Gay Patriot Header Image

Mailroom Error: Misdelivery of Left- and Right-Wingers’ Talking Points

Disgusting (albeit unfortunately unsurprising) goings-on in the Leftist blogosphere at the happy news of the birth of Mary’s new baby boy (that Dan mentioned yesterday).

NDT is keeping track of some of the hate being spewed toward the lesbian parents by the rabid gay-bashing far right-wingers tolerant and loving gay left. One in specific truly turns the stomach. Can’t beat North’s own comments, so I’ll invite you to read over there.

If Dick and Lynn Cheney were as evil as the Gay Left wants us to believe, they’d take this opportunity to come out and make an example of how wrong they think homosexuality is and their abhorrence for homosexuals having babies. After all, what better platform from which to speak, a baby born to lesbians in their own family? Quite the contrary, they are proud and happy grandparents.

On the other hand, if the Gay Left were as dedicated to forwarding the message that gay and lesbian parents are just as loving and deserving of rights because they’re just like any other family, they’d be praising the birth and looking for fans of the Vice President and his family to follow his loving example.

Crickets chirping, by the way, over at HRC. Perhaps they’re taking a tip from their own mothers, and saying nothing if they have nothing nice to say?

Share

101 Comments

  1. I’m surprised by the brutishness of the comments — not even the slightest attempt at wit. I expected a “(Rose)Mary’s Baby“, replete with ‘Hail, Satan!’ or the pictures being referred to as “Adoration of the Maggot“, but no. Just a simple and evil prayer for SIDS, among others. What gives?

    Comment by HardHobbit — May 25, 2007 @ 11:35 pm - May 25, 2007

  2. Boy, it sure has been a boon for NDT’s blog. Five comments already.

    Comment by Ian S — May 25, 2007 @ 11:46 pm - May 25, 2007

  3. Um, Ian:

    Sorry to break your rant, but NDT has about 30 already. Nice try, though.

    Comment by ColoradoPatriot — May 26, 2007 @ 3:15 am - May 26, 2007

  4. And how many readers at your blog Ian? Oh, that’s right, you don’t even have the balls to start one.

    Anyway, tying this thread back to the torture thread from yesterday, it seems like the left unfailingly inverts reality to the opposite of what it is. To the left, our soldiers are brutal torturers, and the terrorists are poor innocent victims. To the left, their side are the agents of peace and tolerance, and they prove it by wishing death on Mary Cheney’s baby, hoping Dick Cheney dies a horrible painful death, hoping Tony Snow dies of cancer, hoping Jerry Falwell is burning in Hell…

    I guess you gotta invert reality to believe that surrender is victory and Pelosi’s Congress is the most ethical in history.

    Comment by V the K — May 26, 2007 @ 7:39 am - May 26, 2007

  5. The left´s idea of the ideal lesbian mother is Rosie O´Donnell!

    Comment by Roberto — May 26, 2007 @ 8:25 am - May 26, 2007

  6. I, for one, was deeply saddened to learn of Rosie O’Donnell’s tragic death and wish her family nothing but condolences.

    Comment by V the K — May 26, 2007 @ 8:49 am - May 26, 2007

  7. Roberto, I just lost my coffee about Rosie being the ideal mother let alone the ideal lesbian… thanks, now I have to go freshen up.

    Back… the Church of Liberalism only recognizes its own, nothing else is supposed to exist in a secular society. That is the mindset of the extreme left. That is why their hate & contempt for anything their opposite is ravaging.

    God blessed Mary Cheney & her spouse with a beautiful baby and I am happy for them.

    Comment by Good vs. Evil — May 26, 2007 @ 8:56 am - May 26, 2007

  8. As a social conservative woman I think these comments in those sites are disgusting. Many social conservatives love the sinner, hate the sin. That doesnt mean we don’t love gay people-we do. Many times people confuse this. I wish Mary and her new baby happiness. I also do wish that the baby would have a mother and father as parents as this is the best way to bring up a baby.

    Comment by conservativequeen — May 26, 2007 @ 8:59 am - May 26, 2007

  9. conservativequeen, I can think of many situations – some of them having “a mother and a father” – that would be rather worse for Mary’s baby than having 2 sane, loving lesbian moms.

    Having said that – You have a right to think what you think. I salute you for expressing it with respect, and for remembering the big picture, wishing Mary and her new baby happiness.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 26, 2007 @ 9:13 am - May 26, 2007

  10. V the K, thanks for the morning laugh, I’d seen the picture, but of course your caption puts it all in context!!!

    Comment by Leah — May 26, 2007 @ 10:48 am - May 26, 2007

  11. Speaking of Rosie, it’s typical of the libtard left that when confronted with facts and reason, they cut and run. No wonder they hold her up in such esteem.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 26, 2007 @ 12:36 pm - May 26, 2007

  12. #3 Well, the one you invited us to visit had five, now six. NDT has posted three times already on this “story” of the vile comment by a mysterious commenter on an obscure site. NDT sure is getting a lot of mileage out of it.

