Free for All: 06/10/09

What’s on your mind?

About these ads

69 Responses to “Free for All: 06/10/09”

  1. stevemg Says:

    Let me bang my spoon again against my highchair.

    Lastest Gallup poll today shows that –

    ‘Ten percent of Republicans name Rush Limbaugh as “the main person who speaks for the Republican Party today.” Ten percent name Gingrich. And nine percent say Cheney. ‘

    Gallup also reports that –
    ‘Seventeen percent of Republicans say no one speaks for the GOP, and 29 percent have no answer. So 46 percent of Republicans surveyed have no answer to the question of who speaks for the GOP, while 10 percent say Rush Limbaugh.’

    E.J. Dionne, Jr. of the Washington Post recently argued that the reason the press is quoting Limbaugh and Gingrich so much is because of their – the press’ – center right bias and perspective.

    I don’t think so, Mr. Dionne.

    Whatever the reason, the evidence is clear once again – very few Republicans see Limbaugh as the leader of the party.

  2. joeremi Says:

    That’s an interesting way to interpret the poll. Another one would be that 29% came up with Limbaugh, Gingrich or Cheney, while 46% threw their hands up. That still leaves those three old white guys as the leading voices of the Republican Party. Didn’t Palin show up there somewhere? If Rush, Newt and Dick are out-polling Sarah, you guys are in deeper than I thought.

  3. stevemg Says:

    ‘Another one would be that 29% came up with Limbaugh, Gingrich or Cheney,’

    Joe, the question being discussed over the past several months or so is whether Limbaugh – not Cheney or Gingrich or Eisenhower or Abe Lincoln – is the leader of the party. The press has been promoting this line – he does – since February or March.

    Polls show no evidence that anything other than a small percentage of Republicans do. And my guess is that that half of that 10 percent did so on name recognition only.

    Fullstop.

    The real story is how splintered and divided the party is and that there isn’t anyone out there viewed as a dominate or leading figure or voice.

    Question – Why doesn’t the press trumpet this story to show how little power Limbaugh actually has over the rank-and-file.

    We know the answer. Hint – it’s not Dionne’s answer.

  4. joeremi Says:

    You’re missing the point. The press is covering that Rush is leading the extreme right wing portion of the party, the only part that remains organized and vocal. The disarray comes within the moderate wing, which is scattered and voiceless.

    The story about the majority having no clue who’s speaking for them is all over MSNBC this morning. It’s an oft-reported narrative that the old white guys are driving the party into a permanent South-only voting block, and that there are alternative voices – see Joe Scarborough – trying to snatch it back from purist ideologues with a messianic conviction of certitude in the face of nobody else caring what they believe.

  5. missy5537 Says:

    Did anyone see Scarborough this am?

    I was flipping around, just as they were finishing trashing Sarah Palin. Scarborough said that she should just go back to Alaska for a few years and lay low, then re-emerge on the national front at some point.

    However, I didn’t hear anything other than that! I can’t imagine that SHE is being disparaged here, after it was Letterman who spoke of her daughter being raped, and that idiot Chuck Nice comparing her to Herpes! Anyone have a video of the whole conversation? I can’t imagine how this was her fault!

  6. joeremi Says:

    Missy, I didn’t see the segment, but this is an argument Scarborough has promoted for some time. He thinks Palin should drop out of site, bone up on national and world affairs, and re-emerge with a more serious persona. I don’t know if he also “trashed” her, but that’s just smart political advice. She’s still the star of a disintegrating party. She should stay out of the trainwreck’s way, then come back as its saviour down the road.

    I personally can’t stand her so I hope she doesn’t take his advice…but she should.

  7. unclearthur Says:

    Whatever the reason, the evidence is clear once again – very few Republicans see Limbaugh as the leader of the party.

    Or another way of saying this is that Rush Limbaugh TOPPED everyone else as ‘voice of the GOP’. If it had been an election, he would have won, even with only 13 percent of the vote.

    “A 52% majority of those surveyed couldn’t come up with a name when asked to specify “the main person” who speaks for Republicans today. Of those who could, the top response was radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh (13%), followed in order by former vice president Dick Cheney, Arizona Sen. John McCain and former House speaker Newt Gingrich. Former president George W. Bush ranked fifth, at 3%. “

  8. unclearthur Says:

    He thinks Palin should drop out of site, bone up on national and world affairs, and re-emerge with a more serious persona.

