[tie]

Originally Posted by PacHead

The left has turned into a bunch of vile, mean spirited people. Way to go, piss on a funeral, that's apparently normal behavior for the left. They have no decency, no respect for others and no class, they are pure garbage. It would never even cross my mind to pull such a stunt at any funeral, I am a civilized person afterall.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

So? I won't be here. And I have no kids. Like I was saying....I plan on living like there's no tomorrow. You guys can save the world if you want, but you'll be doing it without me. Tell ya what. Just work extra hard so you can make up for what I'm not doing.

hmm

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by BlueSky

Don't even.
No amount of spin will ever.

Plus, there's nothing more dangerous than a confident idiot.

I failed High School geometry three semesters in a row. Until I GOT it. And then I was eager to do my geometry homework and take tests and volunteered to do examples at the chalkboard.

The dungeon you have relegated him to may work for you on some level but he just keeps showing he's outgrown it, if he ever belonged there in the first place.

It's now up to you to extend him the benefit of your inestimable wit and compassion that you've shown so many of us, in so many times, ways and places.

Or you can just carry on and we'll still enjoy your posts.

Even though you might be wrong.

That's ok.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Former President Jimmy Carter later swung at Bush as well, not once but twice. As he talked about the Kings, he said: "It was difficult for them then personally with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated as they became the target of secret government wiretaps." The crowd cheered as Bush, under fire for a secret wiretapping program he ordered after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, again smiled weakly.

Another in the long line of shameless Democrats trying to pin on a Republican something they were hopelessly guilty of themselves. Someone should send Carter the timeline here, it’s another of those “Nixon sent me to Cambodia in December 1968” moments that just leaves you flabbergasted and questioning if Democrats truly are that stupid?

None other than JFK and Lyndon Johnson wiretapped MLK and his family. Bobby Kennedy authorized them. It’s clear the phony Civil Rights record whitewash of the Democrats is so secure in his mind, that an idiot like Carter doesn’t even realize the ridiculousness of even daring to go near the subject of wiretapping MLK with a 5,000 foot pole! The bizarreness is compounded by the fact that the fat slob brother of those behind it, it is sitting just yards away pretending that wiretapping al Qaeda phone calls in any way compares.

Positively in-freakin’ credible! Only in the bizzaro, assbackward, inept world of Democrat Party politics!

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by BRussell

You all are just too used to the Bush presidency of insulation, with free speech zones and hand-picked audiences. I remember when Elie Weisel let Clinton have it about Bosnia at the solemn occasion of the opening of the holocaust museum. I thought it was moral and took courage and couldn't care less that Clinton might have squirmed a bit. Perhaps it's just one of the differences between liberals and conservatives.

If Bush had taken the opportunity to make political comments defending his use of his c-in-c powers, you would have been up in arms. But when Carter attacks them, you defend Carter. This is just political. You like Carter because he preaches to the converted whether or not it hurts his party. In the mean time, the rest of the country squirms.

By the way, Ted Kennedy's eulogy was wholly appropriate. It's pretty bad when Teddy is the adult in the room. But of course, if you want Carter to be your spokesperson, that's (so to speak) your funeral.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Kevin

"We know now that there were no weapons of mass destruction over there,"

No, we don't know EITHER WAY. There is NO PROOF either way that claims otherwise.

Such statements are dishonest.

With that logic, how many years will it take for you to admit defeat? 5? 10? 50?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by tie

LOL. Are you for real? Anyway, keep it, v. funny.

LOL! OMG! I AMZ!

We know they existed. They is not in question.

What we don't know, is what happened to them. No one knows.

So tell the class how anyone could no there was none FACTUALLY?

It's impossible.

We can GUESS that there was none. We can HAVE AN IDEA, that there wasn't any.

But there are no facts in the matter.

And that sir, is just being honest.

Originally Posted by Busemann

With that logic, how many years will it take for you to admit defeat? 5? 10? 50?

Defeat? How silly. And what logic? Actual common sense?

Tell me how anything I said was untrue.

I'd LOVE to hear it.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by Busemann

With that logic, how many years will it take for you to admit defeat? 5? 10? 50?

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=283481

Ya must have missed this?

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Y3a

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=283481

Ya must have missed this?

Only one way to find out. Invade Syria!1

[Kevin]

Saddam had the power at any time to stop it. People keep forgetting this.

Let me tell a story.
Mark walked into his neighbor's living room to return a wrench he borrowed from John. He saw a Candy bar laying on John's desk, and commented how he wan't supposed to have said candy bar, that his wife Marge would be pissed.