    Comment by Ian S — May 26, 2007 @ 12:49 pm - May 26, 2007

  13. Three Situations Yet One Strong Undercurrent: Insolence…

    I have wanted to not post about this but I keep getting drawn back to the topic. Or perhaps it’s more of a theme … either way, I am up at the LCH (local coffee house) churning out what apparently…

    Trackback by Randy Thomas — May 26, 2007 @ 1:05 pm - May 26, 2007

  14. Ian S, you obviously feel jealous of NDT and/or CP having blogs and getting any attention, so, here is some attention for you. 🙂

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 26, 2007 @ 1:22 pm - May 26, 2007

  15. Don’t worry, guys. Ian’s merely making it obvious that he’s the most upset, not over the comments his fellow gay leftists made over Mary, Heather, and their new baby, but that somebody pointed them out.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 26, 2007 @ 2:46 pm - May 26, 2007

  16. Thanks, Leah, you’re a stand-up dame.

    Ian’s also been alleging the original post could be a fake, but the person who made the post followed up on it with very sincere-sounding rationalizations for its gobsmacking vileness. I don’t follow NDT’s site but if the comment came from someone who has been commenting there for a while, that would speak to the poster’s legitimacy.

    Comment by V the K — May 26, 2007 @ 3:03 pm - May 26, 2007

  17. #15:

    comments his fellow gay leftists made

    As usual, you make a lot of assumptions you can never back up. Now, vile thoughts and comments are one thing, vile and probably criminal actions such as those of Mary’s father are another.

    Comment by Ian S — May 26, 2007 @ 10:24 pm - May 26, 2007

  18. And again, Ian, you spin.

    Before it was rationalizing the comments by attempting to claim the person who wrote them wasn’t really a left-winger.

    Now you’re rationalizing the comments by claiming Dick Cheney is a criminal.

    Again, you’re demonstrating that it’s not the comments that bother you, but the fact that they were pointed out — since you, as a result, are desperately trying to tear down everyone else to make you and your fellow gay leftists’ sick wish that Mary and Heather’s new baby die of SIDS look even remotely justifiable.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 27, 2007 @ 2:02 am - May 27, 2007

  19. As far as Ian is concerned, he doesn’t believe that liberals could ever be the sick, sadistic, evil bastards they are. Therefore, he has to run defense for the guilty (standard liberal MO).

    Time to circle the wagons and defend the indefensable to the death. It’d be easier to take a slam, post-Immodium, than to expend the energy Ian uses to defend the worthless liberal dregs.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 27, 2007 @ 7:45 am - May 27, 2007

  20. Or worse, Ian knows the left is full of hate and vitriol, but downplays it because he thinks the hate will help his side gain power.

    Comment by V the K — May 27, 2007 @ 11:12 am - May 27, 2007

  21. For the record, I am about as far left as one can be, however I share the outrage and the disgust over what are very offensive comments. There is simply no excuse for comments such as the one you cited as well as other messages of ill will to these new parents.

    That being said, it would have been nice to see the fact that mine is not a singular opinion on these threads, reflected in your coverage over the negative and offensive comments posted by a minority.

    And if, as it has been suggested, there seems to be a tacit support to these comments through not voicing objection, I did in fact voice my concerns on the thread in question.

    Comment by Al — May 27, 2007 @ 2:02 pm - May 27, 2007

  22. #18-20: All three are viable explanations.

    Like I’ve said before – Ian spins more often than Lynda Carter did in four seasons of “Wonder Woman.”

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 27, 2007 @ 2:55 pm - May 27, 2007

  23. you might want to look a bit more closely at those responses that you refer to in your it is filled with horrible homophobic gay bashing from right wingers. yes, there are some unpleasant and uncalled for things posted by people people who are clearly gay/lesbian and or liberal, but why are you trying to deny the fact that there are conservative homophobes posting much nastier things as well? In just scanning quickly there were many more attacks against Lynn Cheney being a lesbian/lesbian with a child than there were of gays/lesbians/liberals condemning her.

    And by the way, as one of the posters points out – why is there a readily available picture of the grandparents with the baby but not a picture of the mothers with their baby? I searched several times and found only pictures of the grandparents with the baby. Not a separate picture of the mothers with the baby or at least a family photo showing the grandparents with both mothers? Bet your bottom dollar that you’d see both parents if they were a married man/woman.

    Comment by Kevin — May 27, 2007 @ 6:15 pm - May 27, 2007

  24. Good points. It’s a shame that the people quoted above can’t separate their disgust/revulsion about Cheney/Bush from the actual parents and baby involved here, even if Mary Cheney spoke in support of her father’s political party; it’s their life and their happiness which is supposed to matter after all. It also reveals blinding hypocrisy, as well.

    Unfortunately, CWA and AfT are focusing on the baby and the mommies, and boy are they disgusted/revolted. It’s a shame these right-wing moralist groups can’t be happy for these two moms and their new joy, especially since they claim to care so much about the family and children.

    it’s a serious quandary: which is worse: Making stomach-turning comments about a couple based on a parent’s actions (war, deceit, etc. as they see it), or making stomach-turning comment about a couple based on nothing more than who they are?

    Comment by torrentprime — May 27, 2007 @ 7:49 pm - May 27, 2007

  25. yes, there are some unpleasant and uncalled for things posted by people people who are clearly gay/lesbian and or liberal, but why are you trying to deny the fact that there are conservative homophobes posting much nastier things as well?

    One, we’re not.

