DUmmies Despair Over Another Obama Cave-In
The DUmmies are in a state of great despair over another apparent betrayal by The One. It looks like there will be NO civilian trials for terrorists and this has plunged the DUmmies into the depths of depression as you can see in this DUmmie THREAD, "WH Leaning towards MILITARY TRIALS for 9/11 Suspects." Oh boo-hoo-hoo! Let us now break out our hankies and watch the DUmmies weep over another backstab by Obama in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your correspondent, still loving his new FREE Compaq Presario laptop, is in the [barackets]:
WH Leaning towards MILITARY TRIALS for 9/11 Suspects
[No hope; no change.]
*sigh* Need i say more. The comments on HP are exploding with rightful negativity towards Obama. Wish this guy would stand strong for one thing without compromises.
[Eric Holder the latest to be thrown under the bus.]
Cowardice. Once again caving into the conservatives.
[All your Obamas are belong to us!]
What solution would you prefer?
[Give up all hope NOW!!!]
Make a decision and STICK WITH IT. THIS is a sign of weakness, and the GOP will continue these tactics... especially since this will be viewed AS WORKING. Another disappointment from Obama. I am tired of supporting this man.
[Would it make you feel better if we allowed you to polish his halo?]
Help me! I'm being crushed beneath all this change!
[Don't forget the hope!]
Is always what the republicans want. Every freaking time
[We control the chip in the Obama brain.]
I really hope they stick to their guns on this. But after so many caves, nothing will surprise me.
[You won't be surprised. I promise.]
lol. You can never blame Obama. His hands are always tied. He must be the most ineffective President in a generation. He can't do a thing for the media, congress, the senate, conservatives, liberals, lol.
[And a Kewpie Doll goes to this DUmmie for having a brief moment of mental clarity!]
Like I said, his hands are forever tied on every major issue. It is always someone else who is at fault or standing in the way.
[Bush's FAULT!!!]
This may be a trial balloon. We need to shoot this down. Call the WH, call your reps, raise a fuss.
[DUAC! DUAC!]
posted by PJ-Comix at 6:46 PM
47 Comments:
Yes!
Because "raise a fuss", is the only tactic the DUmmies have left.
Logic, rational discourse, reliance on the Constitution and Bill of Rights mean nothing. "If we can't have our way... TANTRUM!"
I ask you fellow PJians; How many times have we heard, "TAKE TO THE STREETS"?
Really? I mean... back in the 70's, that was surprising to the 'establishment'.
Now? It's the idiotic and powerless peeing on the public leg.
Not worthy of police intervention, and only the corrupt media will give it a moment of airtime.
heh.....
These people (in the loosest possible use of the term) are a psychoanalyst's goldmine. The same person can be bi-polar, manic depressive, paranoid, obsessive-compulsive in one paragraph.
They don't disappoint for a chuckle.
Speaking of laughing at people, wheres Lil' Troggy?
One of the DSA Moonbats at Democratic Underground uttered the following surprisingly coherent statement:
"lol. You can never blame Obama. His hands are always tied. He must be the most ineffective President in a generation. He can't do a thing for the media, congress, the senate, conservatives, liberals, lol. "
This is what happens when you elect to the penultimate position of leadership someone who has no clue or compunction to be a leader either by talent or experience.
"Speaking of laughing at people, wheres Lil' Troggy?" jarhead
He needs me. jarhead needs me. "Where's the Lil' Troggy?" he asks.
I'm right here, little fella. Never fear. Go to sleep now.
I'll be unhappy if Obama makes this a military matter. Because it's not a military matter. It's a criminal matter.
But then that's not what you're celebrating. You are all delighted he's not leading. And he's not. Party on, Garth.
If it were up to me, troglaman, I'd bury you jackasses in reconciliation. I'd recognize that you and your masters have absolutely no interest in solving anything. Why? Because you have no answers. To anything. And that's a fact.
Anyone willing to entertain the idea that a corporate coup has occurred? Anyone willing to argue that it hasn't?
It hasn't. Your guys had both houses and the white house, they could have pushed it through anyway. They didn't.
As usual, troglaman tries to change the subject with inane babble about a "corporate coup" (which corporation pulled off the coup---General Motors? Goldman-Sachs? Mickey D?)
...it's not a military matter. It's a criminal matter.
Wrong! Sorry sparky but it's most certainly a military matter. We've gone over this many times trogs but please tell me again how non-citizen terrorists who attack the United States militarily are entitled to civilian trials with full Constitutional protections.
You can't and you know it. But I think Obama has something in mind here, something he's willing to trade the civilian trial for.
