GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Comments

  2. My guess BoBo: Monica –because Slick Willy’s left hand thumb is pointing up and he looks like he’s going to hurl. What a group of low lifes… particularly Cohen and Berger. Gheez.

  3. Well here’s a photo that pretty much demonstrates Duhbya’s lack of respect for the flag and the country it represents http://tinyurl.com/eaovo This is not the first time – recall when he autographed some flags? Definitely a no-no. If you Repubs ever get your flag desecration amendment passed, Bush may be the first one nailed for flag desecration!

  6. #3 – Ian, you ignorant slut.

    Anytime an amendment is passed to the Constitution, it is not considered retroactive. Congress is usually given a clause in it that allows it “to enforce it by appropriate legislation.” Just ask your siamese twin raj, since he/she/it claims to be a lawyer.

    Therefore, even if Congress and the states were to ratify such a flag-PROTECTION amendment, there’s no way it could be applied retroactively, especially in light of Texas v. Johnson (1989) in which the use of the flag was considered “symbolic speech.”

    Go way in the back and sit down, and don’t raise your hand again unless you have to go to the bathroom.

    Regards,
    Peter Hughes

  10. #9 – Yeah. And: it would be so like lefties to be (or to be caught doing) what they later smear opponents about!

    You know, like when they claim Bush is dumb… then we learn both Gore and Kerry are dumber, by all objective measures. (Kerry doing measurably worse than Bush at Yale; Gore flunking grad school – twice! – while Bush earned a Harvard MBA; etc.)

  11. #10 – Yeah, Cal, and did you know that Algore didn’t just flunk any ordinary grad school, but Yale Divinity College?

    How in the world do you flunk out on God?

    Oh, wait – Algore is a liberal. Liberals and religion don’t mix. My bad.

    Regards,
    Peter Hughes

  12. #6: My the insults are flying today. Obviously, an amendment would not be retroactive and in fact the amendment would not even state that desecration of the flag would be illegal, only that Congress could make it so. Now Bush has been caught in public on at least two occasions with photographs showing him displaying contempt for the Stars and Stripes so it’s likely he’d keep doing it even if a law were passed. Presumably, he’d add a “signing statement” to the effect that if he needed to trample on the flag for national security reasons he’d feel free to do so.

    It also really says a lot about the flag waving Bush apologists: when it comes right down to it allegiance to Bush trumps their allegiance to the flag and, by extension, the country.

  13. There are two problems here, IanRaj:

    — According to you and your fellow leftists, Bush’s actions are NOT desecration of the flag — so you are blaming him for something that you claim isn’t a crime.

    — Your logic is best expressed as follows:

    Now Bush has been caught in public on at least two occasions with photographs showing him displaying contempt for the Stars and Stripes so it’s likely he’d keep doing it even if a law were passed.

    In short, you are claiming that Bush should be condemned now for something you think he will do in the future.

    That, more than anything else, demonstrates the irrational hatred you have for Bush — and why your posts should always be viewed in the light of the fact that your hatred of Bush is the overriding, overwhelming element in them.

  14. #13: “According to you and your fellow leftists, Bush’s actions are NOT desecration of the flag — so you are blaming him for something that you claim isn’t a crime.”

    Poor NDT, your critical thought processes don’t seem to be running on all three cylinders today. Virtually by definition, trampling on the flag – as Bush just did – is desecration of the flag. I just don’t think it should be illegal to do that. You apparently do. I do think it’s disgraceful for the President to do such a thing but I don’t think it should be illegal, even for him.

    “you are claiming that Bush should be condemned now for something you think he will do in the future.”

    Not at all. He’s ALREADY desecrated the flag by trampling on it and he should be condemned for it. But what he did IS currently legal so he obviously can’t be prosecuted for it. In the future though, if authoritarians such as yourself have their way, flag desecration WILL be illegal and Bush will need to add a signing statement to the law to allow him to continue to trample the flag without running afoul of the law.

    BTW, your response is exactly what I expected and you didn’t disappoint: no objection to what Bush did just invective against a mere messenger.

  16. BTW, your response is exactly what I expected and you didn’t disappoint: no objection to what Bush did just invective against a mere messenger.