    Two, what you are doing is identical to Ian — trying to tear everyone else down after being forced to admit the vile and disgusting rhetoric and feelings you and your fellow gay leftists hold, to the point of wishing a newborn baby dead, because of who his parents and grandparents are.

    And to torrentprime, the only reason you would need to be obsessing over which one was worse is if you were trying to rationalize one by claiming it wasn’t as bad as the other.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 27, 2007 @ 10:07 pm - May 27, 2007

  26. vile and probably criminal actions such as those of Mary’s father are another.

    Talk about making assumptions you can never back up. JEEZ!

    but why are you trying to deny the fact that there are conservative homophobes posting much nastier things as well?

    A. Who’s denying it?
    2. Why is it that the number 1 liberal excuse is “Republicans did it too!!!!”?

    why is there a readily available picture of the grandparents with the baby but not a picture of the mothers with their baby? I searched several times and found only pictures of the grandparents with the baby. Not a separate picture of the mothers with the baby or at least a family photo showing the grandparents with both mothers? Bet your bottom dollar that you’d see both parents if they were a married man/woman.

    My guess is that of (most likely) several pictures that were taken, this is the one the liberal media ran with so people like you can copy and paste from your DNC blast e-mails like you did.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 28, 2007 @ 12:28 am - May 28, 2007

  27. 25: Yes, The original poster, Colorado patriot, specifically writes in and crosses out “rabid gay basing far right wingers”, making it sound as if all right wingers are fine and dandy with it. from the hatred they are also spewing, they’re not exempt from criticism.

    26: Oh, puh-lease. only Cheney and his wife show up on posted pictures and you blame the liberal media for now showing the 2 mothers? What BS.

    You guys will say anything and alter facts to kow-tow to the right, won’t you?

    Comment by Kevin — May 28, 2007 @ 8:52 am - May 28, 2007

  28. So, if I can summarize kevin and Torrie’s rationales: If you don’t like someone’s politics, it’s okay to want their grandchild to die of crib death.

    Also, if you don’t like the way the picture was taken, it’s okay to want their grandchild to die of crib death.

    Also, if you don’t like the way other groups are reacting to the announcement, it’s okay to want the grandchild to die of crib death.

    Why can’t we just go with, it’s never okay to wish for a baby to die of crib death and leave it at that? Or is there just too much hate inside you guys to let it go?

    Comment by V the K — May 28, 2007 @ 10:16 am - May 28, 2007

  29. It is because, V the K, they want the baby to die of crib death.

    They’re just trying to figure out how to rationalize it.

    Because there IS too much hate inside these people. They want to see a baby die because they don’t like his parents and grandparents.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 28, 2007 @ 12:08 pm - May 28, 2007

  30. Good vs. Evil; I hope I didn´t misunderstand the reason you lost your coffee. The operative word is ¨left.¨ Rosie is not my idea of anything ideal except maybe a loud mouth b. TV is better off without her. If we could only get rid of Michael Moore. I hope he takes Fred Thompson´s counsel to heart. a mental institution. I, too, wish Mary and her partner God´s blessings and many happy years watching their child grow and I wish Dick Cheney a long life to see his granddaughter gradualte from college.

    Comment by Roberto — May 28, 2007 @ 1:40 pm - May 28, 2007

  31. Exactly how I took it Roberto, i just didn’t respond accurately. The implication was that the left could see her that way, that’s what made me lose it.

    Comment by Good vs. Evil — May 28, 2007 @ 6:12 pm - May 28, 2007

  32. I realize my opinion in the comment above, #21, puts a bit of a bit of a dent in your theory that all “these people” feel the same way, but I take exception to the very generalized categorization of those on the left.

    In political debates I always try to refrain from the “all gay conservatives are” style of argumentation. It would be nice to see you do the same.

    Comment by Al — May 28, 2007 @ 7:51 pm - May 28, 2007

  33. #29: I could not stand going through life like that. You know that feeling you get when some jerkwad cuts you off in traffic? I imagine the kind of person who would wish crib death on a baby must feel like that all the time. And people who defend that sentiment… not much better.

    Why get so worked up over a bunch of people you don’t even know, who can’t do anything to you? (Except for the paranoid delusional types who think Dick Cheney and Jim Dobson are plotting genocide, but that’s a whole ‘nother breed of insanity.)

    Comment by V the K — May 28, 2007 @ 8:47 pm - May 28, 2007

  34. Unless your name is “Kevin”, “torrentprime”, or “Ian”, Al, I wouldn’t worry about being lumped in with “these people” — especially since you, through your actions, have demonstrated that you don’t really want to be.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 28, 2007 @ 8:47 pm - May 28, 2007

  35. It is surprising that they even put out a picture. Usually when anyone asks about Mary’s personal life, the Vice-President becomes more secretive than a papal election.