BTW, I'm back from vacation, I brought a six pack of Bell's "Hops Slam Ale" back with me. Made by the same people who brew "Two Hearted Ale"---good stuff. How good? Really good, a Plinian explosion of taste.
Oooo, look, troggy boy is making a "hissy".
No, troggy boy, military, NOT criminal you ignorant twit.
Get some facts right for a change.
"Anyone willing to entertain the idea that a corporate coup has occurred?"
Um.......no.
It's a really stupid, even moronic idea.
"Anyone willing to argue that it hasn't?"
There is no "agument".
You might as well argue that planes didn't fly into the WTC towers.
"Wrong! Sorry sparky but it's most certainly a military matter." elrondoclog
Goddamnit, elrond. We just keep going around and around about this.
Let me ask you a few questions.
How many terrorists did Bush try as 'criminals' as opposed to 'enemy combatants'?
How many of these criminal trials resulted in convictions?
How many military tribunals resulted in convictions?
Call me, troglaman, crazy but it seems these questions would be fundamental in determining whether or not trying terrorists as criminals works. Is effective.
Once you get to the fact that criminal trials ARE effective, there's nothing left to explain except why you're suddenly interested. I'd love to know the answer to that
As an aside, my friend, (www.pbs.org/wnet/facesofamerica/?gclid=CL-lzYDrn6ACFRgSawodvCWMZA) is a mind blower. On PBS. Wednesdays. Faces of America.
(WARNING - PROGRAM DISCUSSES GODLESS DNA AND GENOMES)
troglaman said...
"If it were up to me, troglaman, I'd bury you jackasses in reconciliation."
It is a possibility that such will be the course plotted in the weeks ahead, but what goes around comes around, and that genie isn't going back in the bottle without full repayment in kind plus interest once the political tide turns. It always does turn, you know.
Whatever facist teabaggers. Barack and my boys are putting all your neocon asses in Gitmo and letting the brown people free as an inlightinied society will do!
My kid has a public speaking project coming up and I told him to do the ultimate act of patriotic free speech...go up and burn the facist AmeriKKKan flag right in front of all the rascist neocon facists! I raised my kid to be a fearless patriot and to eradicate all neocon teabaggers!
Barack Uber Alles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Barack and my boys" -KayInMaine
Racist!
trogs,
As usual, your links don't work but that's not your fault. I blame the keeper of this blog.
The Obama administration will try the bombers of the USS Cole as "enemy combatants" before a military tribunal; yet it persists in its attempt to treat the mastermind of 9/11 as a common criminal. Why? Because the first attack occured during the Clinton administration while the latter occured during the tenure of Chimpy McHitler. Any trial of KSM in a civilian court will actually be a trial of George Bush; red meat for those DUmmies with a BDS hangover.
Discovery troggy, it's all about discovery. The government will be forced to disclose confidential information just as it was in the trial of the 1993 WTC bombers.
You still haven't answere my
question. Why are non-citizens who attack the United States militarily entitled to criminal trials with full Constitutional protections? I'll bet KSM didn't get his Miranda warning.
"It is a possibility that such will be the course plotted in the weeks ahead, but what goes around comes around." dumbass
Dire, dire warnings. Dumbass would know. Bush pushed through a trillion dollar tax cut with reconciliation...and never made any budget considerations to pay for it - compensate for the loss of revenue. Both the Iraq and Afghan wars were never paid for either. Medicare D was never paid for, never budgeted in.
And you nattering nabobs think you have the answers. Sure you do.
Here's the deal, dumbass. The Karmic wheel has been turning for a while now. Unfortunately, it may be your turn to be seen as and understood to be, well...a dumbass (there's a certain symmetry to all this, isn't there?)
How many times did the RepubliDUms use reconciliation between 2000 and 2008? How many times have the DUmmies used it since Obama took office?
So don't be getting all fired up and jumpy because the DUmmies might venture into territory you jerk-offs somehow claim as your own.
Another astonishingly ribald demonstration of hypocrisy. You all continue to amaze and delight.
"Why are non-citizens who attack the United States militarily entitled to criminal trials with full Constitutional protections?" elrond
"Militarily entitled"? What the hell does that mean?
Let's talk about Constitution protections. Are they a bad thing, elrond? I only ask because it's been proven hundreds and hundreds of times that, even given constitutional protections, terrorists are sent away.
So even though terrorists are given liberal, warm and fuzzy constitutional privileges, they STILL get put away. Always.