    That presupposes she has the intellectual chops to enact such a reinvention. Personally, I think what we see is what we get.

  9. joeremi Says:

    I said it was good advice…I didn’t say it would work. :)

  10. unclearthur Says:

    Heh.

  11. stevemg Says:

    The press is covering that Rush is leading the extreme right wing portion of the party

    The East German judge gives you a perfect “10” for that double flip flop with a triple gainer.

    Nowhere has the press said that Limbaugh represents a “fringe” element in the party. They’ve been trumpeting the narrative that he’s the leader of the Party (Can a narrative be trumpeted? it can for this post)

    No a segment of it, but all of it.

    And once again polls show no evidence of that.

  12. stevemg Says:

    If it had been an election, he would have won, even with only 13 percent of the vote.

    Would you consider someone elected with 13% of the vote a legitimate leader?

    Of course not.

    And any person elected with 13% of the vote would simply not be able to govern.

    He or she would have to assemble, parliamentary-style, a coalition.

    Meaning, of course, that they weren’t running the party but that they were part of a group running the party.

    Look, it’s clear what you folks on the left are doing. It may work elsewhere but not with me.

  13. joeremi Says:

    Rush is leading the only cohesive version of the party. I don’t care how many registered Republicans you poll saying there’s NO leadership, the actual functioning version of the GOP is the far right sect.

  14. missy5537 Says:

    “…the actual functioning version of the GOP is the far right sect…”

    Sounds good to me!

  15. ‘ the actual functioning version of the GOP is the far right sect.’

    We’ve gone from Limbaugh being the leader of the party to the leader of the extremist element to now the leader of the actual functioning version – whatever that means – of the party.

    Some progress; after all, this is the supposed era of the Progressives.

    Look, it’s clear what the liberal/left is doing; to wit for 20 years Limbaugh has hammered you guys – with some success – and this is your opportunity, as you see it, to hammer him back.

    Politics ain’t beanbag so I’m not defending Limbaugh who, as I’ve said here numerous times, is a crank and loon on far too many issues for my tastes.

    But he simply isn’t the leader of the party since, as we know, the party is in near complete disarray.

    We’re going in circles so I’ll end this from my tailchasing end.

  16. unclearthur Says:

    But he simply isn’t the leader of the party since, as we know, the party is in near complete disarray.

    It’s telling that NO ONE got more than 13% of the vote – not the standard-bearer from the last election or anyone else.

  17. unclearthur Says:

    88-year-old white supremist shoots guard at the Holocaust Memorial Museum, is shot by police.

    I guess if you’re 88 and want to lead a revolution, you’d better hurry up.

  18. unclearthur Says:

    whoops, sounds like he was shot by other security guards, not police.

  19. How CUTE is Eric Cantor? He’s predicting the Republicans have a real shot at taking back the House in 2010. That is just SO adorable!

    I’ll have what he’s having please. LOL!:

    “I really believe we’ve got a shot at taking back this House because you see what’s gone on here with the unfettered ability of this administration and Nancy Pelosi to run this Congress,” Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., the No. 2 Republican in the House, told ABC News in an exclusive interview. “The American people see that this agenda is way far out of the mainstream. They want a check and a balance on this power. And I think at the end of the day that’s what rules come November 2010.”

    A Republican talking about ANYONE else being outside the mainstraim is HILARIOUS!

  20. The Republicans have a better shot at winning back the White House in 2010 than they do of winning back the House.

    What is that? There is not presidential election in 2010? Eh, I still give them better odds on the WH in 2010.

    These people are delusional.

  21. And here’s the answer to how many people mentioned Palin when asked who speaks for the Repuplican Party (via the Plumline):

    “Update: Greg Sargent contacted Gallup and found that just .5% of Republicans say Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin speaks for the party.”

    Ha!

  22. unclearthur Says:

    “Update: Greg Sargent contacted Gallup and found that just .5% of Republicans say Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin speaks for the party.”

    She speaks for the inarticulate wing.

  23. jerziegrl Says:

    There is no post for what happened today at the Hollocaust Museum, so I will post it here.

    Listening to MSNBC, I think it may have been Clint Van Zandt (sp??) who said that these sorts of things are to be expected b/c of the “Obama Effect”. He went on to say that b/c the POTUS is black and he is seeking to bring unity to the world we should expect to see more and more of these occurances in the future.