    That is because, Ian, your point is not against flag desecration; it’s against Bush.

    In short, you are making a dishonest attempt to criticize Bush based on something that you would defend or pass off as irrelevant if someone else did it.

    I personally could care less if Bush steps on a flag carpet; it is a carpet, after all, and it’s meant to be walked upon. Remember, I live in a city where Democrats regularly take real flags and either burn them or hang them upside down; I’ve SEEN real desecration.

    But the interesting thing is — I don’t hear a peep from you or them about it.

  17. Heya guys, Ian/raj/blah the sockpuppet got ya! The topic of the post is Slick Willy and his merry band of incompetents… and the speculation that these morons were once in control of National Security.

    Ian/raj/blah took you guys off the topic onto an anti-Bush spew/vent/spin/distraction ride… and you dropped the dime in the ride.

    Gosh it is so easy for the GayLeft to punch your buttons… no wonder they stick around here and posit large loads of mental poo in your path.

  18. Oh, I know, Matt. 🙂

    It’s just that it’s a one-two punch — I point out how foolish and groundless their complaint is, you point out that it’s a diversion to protect the memory of Clinton.

    In fact, let me give an example that continues to tie leftists up in fits.

    Clinton waited nearly two weeks after the embassy bombings to order missile strikes against bin Laden’s camps in Afghanistan.

    Bumbling Berger and Clueless Clarke claimed that this was because they weren’t close enough to al-Qaeda and had to make sure the targets were real — they knew it was bin Laden right away, but they had to find a place to strike.

    However, it was revealed mere days after the event that the Clinton State Department not only knew where the camps were, but could precisely track people and equipment going in and out of them — and that the camps were being emptied almost immediately following the bombings.

    So why didn’t they strike immediately, when they knew not only that bin Laden was responsible, but where and in what condition his camps were?

  19. “merry band of incompetents”

    the Clinton Hatred goes on and on and on and on…
    Let it go fellas.
    Breath in, Breath out, and realize that your ever irrational ever consuming Clinton Rage is useless.
    Lets work on the incompetence of the current regime so we can at least change something!

  20. 401 K the problem is they were so unserious the whole 8 years. Then when a subsequent President tries to clean up the messes, we get nothing but constant and daily whinning. I’ve asked this before ….list 3 fairly major things the Clinton Admin did in 8 years?

  21. keogh-of-the-lower-case-clan spins: “Lets work on the incompetence of the current regime…”

    LOL, keogh… you are such a kidder; did you hear that one on the Daily Dose of DailyKos or DailyShow?

    I think the current Administration –particularly the twice elected President– is back on their game and doing a good job.

    I’m expecting a late October Osama capture or confirmation of his death.

    I’m expecting the MSM to return to the overlooked trial of Saddam –now working on the 3rd set of major crimes (too bad the Iraqi tribunal can’t reach over to the UN and bring the corrupt Kofi and his lower-case-clan to trial for the Food4BribesScam).

    I’m also expecting that Lieberman will continue to lead in the polls and get elected in CT –serving up the greatest rebuke to you crazy Kos’ed wingbats from MoveOn.org.

    And the Senate to remain in GOP control; the House to remain in GOP control… at least 3 current Democrat state governorships to turn over to the Good Side, the GOP path. All this in a year your party was supposed to sweep the elections, bring down Geo Bush, frogmarch Rove out of the WH, end FoxNetwork’s stranglehold on America’s heart, spirit, and mind.

    Where’s your sense of hope? Still in Arkansas or have you hitched your wagon to the HillaryHogTrain?

    Incompetent is once again a word reserved just for the Democrat Party, its leadership of HarryR, NancyP and HowieScreaminDean and its inability to capitalize on a groundswell of anti-govt sentiment. Incompetent, keogh. It’s a word you need to get used to using often.

    Oh wait, it won’t be that they were incompetent…. it’ll just be that they didn’t win. No losing for you guys… it’s non-winning; always whining.

    By the end of 2006, even AirAmerica will be a footnote in the histroy books and the radical fomenting Left will have to settle for an emasculated NPR and PBS.