Is it the 'idea' that they're given protection under the Constitution that bugs you or what? It can't be the conviction record. You're bugged because they have rights under the Constitution. And even though they're convicted again and again, the fact that they're given inalienable rights bugs you. In fact, the Constitution bugs you.
You want to declare who gets Constitutional rights and who doesn't despite the fact the Constitution makes no such distinction?
Yes you do. That makes you a non-believer in truth, justice, and the American way, my friend.
Why don't you point out who's entitled to Constitution protections and who isn't. Make the founding fathers proud.
It's in the general nature of wheels, Karmic and otherwise, that they make more than one revolution once put into motion.
I realize that concept is probably over your partisan little head, Troggie, and therefore largely innocent of concepts such as wheels, physics, and economics. I simply note it for posterity and the amusement of the sane readers here so that we can smugly mock your ire later, at the appropriate point in the turning of the wheel.
trogs,
If KSM is entitled to a civilian trial with all Constitutional rights why aren't the terrorists who plotted the bombing of the USS Cole similarly entitled? Why does the former get a trial before a civilian jury while the latter gets a military tribunal?
I, for one, suspect that Obama's and his AG's devotion to the Constitution and it's safeguards is less than consistent.
Trogs,
The Federal deficit for February, 2010 was $220,900,000,000, an all time record. Multiply that number by twelve and you begin to get an idea of the abyss Mr. Hopeychangey is throwing us into.
Troglaman blames Bush in 5...4...3..
"It's in the general nature of wheels, Karmic and otherwise, that they make more than one revolution once put into motion...I realize that concept is probably over your partisan little head, Troggie." dumbass
How wise. Actually, stopped clocks are right twice a day. They advance their wheels of time by remaining frozen. They're accurately explaining time twice a day even though inert like a big fat rock.
Goddamn. I, troglaman, may have just described the inner workings of the quintessential wingnut mind. Holy fuck.
(copyright troglaman)
h/t dumbass
"Troglaman blames Bush in 5...4...3.." elrond
You're right. It had nothing to do with Bush. Nothing at all. Not one friggin thing had to do with Bush. Not ONE DAMN SINGLE THING.
Happy? Is that a more palatable reality for you, elrond?
"How many times did the RepubliDUms use reconciliation between 2000 and 2008? How many times have the DUmmies used it since Obama took office?" the mighty troglaman
Just answer, potato heads. Then go on and on about how evil it is.
"You're right. It had nothing to do with Bush."
Thanks for for saying it, even if you don't mean it.
But, eventually, you and your fellow moonbats will have to admit that Obama is responsible for his deficits. I see it happening in 2011 or 2012, as our economy implodes. Life is full of sad awakenings...yours will be sadder than most.
Meanwhile, have another beer.
Elrond Hubbard said...
"Meanwhile, have another beer."
Down at the Sunset Grill?
"But, eventually, you and your fellow moonbats will have to admit that Obama is responsible for his deficits." elrond
You know, elrond. I find it kind of...um...ironic that you want me to admit to the damage Obama "eventually" might do. Especially since you (and the unanimous majority around here) have never copped to the damage W did do.
And sadly, elrond, this has become a real barrier in our attempts to understand each other or otherwise share cupcake recipes.
"Why troglaman Why?" you ask.
I'll tell you why, elrond - Because we can't afford to repeat ourselves. And your refusal to acknowledge what went wrong makes you a poor advocate for what needs to be done. This is especially evident when you advocate for the very things that put here in the first place (eg deregulated market) or advocate against effective measures (eg civilian trials for terrorists).
But enough of this drivel. UW has just come back 14 pts against OSU to lead by 4 with 9 minutes left.
And this is pretty damn cool
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qybUFnY7Y8w
Because we can't afford to repeat ourselves.
...and yet that's exactly what we're doing as Bush's big deficits morph into Obama's mega deficits.
If you read my prior postings, you'll see that I've often criticized Bush's runaway spending and I'm consistent in criticizing Obama's super runaway spending. Money is money irrespective of political party and we're spending trillions of dollars that we don't have. It's a nasty mess and we're leaving the clean up to our children and grand children.
Once again your link doesn't work. In a way, it's symbolic (or symptomatic) of our discussions.
"...and yet that's exactly what we're doing as Bush's big deficits morph into Obama's mega deficits." elrond
You might want explain and delineate the Bush mistakes Obama is exponentially making worse. Name one. Then tell me how you're trying to rectify it...correct it.
Can't wait.
You're never right about anything, elrond, except your excellent taste in beer.
troggy,
Does a record breaking $220,900,000,000 deficit for Feburary of 2010 mean anything to you? And there's much, much more coming down the road in the months and years ahead. And not a Bush in sight.