    I laughed out loud.

  24. unclearthur Says:

    Jerziegirl, I posted at “11:11″ above.

    He went on to say that b/c the POTUS is black and he is seeking to bring unity to the world we should expect to see more and more of these occurances in the future.

    There’s no denying that a certain type of nutcase has been more than usually outraged.

    When do you suppose anyone from Fox will admit that DHS should be warning local law enforcement about crazies who could do this very kind of thing? Oh that’s right – never.

  25. “She speaks for the inarticulate wing.”

    I believe the inarticulate wing of the Republican Party is MUCH larger than 0.5%. Maybe they’re just a bit more selective than we give them credit for. :)

  26. jerziegrl Says:

    Sorry Art, didn’t see your post.

    Wish I knew how to italicize…so I just use quotes

    “Oh that’s right….never”

    Really? That’s what I said? Show me where….prove your point Art, show me. That’s what I thought.

    You can’t show me b/c I never said it! I do believe that DHS should be warning LLE about these nut jobs. Just like they are warning, and have been warning abortion clinics about possible dangers (not jumping on that again with you, it was the only comparision I could think of right now). They SHOULD be warning those who need to be told.

    I fully understand that the nut jobs out there who are racists are incensed by us have a black POTUS. No shocker there. My point was that I laughed out loud b/c now this too gets “credited” to Obama. The nut jobs out there shooting random innocent people are part of the “Obama Effect”. The term itself was laughable, never mind the point behind it. He seemed to be conveying that now that we have this great unifying POTUS who is going to bring peace to the world we should be expecting more and more of these incidences. The Pres. being black, yes I can see that being a cause of some of these types of things, b/c he is such a great global unifier….not so much.

  27. unclearthur Says:

    Really? That’s what I said? Show me where….prove your point Art, show me. That’s what I thought.

    Hello? When did I say YOU said that? I was making a general point – back when the DHS report came out, a PLETHORA of right-wing voices reacted like they personally were targeted. Hannity, Limbaugh, Malkin – all jumped up and demanded Janet Napolitano apologize to THEM PERSONALLY for saying they were terrorists, when a) the report said no such thing and b) the report was done under the Bush Administration.

    I said “When do you suppose…” to mean ‘when does ONE suppose’.

    Touchy.

  28. zonedaiatlas Says:

    Well SMH3477, The way the ultra left wing of the Democrat Party is doing to this country. The American people will want “CHANGE” in congress in 2010, which will be a wake up call for Jimmy Obama. Jimmy Obama knows if the unemployment reaches 10% or more in 2010, he’s done in 2012.

    Here’s the political message for 2012… “WE TOLD YOU SO!”

    Enjoy the crappy cars from Government Motors that no one wants to buy…

  29. unclearthur Says:

    Here’s the political message for 2012… “WE TOLD YOU SO!”

    You mean you don’t have your Impeach Obama bumpersticker yet?

  30. jerziegrl Says:

    oops….I am going to have to correcty myself Art. After posting and then going back and re-reading (should have reversed the order) I realized you said FOX, not me personally. My bad!

    As for FOX admitting it….I never realized they were against it. They have talked on several occasions about different places being warned or put on alert over possible dangers. Never really paid much attention to that, honestly don’t really care. That wasn’t the point of my post.

    Again, sorry for the misread.

  31. zonedaiatlas Says:

    No, I have a “He’s not my Commander in Chief” bumper sticker.

  32. Zone,

    Please keep believing all the BS and bluster you hear from Rush, Hannity and Fox. It’s pathetic. Funny, but still pathetic.

  33. “No, I have a “He’s not my Commander in Chief” bumper sticker.”

    Oh, but he IS your Commander-in-Chief. He was elected with 53% of the national vote and over 365 electoral votes. That’s more than Shrub got in his re-election. And it was a helluva lot more than the stolen 2000 election.

    The truth hurts.

  34. Tomorrow’s stories:

    1) The Obama Justice Department has quietly ordered FBI agents to read Miranda rights to high value detainees captured and held at U.S. detention facilities in Afghanistan, according a senior Republican on the House Intelligence Committee.

    Hmm, candidate Obama promised not to extend such rights.