    Comment by Chase — May 29, 2007 @ 1:26 am - May 29, 2007

  36. You guys will say anything and alter facts to kow-tow to the right, won’t you?

    What the hell would you know about “facts”, Kevin? And what’s been “altered”?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 29, 2007 @ 3:09 am - May 29, 2007

  37. can you say sara taylor. conservative corruption continues. xo

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 29, 2007 @ 3:20 am - May 29, 2007

  38. O.k. For some reason, only the blockquote showed up. Let me try again.

    (ahem)

    can you say sara taylor. conservative corruption continues. xo

    Well, I can say Clinton, Pelosi, Reid, Obama, Rangel, Kennedy, Dorgan, Levin, Carson, John, Harkin, Jefferson, Schumer, Breaux, Landrieu, Hoyer, Kildee, Frank, Baucus, Deutch, Durbin, Pallone, Corzine, Mikulski, Levin, Inouye, Kennedy, Stabenow, Bacerra, Johnson, Conrad, Cantwell, Free, Romero, Pastor, Larson, Oberstar, Sherman, Pomeroy, Taylor, Dodd, Inslee, McDermott, Dingell, Baca, Otter, Lincoln, Thompson, Menendez, Matsui, Alexander, Kind, Shows, Keif, Waters, Evans, Holden, Weiland, Wyden, Leahy, Thompson, Boxer, Feinstein, Waxman, Kerry etc. etc. etc.

    You’ll note that most of these are connected to Abramoff. Shall I go on, Billie?

    I know, how ’bout I mention those democrats connected to Enron? Sound like fun? I can play too.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 29, 2007 @ 5:18 am - May 29, 2007

  39. When Queen Nancy reprimands John Murtha for violating house rules and threatening another congressman, or expels William ‘cold cash’ Jefferson, or when the Senate reprimands Diane Feinstein for war profiteering, then, the Democrats can lecture us about the ‘Culture of Corruption.’

    Comment by V the K — May 29, 2007 @ 8:24 am - May 29, 2007

  40. I just read the “comments” about Samuel Cheney. Oh-My-God. Some of these people need to get some counseling. I’m OK with politically disagreeing with the Cheney’s politics, but come on. In particular, the SIDS & NAMBLA comments were beyond the pale.

    Comment by Jimbo — May 29, 2007 @ 11:01 am - May 29, 2007

  41. #41 – Looks like billy (excuse me, I mean MARKIE) didn’t get the memo about how corruption is still rampant in DC under Dhimmicrat leadership.

    He’s a real “mental iant,” that billy. And a lousy speller to boot.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 29, 2007 @ 11:30 am - May 29, 2007

  42. Heck, when Pelosi herself resigns, in line with her insistence that anyone who commits campaign finance fraud should leave their leadership position and resign immediately, then she’ll have room to talk.

    Or perhaps when she fires her puppet Rahm Emanuel, in line with her harpy-esque shrieking during the Foley affair that anyone who knew about the Foley emails in advance and didn’t broadcast it to her was abetting child molestation — although that’s not likely to happen, since doing so would unravel her flat-out lie that she and her party didn’t know about them a year in advance.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 29, 2007 @ 1:42 pm - May 29, 2007

  43. NDT – it would be deliciously ironic if Pelosi resigned during the same week that Rosie O’Donnell and Cindy Sheehan both cut-and-run in the public eye. Of course, it probably won’t happen what with the coddling she and the rest of the Dhimmicrats have been getting from the MSM.

    Meanwhile, we have Shrillary promoting “shared prosperity” in very Leninist terms, and Chavez using Bull Connor/Tianamen Square techniques to enforce his own “Fairness Doctrine.”

    God help our Republic.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 29, 2007 @ 3:22 pm - May 29, 2007

  44. “Many social conservatives love the sinner, hate the sin.”

    Conservativequeen, sadly I’ve yet to see that in action. All I’ve seen is “love the sinner, and do everything in your power to make his life as difficulty as you possibly can”.

    But, then again, my definition of “love” is probably closer to that in Matthew 25 or in Corrinthians 13 than it is to the kind of love that takes away health insurance, bans adoptions, bars loved ones from hospitals, and makes up bogus statistics about “mortality rates” and molestation. As a conservative, I personally don’t have much use for that kind of love.

    But thanks for loving, anyway.

    Comment by Timothy — May 29, 2007 @ 10:39 pm - May 29, 2007

  45. “Quite the contrary, they are proud and happy grandparents.”

    So proud and happy that they do nothing, when in positions of power, to make sure the parents have legal recognition, etc. Even child abusers put candles on birthday cakes. If you are taken by the private love and cheer that refuses to translate into public and political support for gay families, I’m so sorry for you.

    Comment by sean — May 29, 2007 @ 10:51 pm - May 29, 2007

  46. And, seriously, doesn’t the Dallas Lady have her own blog?

    Comment by sean — May 29, 2007 @ 10:52 pm - May 29, 2007

  47. Even child abusers put candles on birthday cakes.

    You poor bastard. Speaking from experience, I guess?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 30, 2007 @ 12:16 am - May 30, 2007

  48. Sean’s comments were very well put. It’s not Vice-President’s private acceptance that is in dispute, as I believe he does love his daughter. It’s always been his lack of public support that has been the rub. 7 years as Vice-President and I can’t think of even one memorable statement he’s made on our issues. For a man with a gay child, that’s certainly a disappointment.

    Comment by Chase — May 30, 2007 @ 2:43 am - May 30, 2007

  49. 7 years as Vice-President and I can’t think of even one memorable statement he’s made on our issues. For a man with a gay child, that’s certainly a disappointment.

    The “rub” is that you seem to think he has an obligation to do so. How many democrat leaders make “memorable statements” on “our issues”? Oh, are you counting the time lord BJ claimed that he cried when he signed DOMA? Or how about when Kerry said that he doesn’t support gay marriage?

