Gay Patriot Header Image

Required Reading at the DNC

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 1:54 am - September 19, 2005.
Filed under: Liberals

Apparently, this book is not only one of Chairman Dean’s favorites, but it’s also been seen on the nightstands of Arianna Huffington, Michael Moore, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid and Dick Durbin.

Share

19 Comments

  1. Are you sure it’s not anything written by Karl Marx, preferably “The Communist Manifesto?”

    Comment by The Party Crasher — September 19, 2005 @ 2:25 am - September 19, 2005

  2. TPC-

    Too intellectual. It uses all those big words.

    Comment by Clint — September 19, 2005 @ 5:28 am - September 19, 2005

  3. Clint, youre right. They are proving they are nothing more than back-biting communists by trying to undermine the best President ever.

    Comment by Joey Petain — September 19, 2005 @ 6:08 am - September 19, 2005

  4. I agree with #3 on all counts. An astute observation, Joey.

    Comment by Veritas — September 19, 2005 @ 10:07 am - September 19, 2005

  5. What book is on Bush’s nightstand? Exactly…What book? There isn’t one. It still hasn’t been determined if he can read.

    And Joey, you must be young. Anyone who has read ANY American History would never call him “the best President ever.” When Clinton was in office, he wasn’t perfect, but it was the Republican witch hunt that was after him and spent millions of OUR tax dollars trying to get him impeached from office because he had a blow job.

    A blow job.

    I say that’s none of my damn business. I don’t want the government in my bedroom telling me what is legal and not legal to do with my partner nor why I should or shouldn’t do it. I also don’t want to know what the president is doing with the sex partners of his choice. And I REALLY don’t want to spend over $50,000,000 tax dollars to prosecute him for oral sex (Mr. Starr).

    So, Joey, how do you feel about Bush’s cocaine usage and drunk driving in his past? How do you feel about his party-girl daughters puking out of limo windows in NYC or his nephew being arrested for drunk and disorderly and resisting arrest, shouting, “Do you know who I am?” in Austin, TX a few days ago? Looks like the ‘moral fiber’ of his family is coming apart.

    And one more thing, why last year after hurricane Ivan was he being photographed in Florida with his brother, Jeb, (in a sickening photo-op) handing out bottles of water the DAY AFTER the storm, but he could only fly over New Orleans 4 days later gazing out of Air Force One’s window? Easy. 2005 is not an election year and he already got what he wanted.

    Comment by Lawrence Bell — September 19, 2005 @ 4:54 pm - September 19, 2005

  6. Lawrence, it’s been well-documented how much the president reads. It’s too bad you’re locked into your left-wing vision of the word to see the man for what he is. And once again, you repeat the charge about Bush’s cocaine usage, one which has been frequently made, but never substantiated.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — September 19, 2005 @ 5:07 pm - September 19, 2005

  7. I notice you didn’t say anything about when he ran over the bush (sic) in Texas while he was drunk behind the wheel. And you’d think that an Ivy League graduate (with a degree each from Yale and Harvard, I believe) would be able to use the English language.

    It’s too bad that you blindly trust an idiot with men behind the curtain pulling all the strings and telling him what to do and when. No matter. The truth will come out. It’s the beginning of the end for your lot.

    Anyone who has studied political history realizes that it’s like a pendulum swing. We’ve crested, once again, on your side. Soon enough, it’ll be cresting on ours. Maybe when it does, we’ll finally be able to marry who we want. That’s a battle that’s going to be lost for ‘Bushie’ (yer doin’ a hell-of-a job, Bushie!), although it’ll be a little while. Definitely when he’s out of office. I know it’ll be scary for you – finally having legitimacy to your relationships. You’ll get used to it though. But alas, for now, you’ll just have to have a small ceremony by a gay-friendly pastor and none of the recognition and tax breaks, let alone immigration rights.

    Just because 1/3 of the world is christian (sic) doesn’t give them the right to tell the other 2/3′s what to do. Christianity is dropping in numbers and there’s more Muslims and Hindus in the world and neither of their religions is dropping in numbers

    http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm

    Wake up and realize that there’s a world out there America. Barely 20% (a generous estimate) of you own passports (or USE them to travel). What makes you think that you know what’s best for everyone when you’ve been nowhere and seen nothing?

    http://www.gyford.com/phil/writing/2003/01/31/how_many_america.php

    http://weblogs.jupiterresearch.com/analysts/clarkson/archives/2005/08/national_passpo_1.html

    Comment by 1whocares — September 19, 2005 @ 5:35 pm - September 19, 2005

  8. I say that’s none of my damn business.

    And lord BJ looked you and I square in the eye, waggled his finger and told us so.

    I don’t want the government in my bedroom telling me what is legal and not legal to do with my partner nor why I should or shouldn’t do it.