    2) Ahmadinejad is defeated in the Iranian elections – okay, that’ll be Friday and Saturday’s story.

  35. unclearthur Says:

    Oh, but he IS your Commander-in-Chief.

    Actually, SMH, unless Zone is in the military (which I very much doubt), he’s right. Civilians don’t have commanders.

  36. zonedaiatlas Says:

    Smh3477, Here’s a chart from Congressional Budget Office of Obama’s $10-11 Trillon budget deficits for his term in office. GWB budget deficit is in the gray, Obama’s budget deficit is in the pink, but here’s the actual budget deficit under the Obama Administration…

    http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/03/21/GR2009032100104.gif

    Is that Hope and Change Obama promised to the American People?

    Barack Obama = Jimmy Carter!

    We Told You So! – 2012

  37. smh3477 Says:

    “Actually, SMH, unless Zone is in the military (which I very much doubt), he’s right. Civilians don’t have commanders.”

    I know, but the right LOVES to fetishize the presidency. And if Shrub was THEIR commander-in-chief, then dammit, so is Obama.

  38. stevemg Says:

    I know, but the right LOVES to fetishize the presidency

    Yes, ye olde “I meant to hit my head on the door” line.

  39. joeremi Says:

    Zone, you don’t know crap about American cars and I would appreciate it if you would quit talking people out of supporting.

    Chevrolet:
    Malibu
    Camaro
    Corvette
    Cobalt
    HHR
    Pickups
    soon to be Volt and Cruze

    Caddillac:
    CTS
    soon to be Volt-based Converj

    Buick:
    LaCrosse
    Enclave

    Saturn:
    Astra
    Sky

    Pontiac:
    G8
    G6
    Solstice

    All good cars. Put a lid on it.

  40. jerziegrl Says:

    Hey Art, we posted around each other. My second post was directly after my first, not sure why I thought you meant me. :)

    I thought I got my post in before you did.

  41. unclearthur Says:

    Oh, BTW? The Uighars we’ve been unjustly detaining in Gitmo long after a federal judge ordered them released into the US?

    They finally are getting out. To go to Palau.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/world/10palau.html?_r=1

  42. stevemg Says:

    The Uighars we’ve been unjustly detaining in Gitmo long after a federal judge ordered them released into the US?

    The judge’s order was stayed.

    The reason they weren’t released earlier is because they’re Islamic terrorists and no country was willing to take them. They went to Afghanistan and trained in AQ camps there.

    [Did you ever think to ask? Hmm, what are Chinese Muslims doing in Taliban and AQ controlled Afghanistan?]

    And the Democrats who control Congress wouldn’t allow them entrance here (US immigration laws either apparently).

    I do wish some folks were as critical of Islamic extremists as they are of anti-abortion extremists.

    But that’s’ just me.

  43. smh3477 Says:

    I do wish some folks were as critical of anti-abortion extremists as they are of Islamic extremists.

    Especially since these one are already in our back yard.

    But that’s just me.

  44. stevemg Says:

    Especially since these one are already in our back yard.

    I’m critical of both and believe they should all be watched.

    I hope THE Commander in Chief thinks so too.

  45. unclearthur Says:

    The reason they weren’t released earlier is because they’re Islamic terrorists and no country was willing to take them. They went to Afghanistan and trained in AQ camps there.

    You don’t know as much as you think you know. For instance, your ‘AQ camp’?

    There were no Afghans or Arabs in the village. The village itself was no more than a handful of houses bisected by dirt tracks. Each Petitioner, as well as five Uighurs who would later be determined non-combatants, lived in this village in October, 2001. In return for food and shelter, the Uighur men did odd jobs and manual labor. They helped build houses and a mosque.

    In the village there was a single AK-47 Kalashnikov rifle and a pistol. Sixteen of the eighteen Uighurs (including all Petitioners and all five of the Uighurs later determined to be noncombatants) freely admit that they were shown the Kalashnikov, and how to assemble and disassemble the weapon. Some engaged in target practice. (Akhtar Qassim, later determined not to be an enemy combatant, shot three or four rounds.)”

    Read Hilzoy’s excellent series, which is helpfully indexed here:
    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/uighar_captives_at_gitmo/

  46. unclearthur Says:

    [Did you ever think to ask? Hmm, what are Chinese Muslims doing in Taliban and AQ controlled Afghanistan?]