    Has Hildabeast said anything memorable? Nope. How about BO? Not Really. Anyone? Anyone?

    What’s memorable for me is Edwards’ statement that he feels uncomfortable around “those people”.

    Good one.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 30, 2007 @ 5:52 am - May 30, 2007

  50. Off-topic, but do you think there’s any chance Ian and the other lefties will admit now that we “right wingnuts” were right about Hugo Chavez all along?

    And as for the “never said anything publicly” issue, frankly, if you need to look to politicians to say nice words to validate your life, you’re a pathetic loser.

    Comment by V the K — May 30, 2007 @ 8:34 am - May 30, 2007

  51. BTW: Investor’s Business Daily has a 10 Part Series on why Jimmy Carter was the worst President in American History. It’s good reading for those who have forgotten, or who never knew, how miserably incompetent liberal Democrats are at leading the USA in a time of crisis.

    Comment by V the K — May 30, 2007 @ 8:42 am - May 30, 2007

  52. To the extent that Mary is not a reflection of her fathers policies, nor should she be expected to be, I agree with you 100%. I also agree that no major Democratic candidate has an especially positive gay record.

    But to cite the Democrat examples that you do, yet at the same time fail to address the point the commenter noted, that being the inconsistency of a Vice President you claim is supportive of his gay daughter, yet remains silent on the issues, as well as maintaining a very anti gay voting history, seems to be conveniently selective regarding appropriately placed criticism.

    Comment by Al — May 30, 2007 @ 8:42 am - May 30, 2007

  53. V the K mentioned Hugo Chavez. Yesterday, May 29th, Castro´s meglomaniac disciple threatened to takeover Globovision. He swears there is freedom of expression in Venezuela. It must mean that you´re free to say anything nice about Comandante Chavez. It seems to be ingrained in leftists worldwide that any criticism of a leftist is mean
    spirited. The vitriol that they have heaped upon President Bush and Vice President Cheney is the worst I´ve ever heard in my lifetime.

    Comment by Roberto — May 30, 2007 @ 10:31 am - May 30, 2007

  54. Roberto, certain of the lefties on this forum have been defending Chavez, and drawing offense that anyone would call him a dictator — despite rigged elections, the installation of a rubber-stamp legislature and courts, re-writing the constitution of Venezuela to give himself absolute power, imposing state control over all economic activities, and now shutting down all opposition media outlets. Even Alan Colmes is now admitting that Chavez has gone too far, exactly as we “right wingnuts” said he would. And I think those who stood up for Chavez should, at a minimum, have the grace to admit that we were right and they were wrong.

    Ian: “You obviously can’t be talking about Chavez since he’s neither a dictator nor does he want to destroy America. “

    Comment by V the K — May 30, 2007 @ 11:05 am - May 30, 2007

  55. University students in Venezuela are continuing demonstrating at this moment. Chavez is rapidly losing his support. Some petroleum workers are joining in and now calling the takeover of their industry as an act of a dictator. Here in El Salvador, the communist FMLN is in front of the Venezuelan embassy in support of Chavez. Remember Venezuela is a member of OPEC. Some of the high prices for gasoline is lining his pockets to keep his boliviarian revolution alive. Maybe its time take a few days off from driving and buying gas to help drive the price of crude back down put less money in his and Iran´s coffers.

    Chavez has become paranoid by the demonstrations. He has accused Globovision of inciting the people to civil disobedience and to assassinate him. Since sunday we have been watching Globovision and at no time has any announcer or commentarist suggested taking out the meglomaniac. Man in the street interviews indicate that those who voted for him are regreting their vote and didn´t think they had voted for a dictatorship. I wonder what Jimmy Carter has to say now. Watch out for Senator Chris Dodd and Congressman Xavier Becerra, they love communists and leftist guerillas.

    Comment by Roberto — May 30, 2007 @ 12:07 pm - May 30, 2007

  56. Roberto, muchas gracias for the heads-up. Fox News also has a reporter embedded in Caracas doing his report by videophone since Chavez has “nationalized” (that is, taken over) his country’s media.

    And except for FNC, nobody else (CNN, PMSNBC, et al) is covering this breaking story. Then again, CNN put the gag on their Baghdad bureau at the request of Saddam Hussein.

    Again, no surprises there. You are either with the terrorists, or you are against them. Pick a side, people.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 30, 2007 @ 12:24 pm - May 30, 2007

  57. And speaking of the ClintonNewsNetwork, this statement is rich:

    “In a statement, CNN denied any campaign to discredit Venezuela and said it has “a long history of consistently balanced coverage” of the country.”

    Translation: “We still kowtow to dictators’ whims so that we don’t get kicked out of the country.”

    Paging Eason Jordan…

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 30, 2007 @ 12:46 pm - May 30, 2007

  58. HAHA!!! It took a few days, but the organizations that run the GOP are now speaking out against the Cheneys “playing house”! Mary and Heather are sinful and sick and, well, you know, the regular litany of terms of abuse that the base of the GOP uses to disparage gay folks. And, you know what? Lynne and Dick Cheney have enabled them. And the little baby boy will grow up in a world where the internet will preserve everything that is said and done and, in Dick Cheney’s case, NOT done.