So Mark goes back home where his wife Jane, and his friend John's wife Marge was making pies. Mark tattles on John and tells Marge there was a candy bar on John's desk when he went over there.

Marge of course was finger snappin pissed, runs over to confront John and give him a few bitchslaps for hiding candy behind her back. But when she gets there, John had already gotten rid of the evidence by hiding the candy in a place Marge can't seem to find.

So she concludes that Mark was lying, and was just a trouble maker. He was probably trying to break them apart so he could drill her oil well.

She was convinced said candy bar did not exist! I mean HOW COULD IT HAVE!? It wasn't there!

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Saddam had the power at any time to stop it. People keep forgetting this.

If he had told the world he had no WMD's, or the fact that their forces was pretty much useless, it would be an open invitation to Iran. People keep forgetting this.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Busemann

If he had told the world he had no WMD's, or the fact that their forces was pretty much useless, it would be an open invitation to Iran. People keep forgetting this.

How much for that magic crystal ball you got there?

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

If Bush had taken the opportunity to make political comments defending his use of his c-in-c powers, you would have been up in arms. But when Carter attacks them, you defend Carter. This is just political. You like Carter because he preaches to the converted whether or not it hurts his party. In the mean time, the rest of the country squirms.

Because it would have been utterly inappropriate for Bush to talk about something that had nothing to do with King, while it was completely appropriate for Carter to mention that the Kings were spied on by the FBI. And as Crash points out, it was during a Democratic administration that King was spied on, and Carter certainly never mentioned Bush, and Bush is only spying on terrorists, right? So how was that a jab at Bush anyway, unless one has a guilty conscience, hmm?

Conservatives are always going to find something to pretend to be outraged about. It's just what you do. A couple of indirect jabs at a conservative president during the funeral of a liberal political activist is the least of things that will set you off. Don't look to liberals to stop you from being "outraged," trying looking inward.

[Y3a]

It MORE demonstrates the stupidity of the leftists and former (and WORST) democratic president.
Carter was such a bufoon that for the next 3 terms you had Repub's. Then they voted in another horrid embarrassment in Clinton. the mistake was to let them talk.

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Another in the long line of shameless Democrats trying to pin on a Republican something they were hopelessly guilty of themselves. Someone should send Carter the timeline here, it’s another of those “Nixon sent me to Cambodia in December 1968” moments that just leaves you flabbergasted and questioning if Democrats truly are that stupid?

There was nothing in Carter's statement that placed any blame on any Republicans. Read it again. He stated a fact - that King and his wife were wiretapped secretly by the government. The fact that it's relevant to the current president's behavior doesn't mean Carter was trying to say that the past behavior was also caused by Republicans.

BRussell is right - freaking out about what Carter said is nothing more than a guilty conscious on the part of conservatives. Only Lowery's comments were a direct jab at Bush.

[deedar]

Originally Posted by BRussell

King (her and her husband) were entirely political individuals. To not talk about politics would be like not mentioning sports at the funeral of an athlete. So Bushie squirms a bit. He can take it.

Can't he?

Well put, BR, well put.

[Kevin]

Actually not well put. it was not only childish, but also irrelevent.

If they wanted to talk about the King's political involvements then it would be relevent.

Attacking someone that said day isn't about at such a time, is just poor taste, lack of respect, and just all out poilitical zealotry

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Tell me how anything I said was untrue.

I'd LOVE to hear it.

There are no WMD's in Iraq, and the intelligence was wrong. The search has been over for about a year already. Therefore, it's silly to blame people of dishonesty when they say there are no WMD's in Iraq.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Actually not well put.

I agree with deedar.

[deedar]

Originally Posted by BRussell

I agree with deedar.

Me too!!!

[Sky Captain]

Justifying politicising a funeral. Sick.
Just like the Wellstone funeral.

If GWB had made a political speech, the left would be up in arms over it.

Complete partisan hippocracy. Nothing more.

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

Complete partisan hippocracy. Nothing more.

"Hippocracy"? Would that be a government of political hippos? Hmmm...

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

There was nothing in Carter's statement that placed any blame on any Republicans. Read it again. He stated a fact - that King and his wife were wiretapped secretly by the government. The fact that it's relevant to the current president's behavior doesn't mean Carter was trying to say that the past behavior was also caused by Republicans.

BRussell is right - freaking out about what Carter said is nothing more than a guilty conscious on the part of conservatives. Only Lowery's comments were a direct jab at Bush.