    From a 2004 FBI report:

    The Uighurs are moderate Muslims who occupied East Turkestan, which was taken over by the Chinese and renamed the Xinjiang province of China. The Uighurs were offered land in Afghanistan in order to gather personnel opposing Chinese oppression. They were often inspired by Radio Free Asia, which [redacted] was often a broadcaster for. The Uighurs considered themselves to be fighting for democracy, and they idolized the United States. Although the Uighurs are Muslim their agenda did not appear to include Islamic radicalism.

    prior to 9/11, we would have supported the Uighur in their fight for religious freedom and autonomy from a communist country. After we accidentally wound up with some of them in our own prison camp system, we had to turn around and agree with a communist dictatorship that these people were ‘terrorists’.

    Honestly, don’t you ever get sick of having to make contorted arguments to justify the Bush regime’s screw-ups?

  47. unclearthur Says:

    The murderer at the Holocaust Museum reportedly hated “neocons, Bush and McCain”

    Hahahaha… you do realize he hated them because they were commie pinkos? ie they weren’t conservative ENOUGH?

  48. stevemg Says:

    you do realize he hated them because they were commie pinkos?

    Of course. It’s the same general view that the anti-abortion zealots have of them. I.e., they’re too “liberal”.

    Which is why the smear that O’Reilly or Beck were somehow culpable in the murder of Tiller, a smear disseminated by Olbermann and other liberal figures, was just that: a smear.

  49. unclearthur Says:

    Of course. It’s the same general view that the anti-abortion zealots have of them. I.e., they’re too “liberal”.

    But that’s not the point the post you linked to was making – SHE was trying to say that because the shooter hated Bush and McCain, he WAS a liberal. Because LIBERALS hate them too. *snort*

  50. stevemg Says:

    Honestly, don’t you ever get sick of having to make contorted arguments to justify the Bush regime’s screw-ups?

    Your insane hatred of all things Bush is, once again, leading you astray.

    I’ll go slow: the Uighurs captured in Afghanistan, who admitted that they trained in terror camps run by AQ, are different than those Uighurs living in China. Just as, for example, those Arab Muslims captured in AQ camps in Afghanistan are different than the Arab Muslims living in Jordan.

    See, not all Uighurs are nice just as not all Muslims or Christians or Buddhists or any other group are nice. The FBI report you simple-mindedly cut-and-paste is referring to those Uighurs living in China not the ones who went to Afghanistan for terror training.

    Again: You do see the difference between Muslims, for example, living in Jordanand those Muslims from Jordan who go to Afghanistan for training by Al-Qaeda? The two are not the same. One is nice; the other is not nice.

    Suggestion: Read the transcripts of those Uighurs who testified as to what they were doing in Afghanistan.

  51. unclearthur Says:

    Here’s another rightie, trying to make the point that LIBERALS, by NOT demonizing all Muslims for 9/11, have made it okay to be anti-semitic:

    “Make no mistake. Muslims created this atmosphere where hatred of the Jews is okay and must be “tolerated” as a legitimate point of view. The shooting today is just yet another manifestation emanating from that viewpoint–another manifestation of the welcome mat that Muslims rolled out for fellow anti-Semites of all stripes to no longer be afraid to come out of the closet,” – Debbie Schlussel, who says that Hot Air isn’t really conservative.

    (Via Andrew Sullivan)

  52. unclearthur Says:

    Suggestion: Read the transcripts of those Uighurs who testified as to what they were doing in Afghanistan.

    The Uighurs who were in Afghanistan were looking for training and support in their fight against CHINA. The ‘training camp’ had ONE AK-47 and ONE pistol. They were shown how to assemble and disassemble it and got to take turns shooting it. You might do as much with your kids at an NRA weekend camp.

    Did you miss this part?

    “Even the Bush administration’s Combatant Status Review Commissions, which were heavily slanted towards the government, found them not to be enemy combatants.”

    If even the Bush administration admitted they were not enemy combatants, why is it so important for you to prove, somehow, that they ARE?

  53. stevemg Says:

    Correction:
    The Uighurs captured in Afghanistan were trained by the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, an affiliated group of Al-Qaeda.

    But they were not trained by AQ.

  54. stevemg Says:

    Let’s remember that the British, the French, the German, the Italians, the Spaniards, the Canadians and every other country in the world has refused to accept these Uighurs prisoners/detainees.