    Hateful comments on random internet sites and pretend-blogs-like-Dallas-Lady’s = Huge organizations with millions of dollars and GOP political clout making strident and extreme public statements and press releases of hate? I think not. The latter is much, much worse than the former.

    I certainly wouldn’t want most of you weighing my meat cuts at the butchers…

    Comment by sean — May 30, 2007 @ 5:13 pm - May 30, 2007

  59. #47. Ad hominem, as usual. Sad that one takes literally a metaphor. But that is what shallow literalism in all its forms has done to America.

    Comment by sean — May 30, 2007 @ 5:18 pm - May 30, 2007

  60. #29. No, the kid can’t die of crib death!! He has to go to school and get ridiculed and bullied and punched by the offspring of Christianists…and have no recourse to protections afforded to children of heterosexual couples. Then Dick Cheney will see what he has wrought. So, whoever is talking about crib death is just plain wrong.

    Comment by sean — May 30, 2007 @ 5:23 pm - May 30, 2007

  61. And again, sean, you demonstrate how much you and your fellow leftists actually care in hoping that a kid will be bullied and physically assaulted because you don’t like his grandfather’s political beliefs.

    SICK. You WANT a kid to be bullied and physically assaulted. UTTERLY SICK.

    The next gay Democrat who comes anywhere near this blog is going to get this in their face. In fact, I think I’ll add it to the referenced blog post to demonstrate the hate mentality of these individuals.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 30, 2007 @ 6:58 pm - May 30, 2007

  62. Peter, Chavez hasn´t taken over all the media yet. He took over Channel 2 Radio Caracas Television. He has threatened Globovision.
    which is still private and like Fox they are fair and balanced. I also receive Fox News as well as CNN english and spanish, as well as ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox. There are two other private channels operating. I flip to Fox because english speaking protesters are interviewed and they want the USA to know they have lost their democracy. Chavez did take over the banking industry and became the major partner with some of
    the oil companies. He has taken over Conoco. He´s been a busy little bee and has found time to visit Iran and declare his solidarity with them´
    During all of this; Jimmy Carter´s silence has been deafening. The problems in Venezuela can be laid at his feet just as giving the green light to the FMLN to overthrow the government of El Salvador. Thanks to our Beloved Ronald Reagan, who is venerated as a saint, by the right here in El Salvador democracy has been been restored.

    Comment by Roberto — May 30, 2007 @ 8:49 pm - May 30, 2007

  63. #62:

    Peter, Chavez hasn´t taken over all the media yet.

    Surely, you’re not calling Peter, that massive Constitutional scholar, a liar? Tsk, tsk. As for freedom of the press in Venezuela, there’s still far more of it than in many of our “allies” such as Pakistan , Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Egypt.

    Comment by Ian S — May 31, 2007 @ 1:08 am - May 31, 2007

  64. And speaking of right-wing talking points, when will we see an apology from all the wingnuts here for their lying about Valerie Plame’s covert status when she was outed as a spy? Hmmm?

    Comment by Ian S — May 31, 2007 @ 1:12 am - May 31, 2007

  65. when will we see an apology from all the wingnuts here for their lying about Valerie Plame’s covert status when she was outed as a spy?

    How about when she admits she perjured herself before Congress? BTW, you can’t be covert when your idiot husband outs you first.

    And when will Kerry be held accountable for leaking an agent’s name? About the same time Leaky Leahy will be punished.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 31, 2007 @ 1:30 am - May 31, 2007

  66. There was no lying. She was not covert. No one outed her. Ian spins like Rumpelstiltskin to deflect attention from the fact that he was a slobbering Chavez sycophant.

    Comment by V the K — May 31, 2007 @ 7:21 am - May 31, 2007

  67. #66:

    She was not covert.

    Yes, she was.

    Comment by Ian S — May 31, 2007 @ 9:19 am - May 31, 2007

  68. Keep on spinning, you silly dervish.

    Comment by V the K — May 31, 2007 @ 9:36 am - May 31, 2007

  69. IgnoAndNaus, your attempts at trying to define me are utterly vapid. I think my track record on this blog speaks for itself. Which, by the way, is much more trusted than yours, Wonder Woman.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 9:43 am - May 31, 2007

  70. #62 – Thanks, Roberto. I think you’ll get a much fairer picture of what is happening in Venezuela from Fox News rather than CNN – which has a history of suppressing news in its foreign bureaus from overzealous tyrants.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 9:45 am - May 31, 2007

  71. “As for freedom of the press in Venezuela, there’s still far more of it than in many of our “allies” such as Pakistan , Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Egypt.”

    Care to back that up, Wonder Woman?

    I didn’t think so.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 9:47 am - May 31, 2007

  72. Ian, you´ve got it wrong! I never called Peter a liar. I was clarifying the comment he heard by the American commentator. There are three commercial tv stations. Two have capitualated while Globovision still airs views of the opposition as well as defenders. Fair and balanced reporting is not what Chavez wants. The facilities of RCTV is now used by Chavez´s channel TSVE dedicated to keeping his bolivarian revolution alive. His most vocal critics have been arrested. He wants to run Venezuela as his own private fiefdom just like Castro in Cuba. He is calling it 21st century socialism. But is just good old fashion communism,

    Living in El Salvador and having a cable company that provides channels from Europe and South America, as well as the USA, I´m a
    little bit more closer to the situation. By the way, I´m not calling the Fox commentator a liar either. With so much going on in the world he has only a limited amount of time to report. This is on the scene reporting and not investigative journalism. If you think there is more freedom of expression in Venezuela than in Pakistan, how come there have been antigovernment demonstrations there? I suggest you go to Caracas and say something like Chavez is a dictatorial nut case and let us know how long it took for a boliviarian thug to pay a visit to you.