There’s nothing related about using wiretaps against al Qaeda conversations to foil future terror attacks vs. Democrats using illegal wiretaps against American citizens and Civil Rights activists with not a shred of national security or law enforcement interest involved. It was purely a shameless vendetta, and the absolute pinnacle of illegality. The fact that Democrats can’t fathom the immense gulf of difference between the two, just further illustrates how clueless they are, and why they will continue to lose ground.

Carter might have been able to bring the subject up if only to personally APPLOGIZE for his own party’s shameless treatment of the Kings and other Civil Rights leaders, but get real. He didn’t apologize; he brought up wiretapping to try and tie it in with Bush spying on al Qaeda, (something that has nothing what-so-ever to do with honoring King’s wife) and he purposefully made no mention of his own party –those falsely heralded as civil rights champions- being responsible for it.

The attempted comparison is ridiculous on multiple levels- Civil Rights leaders weren’t threats to the US and were within their rights to demand their rights without being spied on by Democrats, just as spying on terrorists isn’t a Civil Rights issue, and anyone involved with al Qaeda and the like has no right to claim it is. That Dems are too clueless to get this, is just another nail in their own coffin. Can’t say as I really care that the Dems are self-destructing with idiocy like this. Chalk up another ‘Wellstone’ moment.

[Gee-Man]

That's quite a rant.

Your central premise (we're exclusively spying on terrorists) is highly disputed though. At the time, the government thought spying on American citizens and civil rights activists WAS in the interest of national security or law enforcement. Only history has proven how wrong they were, just as I believe history will prove how wrong the current administration is today for spying on ordinary Americans (not terrorists) with similar justifications. There's always a good reason or an excuse handy for this bad behavior.

As for Wellstone, the only people who are still outraged over that one are hardcore right-wingers. Everybody else just shrugged their shoulders and wonders what the big deal is. Wellstone was a liberal politician - his friends got together to celebrate what he believed in. I don't think there's anything wrong with that - when a prominent conservative dies, you guys can line up to celebrate his politics all day long and you won't hear any complaints from me. It's just not that big a deal, really.

Here's a shocker - sometimes, people with similar points of view get together and commiserate with each other by talking about the things they all agree on. Even at funerals.

[Spliffdaddy]

Huh?

I've never been to a funeral like that.

And I bet you haven't either.

Typically, the life of the deceased is discussed.

[olePigeon]

The Conservatives are exploiting the funeral just as much as the Liberals. Give it a rest.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

The Conservatives are exploiting the funeral just as much as the Liberals. Give it a rest.

Not true. The Liberals pissed on a funeral and every sane person in the world is condemning their lack of manners and even their respect for the dead. What a joke the liberals are, no class at all those people.

[Gee-Man]

Pssst - I've got a secret. You might want to hold onto something, this one's big...

Coretta Scott King was a liberal (GASP!). You know what else? Her husband was too. (HUH!??!?!)

And the truth is, "every sane person in the world" who heard about this faux outrage is actually wondering why some people can get so worked up about a couple of liberals bringing up liberal issues at the funeral of a liberal activist.

Oh, it's a joke all right - just not the way you think it is.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Your central premise (we're exclusively spying on terrorists) is highly disputed though.

Yes, because of course everyone has endless time and resources to waste spying on Joe Blow. And as you completely missed the point, the whole subject has precisely NOTHING to do with memorializing Corretta Scott King.

Coretta Scott King was a liberal (GASP!). You know what else? Her husband was too. (HUH!??!?!)

Translation: They were liberals, and nothing more. All liberals have no class and never know when cheap, self-serving political shots are inappropriate. Therefore no one should question liberals looking to score cheap political points at the expense of other liberals (and nothing more), because that’s just what liberals do!

Pfft!

Actually, I give MLK and probably his wife as well credit for having had far more dignity and class than the self-serving far-left wack jobs that have derailed the Democrat Party of late.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by BRussell

Because it would have been utterly inappropriate for Bush to talk about something that had nothing to do with King, while it was completely appropriate for Carter to mention that the Kings were spied on by the FBI. And as Crash points out, it was during a Democratic administration that King was spied on, and Carter certainly never mentioned Bush, and Bush is only spying on terrorists, right? So how was that a jab at Bush anyway, unless one has a guilty conscience, hmm?

Conservatives are always going to find something to pretend to be outraged about. It's just what you do. A couple of indirect jabs at a conservative president during the funeral of a liberal political activist is the least of things that will set you off. Don't look to liberals to stop you from being "outraged," trying looking inward.

Wait: how could they have been "indirect jabs" if Carter didn't make jabs at Bush? Is this your guilty concience speaking, or was what Carter doing a lot more obvious than you care to admit?