    But keogh, if it helps you sleep at night… you keep up the lame DailyKos’sack jokes. You gotta have something besides reality to rely upon.

  22. You really think that Bush is doing a good job?
    If you think so then you are truly blinded by your ideology. You must try to regain your sight like George Will and Christopher Buckley have done. Or is it to late for you?
    And:
    How exactly is the President “Back on his game”? (Unless of course you consider the “game” being lying to the public, smear politics and politicizing fear?)
    And:
    Matt,
    You sound an AWFUL like the democrats did in ’94 but for both our sake, I hope you are right about Air America…bad radio. It fails because Progressives are not intellectually stimulated when someone “preaches to the choir.” Unlike you rightists who only want to hear your point of view spewed over and over again.

  23. 401 K the problem is they were so unserious the whole 8 years. Then when a subsequent President tries to clean up the messes, we get nothing but constant and daily whinning. I’ve asked this before ….list 3 fairly major things the Clinton Admin did in 8 years?

    1. Welfare reform

    2. NAFTA

    3. Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

    All three things Republicans have liked and praised.

    As far as being oblivious to Islamic Terrorism, you can see that going back as far as Carter. And did you notice that we had Reagan and Bush Sr. in there before Clinton? Those were, as I recall, GOP Administration’s. Osama Bin Laden cites our withdrawl from Lebanon under “cut-and-run” Reagan as encouragement to his fellow terrorists.

  24. One last comment on this carpet/flag brouhaha:

    If demoncRATS are so overtly concerned that the president did, in their opinion, desecrate the flag – why isn’t the NYT and WaPo running with it?

    Or do you expect DailyKaka and DemonsUnderwear to carry the water?

    And 401(k) in #19 – we could say the same for you with you and your ilk’s irrational hatred of our president and current leader of the war on terror.

    And (God forbid) if the House goes RAT (which I doubt, but I’m engaging in hypothesis), and they attempt the impeachment route, we can always dredge up Slick Willie’s excuse that since the president is the commander-in-chief, such an action would be detrimental to his “active duty” in the WOT.

    Sounds ridiculous and laughable, right? Well, now you know how the real Americans felt when we heard this one out of the mouth of James Carville. Yet in this instance – would it not be true?

    Don’t forget that when you hope for something to come true, and it does, be prepared for fallout. As in: PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY.

    Impeachment doesn’t sound so dandy now, does it?

    Match, set, game. You lose.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

  25. My thoughts on #20….

    1 – Welfare Reform (only because it was pushed by a GOP Congress)

    2 – Balancing the Budget (only because it was pushed by a GOP Congress. Clinton “found” the issue in June 1995 after the GOP takeover of Congress where this issue was the #1 item in the Contract with America).

    3 – I honestly can’t think of a third (non-snarky) thing that comes close to those two. I can say that his foreign policies were a disaster in retrospect. The world may have “loved” him… but they didn’t respect the USA. (Repeated Al-Qaeda attacks on US interests, N. Korea deal that left us nowhere, the appeasement of Yassir Arafat that has resulted in no improvement in the Palestinian situation).

  27. #22: I hope you are right about Air America…bad radio. It fails because Progressives are not intellectually stimulated when someone “preaches to the choir.” Unlike you rightists who only want to hear your point of view spewed over and over again.

    Is that also why Fox kicks CNN’s manipulative little ass up and down the street? Are liberals watching Fox so they can be intellectualy stimulated? Is it like a masochism thing? Do they watch Fox and then go get hot wax dripped on their backs?

  29. #23 Ok Patrick, you gotta admit that welfare reform was a Republican idea, pushed hard by conservatives to get some of the poor out of the cycle of poverty. I’ll give you this Prez Clinton could have been obstructionist or vetoed a final bill. But the counrty was adament about this reform and he and Dick Morris knew it, so he got on board. It was the major piece of Morris’ Triangulation puzzle. Now your #3 Don’t Ask Don’t Tell….you couldn’t come up with a more major, earth shaking, third most amazing accomplishment by the Clinton Administration in 8 long years than that? Hte to say it but case closed. I hope other leftists in here will think about the original question in #20 and respond.
    Bruce GP…You had the same problem I had. You get stuck after one or two Republican led innitiatives.