"Then tell me how you're goring to rectify it...correct it?"
I was thinking of having a cake sale with the proceeds payable to the Treasury. What about you Einstein?
"'Then tell me how you're goring to rectify it...correct it?' (trog)
I was thinking of having a cake sale with the proceeds payable to the Treasury." elrond
Great Answer!!! Actually better than most. At least you're proposing something.
I want you to know that I will stand firm with you, Chairman Elrond (of the soon-to-be-announced "Baking For The Aching" movement)...by whipping up big-assed batch of Troglamuffins!
("Bacon For The Achin'" might be better...just saying)
Troggy said,
"Once you get to the fact that criminal trials ARE effective, there's nothing left to explain except why you're suddenly interested. I'd love to know the answer to that."
They are not American citizens. As such, they are not protected by the US Constitution.
Oh, and if that's not good enough and you want another reason why I'd prefer they be given a military trial over a civilian one, a BIG reason is public security.
A big civilian trial being held for such high- profile terrorists in the middle of the day in New York would be a prime target for a terrorist attack. A suicide bomber could take out hundreds if not thousands of innocent people at such a crowded courthouse. In contrast, a military trial would be held on a heavily- guarded military base, so the risk of attacks is greatly diminished.
Or are you just desperate to see more Americans die?
"They are not American citizens. As such, they are not protected by the US Constitution." adam
Wrong.
"A big civilian trial being held for such high- profile terrorists in the middle of the day in New York would be a prime target for a terrorist attack." adam
Count yourself as one of the terrorist's pussified victories, brave patriot.
troglaman,
You're right in that non-citizens commiting crimes in the United States are protected by the Constitution and entitled to a civilian trial. But you're wrong in believing that these protections extend to non-citizen
combatants who launch military attacks on the United States.
Count yourself as one to the terrorists' brain dead victims.
"But you're wrong in believing that these protections extend to non-citizen combatants who launch military attacks on the United States." kat
No, I'm not. Constitutional protections apply to anyone tried by the USA. At least, that's the theory. And why not? Can you point out where the it's failed us? Ever?
Is there any distinction in that pretty little head of yours between 'terrorist attacks' and 'military attacks'? Probably not. Too difficult.
Was the guy that tried to shoot his way into the Pentagon a terrorist or was he executing a military attack? How about the guy that crashed his plane into the IRS building? Both these crimes will be tried with Constitutional protections. Timothy McVeigh was tried with Constitution protections.
You doubt the Constitution, kat? Have you lost faith in the American way?
Yes you have.
troggy,
"Constitution protections apply to anyone tried in the USA"
McVeigh, the imbecile killed in the Pentagon shootout and the pathetic loon who crashed his plane into the IRS building were indeed terrorists; they were also U.S. citizens and so entitled to civilian trials in U.S. courts.
The people who planned and carried
out the 9/11 attacks are terrorists too but they are also members of al Qaeda, a quasi military organization that declared war on the United States during the Clinton era. Al Qaeda is the entity we've been waging war on in Afghanistan since October of 2001. Al Qaeda members consider themselves warriors in a jihad against America.
When in the history of the United States have prisoners of war ever
received the right to civil representation? If you give more protections and privleges to al Qaeda fighters than to lawful combatants then you provide the former an incentive to violate the laws of war. What's the incentive for any foe of the United States to abide by the laws of war if they get better treatment upon capture when they violate such laws?
Giving KSM and his followers civilian trial invites more terrorism.
"McVeigh, the imbecile killed in the Pentagon shootout and the pathetic loon who crashed his plane into the IRS building were indeed terrorists; they were also U.S. citizens and so entitled to civilian trials in U.S. courts." elrond
You might have missed it, elrond, but the Constitution claims everyone is equal under the law. And it makes no distinctions whatsoever about who gets that right and who doesn't. I'm right, you're wrong. What's important for you to understand is that you disagree...with the Constitution. You want to say that Dave gets Constitutional protections but Harry doesn't.
The Constitution's pretty much a blanket statement about how things should be. That's what makes it great. That's what made it revolutionary. It applies to everyone.
But you don't think so. You would rather choose who it applies to and who it doesn't apply to. That's what kind of guy you are.
By the way, what's with the Texas school guys removing Thomas Jefferson from the history text books? Jesus.
This is a rather perfect snapshot of the right wing world. Being arrogant enough to parcel out Constitutional rights while busily rewriting history. All in a day's work.
You're all nuts.
"Elrond Hubbard said...
Because we can't afford to repeat ourselves.