Of course you like what Carter did. He was preaching to the converted. The problem is, a funeral is a moment to bring people together, and let us all pause together to reflect and appreciate the person departed. If you want the King legacy to only mean something to liberals, then by all means spit on conservatives who come to show their respects. But don't expect agreement with your divisiveness. What you are celebrating was public rudeness, nothing more. That just makes Democrats look bad and uncouth.

Not only does this demonstrate the political cluelessness of Carter (and note, other liberals, such as Ted Kennedy gave perfectly appropriate eulogies), it also illustrates Carter's personal unpleasantness.

There is an interesting dynamic among the former presidents. They usually like one another personally. They have a common bond that it understandable. It usually trancends partisanship. Witness Clinton's relationship with for former president Bush, and with the current president. But not Carter. They just don't get along. As a matter of fact, I know several people who have worked for Carter, and not one has ever shared a pleasant recollection of the man's personality. In fact, the only stories I have heard are less than flattering about what he was like to know. Carter carefully tries to project a nice guy image, but it is fake. He's just not a nice person, and the older it gets, the more it shows. He also has poor judgment. This is the man who kissed Leonid Brezhnev, and who hurt his candidate in the last election by inviding Michael Moore to sit next to him at the convention. He's embarrassing, and bad for your party, but he's your man, I guess.

[Pendergast]

You guys take the "fun" out of "funeral" for sure...

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Busemann

There are no WMD's in Iraq, and the intelligence was wrong. The search has been over for about a year already. Therefore, it's silly to blame people of dishonesty when they say there are no WMD's in Iraq.

Busemann you simply ignored my whole point, and repeated the rhetoric I just knocked down is said post.

Congratulations!

Originally Posted by olePigeon

The Conservatives are exploiting the funeral just as much as the Liberals. Give it a rest.

Difference is, they waited till after it was over. And if it wasn't for the left making an ass out of themselves in the first place, they wouldn't have anything to exploit.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

Not only does this demonstrate the political cluelessness of Carter (and note, other liberals, such as Ted Kennedy gave perfectly appropriate eulogies), it also illustrates Carter's personal unpleasantness.

There is an interesting dynamic among the former presidents. They usually like one another personally. They have a common bond that it understandable. It usually trancends partisanship. Witness Clinton's relationship with for former president Bush, and with the current president. But not Carter. They just don't get along. As a matter of fact, I know several people who have worked for Carter, and not one has ever shared a pleasant recollection of the man's personality. In fact, the only stories I have heard are less than flattering about what he was like to know. Carter carefully tries to project a nice guy image, but it is fake. He's just not a nice person, and the older it gets, the more it shows. He also has poor judgment. This is the man who kissed Leonid Brezhnev, and who hurt his candidate in the last election by inviding Michael Moore to sit next to him at the convention. He's embarrassing, and bad for your party, but he's your man, I guess.

So Carter is a bad person, a deeply, troublingly bad person. I'll leave the amateur psychology to you, but I want you to tell me with a straight face that you're really concerned that civil-rights-oriented political statements were made at a civil-rights activists' funeral.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by PacHead

Not true. The Liberals pissed on a funeral and every sane person in the world is condemning their lack of manners and even their respect for the dead. What a joke the liberals are, no class at all those people.

Two people hardly accounts for "all the liberals," and it wasn't entirely ill-placed. Rather than a rally I think it would've been more somber, but I think having former presidents there really riled people up. Did her friends and family seem bothered by the statements? Sounded like to me they were supportive. It's a reminder that even after Coretta and Dr. King's lifetime commitment and self sacrifice to racial and gender equality, that we're still fighting the same cause under different political guises.

CRASH HARDDRIVE had a very important and very valid point. The Democrats are just as guilty as any Republican. However, this was a criticism of personal belief and not necissarily party affiliation. It's easy to group Conservatives with Republicans and Liberals with Democrats as they often share the same ideas.

The irony is somewhat amusing with the Conservatives criticizing people making civil rights statements at Coretta's funeral. The same people who quite litterally pissed on Coretta and Dr. King are complaining about liberals figuritively pissing on Coretta's grave.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Two people hardly accounts for "all the liberals," and it wasn't entirely ill-placed. Rather than a rally I think it would've been more somber, but I think having former presidents there really riled people up. Did her friends and family seem bothered by the statements? Sounded like to me they were supportive. It's a reminder that even after Coretta and Dr. King's lifetime commitment and self sacrifice to racial and gender equality, that we're still fighting the same cause under different political guises.

