I got an e-mail inviting me to "Meet The Bloggers"... | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 hidden)
This really isn't funny. (none / 0)
Tim, you know I find everything hilarious, but I’m having trouble laughing this one off.

Liberals demand that foreign terrorist saboteurs be given habeas corpus access to Federal Courts.

Liberals demand that agents of al Qaeda, operating in foreign countries be given Fourth Amendment protection from illegal search and seizure. These same liberals freaked when Democrats voted overwhelmingly to give the Bush Administration the FISA structure they requested.

But when it comes to giving Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh their constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech, liberals just aint buyin’ it! Liberals want to shut down all sources of information that they don’t agree with. This makes them worse than Un-American. It makes them Stalinists.

Imagine if the Democrat Party purchased MSNBC, and renamed it DNCTV. Then imagine if they hired three more propagandists just like Keith Olbermann, and they ran a continuous loop of the same vile, loathsome, putrid lies that are perpetrated on CountMeltdown every night.

Should DNCTV have a right to present their version of the news in whatever fashion suits them? Of courrrrsssseee they should!  I would tune in, just for the entertainment.

Should FoxNews have the right to broadcast information on the satellite bandwidth that they purchase? Not according to Greenwald.

Should The Young Turks be allowed to broadcast their opinions on AM radio? Of courrrrsssseee they should!   I contribute financially, just for the entertainment.

Should Rush Limbaugh be allowed to broadcast his opinions from behind the Golden EIB microphone, firmly ensconced in the Attila the Hun Chair? Not according to Nancy Pelosi.

by KenTX on 07/17/2008 03:18:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Serious, except... (none / 1)

(I'll let other get you on that silly thing you must do with "Democrat Party", okay?)

I speak from the Liberal part of myself when I say that all people being thought worthy of detention by a representative of the United States already HAS the right to Habeus Corpus under our Constitution. In case you missed it, Bush wants his "hold them forever without charges" policy to apply here. To U.S. citizens. Civilians. On U.S. soil. And one of his puppet courts went along with him. So while you're still living in that fantasy world of "Fairness Doctrine means minute for minute equality of the airwaves," important matters are taking precedence with me. Like how to keep our Constitution intact, speech and all. How about if Rush had to use his power of "Free Speech" (for which he is paid quite handsomely...) outside, in a designated "Speech Zone" only? That would be some quid pro quo, don't you think, Clarice? Thip thip thip.

"Liberals demand that agents of al Qaeda, operating in foreign countries be given Fourth Amendment protection from illegal search and seizure."

Really? Which "Liberals" would that be, exactly? They forgot to add that to my daily "vast left wing conspiricy to overthrow the world using human rights as a weapon" email. How could they be so forgetful? Tch tch. This time, when the cat buries that line, resist the urge to dig it back up, okay? The odor gives away what it really is from the next room.

"...vile, loathsome, putrid lies..."

Gosh, that sounds horrible! Quick, give me some examples. .... Okay, slower, give me a few examples. .... Okay, how about one or two? Take as long as you need... 

"Should FoxNews have the right to broadcast information..."

That was never the question. The question is whether they be allowed to repeatedly broadcast known lies and pure Right Wing propaganda under the guise of "news." If they called themselves the Fox Comedy Channel or the Fox Cheerleading Channel, there wouldn't be this problem. If they insist on referring to themselves as a "fair and balanced" "news" organization, why do you object to people wanting to hold them to their own standards?

(You got me on one of the "good" days. Sorry.)

 

by MedfordTim on 07/17/2008 04:08:01 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Not funny at all (none / 0)

Ken, I usually find your posts amusing and even sometimes informative. This post is neither. Liberals demand "foreign terrorist saboteurs" be given the right to habeus corpus? It seems to me that liberals, libertarians and conservatives also supported this idea. The Cato Institute wrote an amicus brief in support of habeus. What I really don't understand, is why anyone would be afraid to give habeus in the first place. None of the detainees at Guantanamo will be released by the court's decision, which does not even guarantee a right to a hearing. Rather, it guarantees only a right to request a hearing. Courts retain considerable discretion regarding such requests. There is also another right which is being trampled here that we don't hear about which habeus could solve: the right to be presumed innocent until found guilty. Most certainly there are terrorist fighters among the detainees, as sure as there are people who were caught in a very wide cast net. Unfortunately, holding people for 5+ years without really caring who they are or why they were picked up in the first place doesn't do much to further our cause of justice, democracy and peace. Do you honestly believe a 15 year old boy was a "foreign terrorist saboteur" or maybe he was just a kid who thought he was protecting his country from invaders? I agree with you, though, after 6 years at  Guantanamo he is probably now a "terrorist."

 As to taking down Fox, if Greenwald is doing this (I couldn't find a cite for it) it's not because they present the news with a conservative bent; it's because they present the news with a truthiness bent. As for O'Reilly and Limbaugh, they are not news reporters. Therefore, they can lie, stir up trouble and smack their greasy lips at all the chaos they can cause. By the way, if anyone is going after the two of them, what is the difference between that and O'Reilly's constant call for boycotts of anything with which he disagrees? I don't know about Rush because I choose to save myself the pain from listening to his self-aggrandizing blather. It seems from this side of the fence, that you choose your outrage from a political side and not with much critical thinking.

by dlstephens on 07/17/2008 04:55:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No sooner typed... (none / 0)

First player up to bat, sent back to the minors...