    Problem is, it wasn’t in HIS bedroom. It was in the office that you and I pay for. If you were doing your partner in your office at work, would you tell your boss that it’s none of his damn business?

    I also don’t want to know what the president is doing with the sex partners of his choice. And I REALLY don’t want to spend over $50,000,000 tax dollars to prosecute him for oral sex (Mr. Starr).

    How about perjury before a Grand Jury, obstruction of justice etc. Is that out of bounds? I guess it is if you have a “D” after your name.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 19, 2005 @ 5:50 pm - September 19, 2005

  9. Actually, if Clinton had come clean at the beginning of the investigation instead of stonewalling it every step of the way, it wouldn’t have cost $50 M to investigate.

    Comment by V the K — September 19, 2005 @ 6:14 pm - September 19, 2005

  10. I don’t care where he was when he was with Monica. As far as the Grand Jury and obstruction of justice, it NEVER should have gone to court. That’s where you’re wrong. Completely wrong.

    What’s worse? A private session of oral sex in the Oval Office (which involved no one except Bill & Monica) or using vulgar, four-letter words in the Senate? C’mon, TGC. It obviously didn’t affect his decisions as President. If fact, he was probably a lot more relaxed than the current prez.

    Comment by 1whocares — September 19, 2005 @ 6:15 pm - September 19, 2005

  11. and VTK, I agree 100% with you that he should have come clean. However, it was not a trial about National Security that required that amount of media attention, money, etc. And it wouldn’t have come to that either if Ken Starr wouldn’t have whipped the witch-hunters into a frenzy. Remember the Starr Report? That’s a good read….

    Comment by 1whocares — September 19, 2005 @ 6:17 pm - September 19, 2005

  12. What’s worse? A private session of oral sex in the Oval Office (which involved no one except Bill & Monica) or using vulgar, four-letter words in the Senate?

    Well, since Dick Cheney’s wasn’t just using someone as a disposable object for his personal gratification and didn’t subsequently lie about it…

    Comment by V the K — September 19, 2005 @ 6:49 pm - September 19, 2005

  13. Back in 1996, I told friends that Clinton would settle the Paula Jones suit before Christmas. Had he heeded my advice, there would have been no investigation, no need to subpoena Ms. Lewinsky and former President Gore would now be in his eighth month of retirement.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — September 19, 2005 @ 6:54 pm - September 19, 2005

  14. Joey, while I certainly admire and support President Bush, history will have to judge whether he deserves to be called the best president ever. It’s premature to compare him to, for example, Abraham Lincoln when he’s not even half way through his second term. Although there’s no shortage of back-biting communists on the left.

    Comment by Conservative Guy — September 19, 2005 @ 10:29 pm - September 19, 2005

  15. I worked with someone (can’t say who) that was friends with Monica. She came to visit backstage once after the show to see her friend while I was working. I had a discussion with her friend who worked on the show with me and I was told that Monica was pissed that she wasn’t going to be the next Mrs. Clinton. I’ve been under the impression for years that she was a social climber that got what she wanted (to be used – even I enjoy that from time to time) but after she got what she wanted she didn’t get what she wanted. If I recall correctly, SHE wasn’t the one that blew it all wide open. Either way, I might have done the same thing – Bill was much hotter than W is and has a MUCH better personality. The difference is, Monica, I wouldn’t blab. First of all, I’m afraid of Hil.

    Comment by bwaybaby — September 19, 2005 @ 11:21 pm - September 19, 2005

  16. I agree with GayPatriotWest, but I think that Gore would be in his second term. Especially if the votes were re-counted in FL (wait, and OH, too) and there was a paper trail for voters. I asked one of the heads of one of the largest Unions in the country why there is not a paper trail in our voting system. He was told that it was “too expensive” to retrofit printers. Now, I used to bartend. Even years ago, all you had to do was plug in a $50-$100 bar printer into the computer and voilá. Paper trail. Jimmy Carter (as a diplomatic opserver) said that Honduras’ voting system was completely electronic, completely democratic and everyone had a record of how they voted. Wonder why they can’t do that here????

    Comment by bwaybaby — September 19, 2005 @ 11:27 pm - September 19, 2005

  17. If the left is so concerned with “paper trails” and “protecting the integritry of the voting process,” why are they so opposed to requiring photo ID to vote?

    Comment by V the K — September 20, 2005 @ 1:43 pm - September 20, 2005

  18. I believe they’re opposed to requiring photo ID to vote because the Repubs want people to pay for it. Former prez Jimmy Carter and an ex-Repub speaker of the house(?not sure) worked together on a free voter ID card bill that is currently under review by GWB.

    Comment by njmm — September 20, 2005 @ 5:19 pm - September 20, 2005

  19. I believe its because Democrats know that photo ID will make it harder for them to commit fraud.

    Comment by V the K — September 23, 2005 @ 1:45 pm - September 23, 2005

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.