    Comment by Roberto — May 31, 2007 @ 10:35 am - May 31, 2007

  73. Pete — Ah luvs the ‘Wonder Woman’ nickname. It fits so well.

    Comment by V the K — May 31, 2007 @ 10:41 am - May 31, 2007

  74. #71 – Roberto, muchas gracias por tu comentarios. Hope you can visit us here in Houston sometime soon.

    #72 – VdaK, thanks for the compliment. I really am humbled by it because you are THE MAN when it comes to verbal smackdowns. But yeah, the whole “spinning” thing really fits Wonder Woman like a magic belt.

    (I was a big WW junkie in the 1970s. As well as Bionic Woman, Bewitched and I Dream of Jeannie – like most gay men my age.)

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 10:49 am - May 31, 2007

  75. Good point about Pakistan. Anti-government demonstrations happen there constantly.

    Saudi Arabia is, of course, repressed. BUT – I don’t consider either Saudi Arabia or Pakistan “allies”. I’m also struck by the fact that lefties are perfectly happy with repression in Muslim countries. I mean, if we ever try to liberate a Muslim country and make it less repressive, what do they do? 🙂

    It fits with the overall pattern of lefties being happy with repressive countries in general, so long as those countries are anti-American.

    Yup. Think about that. Lefties wink at (Castro and Chavez), support (Iraq) or silently ignore (Saudi Arabia) the most brutal repression – so long as the oppressor is also against America.

    I don’t condone U.S. policy in those cases where we have winked at oppression because the oppressor was for America. But folks, who is more evil? Someone who does condone oppression, while basically loving and supporting America? Or someone who condones oppression AND basically hates America?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 31, 2007 @ 12:35 pm - May 31, 2007

  76. Yes, she was.

    Then the CIA was patently incompetent.

    Case in point (emphasis mine):

    Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

    So the CIA’s method of hiding her links to the CIA……was to give her a job working at their headquarters.

    That’s beyond brilliant.

    Second, what about Plame’s past?

    Well, it turns out that a ten year old with an internet connection had an honest stab at figuring it out.

    When the Tribune searched for Plame on an Internet service that sells public information about private individuals to its subscribers, it got a report of more than 7,600 words. Included was the fact that in the early 1990s her address was “AMERICAN EMBASSY ATHENS ST, APO NEW YORK NY 09255.”

    A former senior American diplomat in Athens, who remembers Plame as “pleasant, very well-read, bright,” said he had been aware that Plame, who was posing as a junior consular officer, really worked for the CIA.

    According to CIA veterans, U.S. intelligence officers working in American embassies under “diplomatic cover” are almost invariably known to friendly and opposition intelligence services alike.

    “If you were in an embassy,” said a former CIA officer who posed as a U.S. diplomat in several countries, “you could count 100 percent on the Soviets knowing.”

    Plame’s true function likely would have been known to friendly intelligence agencies as well. The former senior diplomat recalled, for example, that she served as one of the “control officers” coordinating the visit of President George H.W. Bush to Greece and Turkey in July 1991.

    Not to mention the other kicker — that Valerie Plame was recalled to the United States in 1994 because the CIA was positive that her name had been given to the Soviets (and then Russians) by Aldrich Ames and they could no longer maintain her cover abroad.

    So what we have here is a woman who blatantly used the US embassy as an address (breaking several rules about people on non-official cover never doing anything of the sort), whose identity as a CIA officer was revealed to friendly governments (Greece and Turkey, at minimum), whose identity was so compromised that she had to be returned to the United States in fear for her life in 1994, and who was then given a job where she drove to CIA headquarters every day — being passed off by the CIA as a covert agent.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 31, 2007 @ 12:40 pm - May 31, 2007

  77. Massive Constitutional scholar in #70:

    Care to back that up

    Of course, you dolt. As you can see, in the most recent survey, Venezuela is far ahead of our “allies” that I mentioned. Chavez is taking his country in the wrong direction but the only reason he gets you guys foaming at the mouth is the way he thumbs his nose at Bushco. If people in Saudi Arabia had half the freedoms available in Venezuela, you’d be hailing it as a new beacon of freedom in the Middle East. LOL!

    Comment by Ian S — May 31, 2007 @ 12:51 pm - May 31, 2007

  78. Ah, Wonder Woman spins her lasso and conjures up the most recent “survey” to back up her DNC talking points. How tragic.

    Obviously, you are so much more of a dolt that you believe everything you have been spoon-fed without backing it up. Surveys can be manipulated, you know. What about actual NEWS items that document what is going on in the real world?

    If you weren’t so stupid, you would realize that Bolivia and Ecuador are also limiting free speech in the media as well. And this is not a survey, but a hard news piece. What is so scary is that they are emulating Venezuela and Cuba’s lead and openly ALLYING themselves with those dictators your side of the aisle openly embrace.