CRASH HARDDRIVE had a very important and very valid point. The Democrats are just as guilty as any Republican. However, this was a criticism of personal belief and not necissarily party affiliation. It's easy to group Conservatives with Republicans and Liberals with Democrats as they often share the same ideas.

The irony is somewhat amusing with the Conservatives criticizing people making civil rights statements at Coretta's funeral. The same people who quite litterally pissed on Coretta and Dr. King are complaining about liberals figuritively pissing on Coretta's grave.

The irony of your post (to me, anyway) is that you start it by saying "Two people hardly accounts for "all the liberals."

And then you make the same error you cited HIM for.

I supported Dr. King and the movement. I am a conservative Republican. I'm complaining about liberals figuratively pissing on her grave.

Here let me give you "some."

Now you can say, "Some of the same people who quite literally pissed on..."

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by BRussell

So Carter is a bad person, a deeply, troublingly bad person. I'll leave the amateur psychology to you, but I want you to tell me with a straight face that you're really concerned that civil-rights-oriented political statements were made at a civil-rights activists' funeral.

It seems to me SOMEONE didn't watch, hear or read all of the pertinent funeral speeches, eulogies or pot-shots.

The utterances brazenly spilled out all over most any and various subjects depending on the spewer's bent. It was a free fire zone and the shooters went hog wild.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by BRussell

So Carter is a bad person, a deeply, troublingly bad person. I'll leave the amateur psychology to you, but I want you to tell me with a straight face that you're really concerned that civil-rights-oriented political statements were made at a civil-rights activists' funeral.

Carter WAS a bad president, and hardly a 'leader' as he should have been. He was great at wimping out, knuckling under, and being wishy-washy. Under his relm, our country went thru one embarrasment to another. He became the laughing stock of the middle-east with his Iranian problem, and his lack of dealing with it, and politically, letting Reagan bring 'em home as part of Carter leaving office really put the icing on the cake. Sitting in the White House with the thermostat turned down, and him in is stupid sweater made him look like a wimp. I lived thru those times and he helped us to be less proud to be Americans. The Liberals still want us to be embarrased to be Americans. It's important to ask WHY.

[Monique]

If it was not going to be political, Bush should not have showed up. Of course, it was going to become a battle and Dr. King and Mrs. King would have approved. They were fighters for a good cause. Kennedy did not approve of wiretapping but Hoover did it without anybody's permission as the Conservatives today want it done to their political ennnemies.

Calling Carter a bad President is silly; at least he did not pretend everything was fine with the economy like Reagan, and the 2 Bushes did and are doing right now.

Funerals are not necesseraly a place where we sing kumbaya.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Monique

If it was not going to be political, Bush should not have showed up. Of course, it was going to become a battle and Dr. King and Mrs. King would have approved. They were fighters for a good cause. Kennedy did not approve of wiretapping but Hoover did it without anybody's permission as the Conservatives today want it done to their political ennnemies.

Calling Carter a bad President is silly; at least he did not pretend everything was fine with the economy like Reagan, and the 2 Bushes did and are doing right now.

Funerals are not necesseraly a place where we sing kumbaya.

Monique, are you talking about the President's recently revealed secret wiretap program? Please support your statements with links. Anyone can say whatever they feel like saying if they are not bothered to make sure the statements are fact.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by Monique

Calling Carter a bad President is silly

But it WAS THE TRUTH. Were you even ALIVE during Carters Admin??

[Monique]

Yes I was, I was 17 and I remember the hostages, the long lines for gas, how bad it was for most people except the Republicans which never suffered from anything.

[Spliffdaddy]

lol

Yeah, we had to swap license plates between our cars in order to get gas.

(odd plates one day, even plates the next)

Carter was an absolute failure.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by BRussell

So Carter is a bad person, a deeply, troublingly bad person. I'll leave the amateur psychology to you, but I want you to tell me with a straight face that you're really concerned that civil-rights-oriented political statements were made at a civil-rights activists' funeral.

Carter is a boor, but what I think of him isn't the point. You should be concerned that your party is represented by people who have so much difficulty with simple manners. Remember, you can't win elections just with the most liberal fringe.

[analogika]

I have one thing to say to the original poster:


What the hell did you expect?

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Monique

Yes I was, I was 17 and I remember the hostages, the long lines for gas, how bad it was for most people except the Republicans which never suffered from anything.

Keep it up, you will soon generally be disregarded if you continue making rash, unfounded and/or unsupported statements.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by rparke1

hia

Ok, this is getting obnoxious. Reported.