...and yet that's exactly what we're doing as Bush's big deficits morph into Obama's mega deficits."
The Bush Administration spent like a drunken sailor.
The O!bama administration spends like a coked up Armada.
"Count yourself as one of the terrorist's pussified victories, brave patriot."
So you WANT to see Americans ripped to shreds by a nail bomb, you treasonous scum?
troglaman,
I admire the way you ignore the thread of my arguement only to rant about the Texas public school system.
To repeat one last time: prisoners of war from a foreign country (or terrorist organization) are not entitled to trial in civilian courts. During WWII we had 400,000 German and Italian POWs imprisoned in the U.S.A.; none of them ever received civil representation. In fact, of all the POWS in all the wars we have fought none have ever been given domenstic representation. Why should we change now? What's the rationale? Why are foreign para-military terrorists who kill Americans entitled to Miranda rights, public defenders and a jury? What's so special about al Qaeda?
You really can't answer those questions, can you.
troggy,
"By the way, what's with the Texas school guys removing Thomas Jefferson from the history text books?
Apparently Old Tom wasn't right with God (which puts the Declaration of Independence on shaky ground).
Then there's the problem of Texan biology text books and that Darwin guy.
"So you WANT to see Americans ripped to shreds by a nail bomb, you treasonous scum?" Lazarus
You privy to the "Americans ripped apart by nail bombs" attack that is sure to happen during the trial? You might want to alert the authorities, you treasonous scum.
Spell it out, pussy. Tell us all about this diabolical "nail bomb" plan that will take place if terrorists are tried in New York. Let's hear it.
Truth is, Lazarus is making it up. There is no "nail bomb" plan. HE MADE IT UP. Ever wonder why someone would make this shit up? I'll tell you why, because they're proudly terrified pussifications. Osama's got this mofo by the balls and is tickling his...never mind.
There you go.
Just one more short thought-
Seems to me the last guy to use a nail bomb in America did it in Atlanta. And he was no Muslim.
Anything else you want to tell us blogofiles (and the NSA), Lazarus? A date? A time? The location of the bomb?
"Apparently Old Tom wasn't right with God (which puts the Declaration of Independence on shaky ground). Then there's the problem of Texan biology text books and that Darwin guy." elrond
Yes. That's exactly it. And you're OK with that, right?
troggy,
And you're OK with that, right?
Wrong. By now you should know better than to think that.
I admire Jefferson for his many accomplishments and his intellect. There's a reason a monument dedicated to him stands in Washington, D.C.
As for Darwin, I think the truth of evolution has been demonstrated and Darwin vindicated.
"As for Darwin, I think the truth of evolution has been demonstrated and Darwin vindicated." elrond
I, troglaman, am not the one needing convincing.
Your friends are. That's your test, elrond. Let's see how brave you are the next time one of these bozo's claims God's on their side.
I'll eagerly await you support when I call their bullshit.
Support? Sorry, but, based on experience, arguing over evolution is a waste of time. Religious beliefs (like many political beliefs) are not amenable to reasoned arguement.
Reunite Gondwanaland!
"Sorry, but, based on experience, arguing over evolution is a waste of time. Religious beliefs (like many political beliefs) are not amenable to reasoned arguement."
Well then...what should we do with all these crazy-assed motherfuckers? And we're not talking a paltry number of people here, elrond.
"People in the United States are much less likely to accept Darwin's idea that humans and apes share a common ancestor than adults in other Western nations, a number of surveys show"
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060810-evolution.html
"In the U.S., only 14 percent of adults thought that evolution was "definitely true," while about a third firmly rejected the idea."
"In European countries, including Denmark, Sweden, and France, more than 80 percent of adults surveyed said they accepted the concept of evolution."
"The only country included in the study where adults were more likely than Americans to reject evolution was Turkey."
Turkey.
You're right..."arguing over evolution is a waste of time". It's hopeless. Even though these God fearing mole-people are presented with fact after fact after fact, it remains impossible to change their crazed and twisted subterranean little mole-minds. All they think about is tunneling and looking for big fat larvae and grubs for Christ's sake. How do you argue with people like that?
But I, the mighty troglaman, think it worthwhile to challenge the mole people, hopeless as it may be.
You don't.
"You don't."
Right, I don't. I don't think it's a good idea to hit myself on the head with a hammer either.
I'd like to discuss this subject at greater length but I've got a cake sale to organize.
"I'd like to discuss this subject at greater length but I've got a cake sale to organize." elrond
My troglamuffins might lend meaning to our continued discussion.
Let me know.
Post a Comment
<< Home