Doncha hate it just a little when you're this right?

Before anyone tells us different, it was a Clinton appointee who made this somewhat baffling but not unexpected ruling.

by MedfordTim on 07/17/2008 05:50:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Congratulations! (none / 0)
You must be the last remaining Darrin Stephens, the one who managed to avoid succumbing to AIDS.
darrins


“There is also another right which is being trampled here that we don't hear about which habeas could solve: the right to be presumed innocent until found guilty. Most certainly there are terrorist fighters among the detainees, as sure as there are people who were caught in a very wide cast net. Unfortunately, holding people for 5+ years without really caring who they are or why they were picked up in the first place doesn't do much to further our cause of justice, democracy and peace.”
We only have 400 dog kennel cages in Gitmo. There is only enough room for detainees with potential intelligence value, so we constantly recycle the captives, sending many back to the Middle East, so they can kill again.

Marines and soldiers are not trained as CSI detectives, gathering eyewitness testimony and forensics on the battlefield, in the middle of a war, so we can give jury trials and constitutional rights to foreign saboteurs who have never set foot on American soil.

I researched the reason that Nazi POWs or Korean POWs or Vietnamese POWs or even Confederate POWs were never given habeas and jury trials, and learned that Americans thought that was a really stupid idea.
Fortunately we have a practical workaround to Boumediene. All future detainees will be held and “interrogated” by the host countries of Iraq and Afghanistan. American troops will simply draw a perimeter around the POW camp to prevent any jailbreaks.

 “As to taking down Fox, if Greenwald is doing this (I couldn't find a cite for it) it's not because they present the news with a conservative bent; it's because they present the news with a truthiness bent.”
FoxNews has the constitutional right to present information, or even misinformation, with a political slant. It’s called free speech. It’s what you do with every post, when you spread your lies and propaganda in support of the liberal cause.

by KenTX on 07/19/2008 05:08:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
So thats how you are gonna play it? (none / 0)

You are just going to pretend O'Reilly and Fox did not start a petition to force Olbermann off the air?

Nice hypocrisy.

This is exactly why everyone mocks you.

by ProfRich on 07/17/2008 11:15:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Rich, look at me. (none / 0)
I want to make sure you understand what I'm about to tell you, and I want to make sure everybody else hears what I have to say.

If you really believe the "O'Reilly-Olbermann Feud" is anything more than a running gag for the sake of performance art and ratings enhancement, then you are even stupider than I thought. These two guys are like professional wrestlers, talking phony smack prior to the phony grudge match. Their handlers probably maintain ongoing dialogue, so they can choreograph the exchange each night.

As usual, the only person who doesn't get the joke is you. If you watched both O'Reilly and Olbermann, you would understand what's going on.

by KenTX on 07/18/2008 12:41:50 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Conservative "humor" (none / 1)

So when O'Reilly tries to force a guy off the air thems just jokes.

When Glenn Greenwald makes a plea to stop fake news he speaks for every liberal and is a brutal dictator who is a major danger for free speech.

Whatever, man.

Here are two giant problems with your sad little dodge.

The petition was a real live petition they got people to sign.  It wasn't just a joke.  Was O'Reilly mocking his own viewers and supporters by pushing them to sign this travesty?  Is he that disrespectful to you and your zombiefied ilk?

The address published in the paper was really Olbermann's address.  I suppose if it was a big joke and they ran a fake address that might be funny in that Republican "isn't it funny how nasty we are" way. But no, these jack-booted thugs published Keith's actual address and put Keith and his friends and family in real live actual danger from their soldiers who are daily indonctrinated to hate the man.

I understand that you are a conservative.  So constantly reiterating how awful and evil and destructive to your way of life a man is and then giving your impressionable followers  directions to his house is somehow a joke or prank or game or something.  But its not.  Its deranged and hateful.

I guess you had to post some weak ass response since I was hounding you and it was totally cutting the legs out from under your point.  But this was extremely pathetic.

So just to hurry things to their inevitable conclusion, did you play any sports in high school?

by ProfRich on 07/18/2008 01:29:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]
A lot of desperate words (none / 0)
From a loser who just got his ass kicked by a YouTube clip. I love YouTube. It nails you lying sacks every goddam time.

by KenTX on 07/18/2008 03:06:39 AM EST

[ Parent ]
SUCK MY DICK! (none / 0)
Good morning douchebag.
KenTX,

SUCK MY DICK!

ha ha

by BENS MISSING GOATEE on 07/18/2008 06:54:49 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Chocolate Rain. Ken feels the pain. (none / 0)
A moron will never say, "I'm a moron."  But he WILL often say, "I was just kidding!"  Ken Topping and Bill O'Reilly both do this a lot, but the rest of us know the difference.

by OneHitKill on 07/18/2008 08:51:21 AM EST

[ Parent ]

I got an e-mail inviting me to "Meet The Bloggers"... | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 hidden)