  33. Holy shit, GP. I’m looking at your “We Will Never Forget” ad and I recognize the guy. He was my first crush ever in high school. I pined after him for four years like only a love-struck teen can do. I didn’t give a crap about any other guy.

    He became a firefighter and died in the WTC. I had no idea until just now. I had this strange notion to do a web search a week or two ago to try to see what he was up to and came up with nothing. This is blowing my mind.

    I’m sorry. I know this is completely off topic.

  34. Also, this brings up a valid point; Calarato, M-M, GP, and others are not only able to view Clinton, but also to state publicly that Clinton did do some things right in his Presidency.
    In short, they can effectively argue and compare pros and cons.

    Compare that to our leftists here, who are seemingly incapable of making a positive statement about Bush and must in fact contradict everything he does or says, no matter how insignificant, i.e. a flag carpet.

    As the old Monty Python goes, “Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is merely the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.”

  35. NDT, indeed. I voted for Clinton twice. And Gore once (ugh! or actually, Lieberman-VP).

    I loudly defended Clinton against the nuttier charges (e.g., Vince Foster). I still do. I was an early Moveon.org supporter, back when their slogan was “Censure [Clinton] and move on.” I thought he should get a big black mark for his perjury, but impeachment was net-counterproductive. I still do.

    It took the cumulative effect of Monica, DADT, DOMA and 9-11 (which clearly had to have been helped by Clintonian negligence on some level) to make me see the guy in a more proper, negative light. As you point out, I still have no problem rattling off 3 good things he did, or at least presided over.

    The BDS people we see here today (“B” could be Bush, or Bruce) are fully as twisted, sick and nutty as the ugliest of the Clinton-haters we saw in the 1990s. I denounce both groups, for the same reason: They are destructive.

    And Gryph, I know you’re reading this – so yes dear: that means you.

  36. No, it isn’t just a carpet. I am not a lefty, but I want to make that clear. Any depiction of the American flag should be treated as an American flag would be treated.

    That is what they say at our local VFW. Maybe I am old fashioned, but everyone I talk to at work agrees on that.

  37. #36 I agree. But I understand that other people don’t agree and I prefer to live in a place where people are free to demonstrate just how much of scum bucket they are by desecrating or disrespecting our flag. And if it means gritting my teeth at a US flag carpet or stars and stripes olympic uniform, then I can grit my teeth. It makes me sad, but I can’t see the point of outrage, particularly manufactured outrage.

    Which made the earlier comment someone or other made about us all wanting a flag burning ammendment sort of odd because I’d never assume that someone supported that ammendment unless they had specifically said so.

  38. Again the moral equivalance of Libs shows its ugly head.

    Eight years of ignoring the threat from Islamic Fascism and bin Laden specifically EQUALS the President and First Lady standing on a carpet (though it looks like a doormat I’ve seen sold at Target!) that is obviously used by fireman who responded to the 9/11 attacks based on where he was at the time.

    Sure…. that makes perfect sense that they are equal.

    Dear Lord!!!

  39. #37: “people are free to demonstrate just how much of scum bucket they are by desecrating or disrespecting our flag.”

    So you agree that Duhbya is a scum bucket. Good, that’s progress. I love how most who are commenting here simply CANNOT bring themsleves to call Bush’s trampling on the flag for the desecration it is.

    #38: “Eight years of ignoring the threat from Islamic Fascism and bin Laden”

    I don’t care if you are the blog owner, Bruce, this is total BS and you know it. For shame!

  40. Bruce, fair and accurate point when you write: “Eight years of ignoring the threat from Islamic Fascism and bin Laden specifically EQUALS the President and First Lady standing on a carpet….”

    Clinton and his cronies –especially SandyStuffYourPantsBerger– did ignore the repeated and well documented threats that lead up to 9-11. In fact, they helped create an enviroment in US law enforcement and international intelligence which allowed the terrorists to act with freedom and unchecked boldness.

    If Clinton hadn’t gutted the military, gutted procurement, gutted the CIA, gutted the FBI, put ACLU-types into leadership spots at Justice Dept… we might never have reached 9-11.