    Along with the Democratically-controlled Congress.

    Ask yourself: Why would all of these countries be wary about accepting these individuals? Why would the brilliant progressives such as Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid refuse to allow them to be sent here?

    From what I have read, the vast majority of Uighurs are peaceful and, indeed, pro-US people who have been oppressed by the Chinese government.

    But the evidence I’ve seen is that these 17 Uighurs may not be so peaceful.

    In any event, the Bush-hating crowd wish to use a standard of judgment that no other Administration in history could be or was ever held to.

    Including the current one.

  55. bigred08 Says:

    Thank God those poor, Al Qaeda trained Uighers that arthur loves so much are finally getting out of Gitmo.

    It’s a good thing everybody loves the U.S. now that Obama’s president, so that he could convince Palau to take them.

    Oh wait….. maybe it was the $200 MILLION IN TAXPAYER MONEY Obama paid Palau off with. I mean, we’re in such great financial shape right now. This is exactly what we should spend 200 MILLION on.

  56. unclearthur Says:

    Let’s remember that the British, the French, the German, the Italians, the Spaniards, the Canadians and every other country in the world has refused to accept these Uighurs prisoners/detainees.

    Oh please. MANY countries have said they would take some non-terrorist detainees IF the US would take some too. But after the scare-mongers got done with the candy-a$$es in Congress, those panty-waists got all ‘ooooh, scary turrorists!’ too.

    Lord, I thought when we got rid of Bush we could get rid of the ‘why do you hate America?’ BS. But I see you guys still think it’s working for you.

  57. unclearthur Says:

    Oh and…

    But the evidence I’ve seen is that these 17 Uighurs may not be so peaceful.

    Please. You have seen NO evidence. If you have, bring it out, because no one else has it.

  58. unclearthur Says:

    And Red? What part of “Even the Bush administration’s Combatant Status Review Commissions, which were heavily slanted towards the government, found them not to be enemy combatants.” don’t you understand?

  59. bigred08 Says:

    If they’re so harmless, why is it no one else would take them???

    Why do we have to pay the country of Palau, $200 MILLION IN TAXPAYER DOLLARS, to take them???

    17 Uighers, for only $!2 MILLION PER TRAINED TERRORIST…..even though they’re completely harmless, according to you.

    Palau’s GDP for all of 2008 was….. $164 million. They surpassed that today with pay-off money from Obama.

    No global economy worries in Palau in 2009.

  60. unclearthur Says:

    If they’re so harmless, why is it no one else would take them???

    Are you purposely NOT reading my replies? No one else would because WE wouldn’t. And the world is getting pi$$ed off at being asked to clean up after OUR mistakes.

  61. unclearthur Says:

    AND ONCE AGAIN. Did you miss the part where a FEDERAL JUDGE ordered them released in the US? NOT imprisoned in the US, RELEASED in the US.

  62. bigred08 Says:

    Art, I know the facts of the case.

    If you’re ok with giving away $200 MILLION in our taxpayer money as a payoff so another country will take them, then just say so.

    It’s beyond ridiculous that Obama did that. They’re now going from one island resort to another. Gitmo isn’t this horrible place you like to make it out to be.

    And the Uighers, while not able to leave the prison, weren’t exactly serving hard-time at Gitmo…..even though they’re trained terrorists by Islamic radicals.

    TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS PER UIGHER. UNREAL.

    How many U.S. jobs could that $200 MILLION have “created or saved”?

  63. unclearthur Says:

    Art, I know the facts of the case.

    You clearly don’t, since you keep insisting these guys are too dangerous to be allowed out.

    If you’re ok with giving away $200 MILLION in our taxpayer money as a payoff so another country will take them, then just say so.

    Uh, you do realize Palau is a former US protectorate that receives considerable US aid ANYWAY and will for the forseeable future?

    Gitmo isn’t this horrible place you like to make it out to be.

    This is hilarious. Gitmo, your vacation paradise.

  64. joeremi Says:

    Gitmo isn’t this horrible place you like to make it out to be.

    The living conditions at Gitmo are beside the point. As long as the US has people there detained indefinitely without legal process, it’s a Gulag. Remind me why we defeated the Soviet Union if we were going to turn around and start acting like them.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 218 other followers

%d bloggers like this: