allies to rebuild Germany and Japan if they had let the war criminals off instead of "looking to the past".

The U.S. record is not spotless here. The U.S. let quite a few somewhat shady characters into the U.S. post-war ... and turned a blind eye to what they'd done during the war ... if they could be enlisted in the nascent battle against the Soviet Union.

Cheers,

Ever seen a "bloodworm"?

_____________________________________

Not a fisherman, unfortunately. But after a quick peek at Google Images, I seem to have unconsciously adopted a sort of Lotus Position.

Yet I've never practiced yoga in my life-- which is probably why I don't seem able to disengage, and my hand is stuck!

This seems to be the thought process of those pro-Israel supporters

Pro-Israel supporters? Pro-Israel supporters? What ever happened to "the Jews", Steele?

Steele is a posthumous Andy Kaufman act, I'm sure of it!

Wow, I wish I had been there when Steele tried this act out in real life, under his own name. Steele's "I started out as a Jew" and "those anti-semitic remarks that slip out at work" give us an entrancing hint, but nothing more. I was hoping Steele could fill us in.

But what a weak-ass, lily-livered back-pedlar! From "the Jews" to "pro-Israel supporters"?

They just push you around like a whipped dog, don't they Steele? What are you afraid of, Steele, are they going to get you through the radio or TV?