    Match, set, game. You lose. Go fly away in your invisible plane and visit Mother on Paradise Island.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 1:12 pm - May 31, 2007

  79. Chavez is taking his country in the wrong direction but the only reason he gets you guys foaming at the mouth is the way he thumbs his nose at Bushco.

    Translation: Ian and the Democrat Party are humiliated by the fact that the dictator whose ass they’ve been kissing for years, claiming he was a supporter of “freedom” and “populism”, because he was anti-Bush actually acts like — surprise! — the totalitarian dictator that the Bush administration says he is.

    So, like the spiteful little children they are, they try to divert attention away from their known, obvious, and documented support of Chavez by making fantasy accusations about what the Republicans WOULD do “if”.

    Furthermore, given the Democrat Party’s threat to yank the broadcast licenses of stations or networks who air anything critical of Democrats, i.e. last year’s movie about the Clintonistas, as well as their obvious and blatant attempts to harass Fox News out of existence, perhaps it should not surprise us that puppet Ian is spinning for why Chavez’s actions are in the least justified.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 31, 2007 @ 1:25 pm - May 31, 2007

  80. the only reason he gets you guys foaming at the mouth is the way he thumbs his nose at Bushco.

    Wrong again, brass tits. The only reason *you* are defending him is because he hates the same things you hate: America and capitalism. Most of *us* are at least as hard when it comes to other countries. Check out LGF if you think the Magic Kingdom holds a special place in the conservative heart.

    In case you haven’t noticed, a lot of us here aren’t exactly the mindless Bushbots you would make us out to be. We criticize Bush 1,000 times more often than you criticize your dear leadership. You probably don’t notice because we criticize the administration on genuine policy issues, instead of spouting idiotic name-calling like “BushCo.” We’ll leave blind obedience to party diktat to you are your fellow Reid/Pelosi/Murtha/Cold-Cash Jefferson shills.

    Pinochet was a right-wing dictator. He not only left power, but he left his country freer and more prosperous. Unlike the dictators Castro and Chavez whom you so eagerly slobber over, who mire their countries in misery and hold onto power for life.

    Comment by V the K — May 31, 2007 @ 1:30 pm - May 31, 2007

  81. Ian and the Democrat Party are humiliated by the fact that the dictator whose ass they’ve been kissing for years, claiming he was a supporter of “freedom” and “populism”, because he was anti-Bush actually acts like — surprise! — the totalitarian dictator that the Bush administration says he is.

    And Bingo was his name-O.

    Comment by V the K — May 31, 2007 @ 1:31 pm - May 31, 2007

  82. Meanwhile, in the liberal wet-dream-land of tolerance known as the Netherlands, a gang of gay men is being sought for raping and infecting men with HIV.

    Two questions: (a) would this be considered a hate crime and (b) will the HRC even bother to notice this story, much less condemn it?

    I am also waiting to see if Wonder Woman and her allies on this board are going to justify this behavior rather than criminalize it.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 1:38 pm - May 31, 2007

  83. “Chavez is taking his country in the wrong direction…”

    Astonishing wonderful, to see a leftist made such an admission!

    “…but the only reason he gets you guys foaming at the mouth is the way he thumbs his nose at Bushco.”

    Try again. I have always disliked Chavez for the simple, consistent reason that he is a dictator taking an entire country of people in the wrong direction.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 31, 2007 @ 1:39 pm - May 31, 2007

  84. 75, But folks, who is more evil? Someone who does condone oppression, while basically loving and supporting America? Or someone who condones oppression AND basically hates America?

    ILC. The answer depends. If these regimes really support America, I would go for the former. However, if a regime outwardly supports the U.S., but are duplicitous, which I suspect is the case for Saudi Arabia, I would say the latter. But in either case, it’s pretty close.

    76, So the CIA’s method of hiding her links to the CIA……was to give her a job working at their headquarters.

    Interesting, NDT. Can’t say I’m surprised. And I also found it more interesting all the hoops the administration had to go through, including perjury, to defend themselves against something that was patently obvious then. I guess there have been stranger things in Washington, but this has got to be near the top.

    Comment by Pat — May 31, 2007 @ 2:22 pm - May 31, 2007

  85. Peter – great link.

    This bit struck me:
    *** Said Henk Krol, the editor of a homosexual magazine titled Gaykrant: “These people were drugged, it’s therefore rape, pure and simple. It’s shameful, disgusting and terrifying. Those who did this are crazy.” ***

    Um… I think the adjective that ol’ Henk is grasping for there, and can’t seem to find, is… *evil*. Note, *morally wrong* would also do.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 31, 2007 @ 2:39 pm - May 31, 2007

  86. #79:

    given the Democrat[sic] Party’s threat to yank the broadcast licenses of stations or networks who air anything critical of Democrats

    More lies from the foaming-at-the-mouth crowd!

    Comment by Ian S — May 31, 2007 @ 3:58 pm - May 31, 2007

  87. One may spin, and spin, and be a libtard.
    At least it may be so in Ian.

    (Apologies to William Shakespeare.)

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 4:02 pm - May 31, 2007

  88. #76: Oh great, NDT, an old article. My reference was up-to-date. Scooter needs to wind up in the slammer for his treachery.

    Comment by Ian S — May 31, 2007 @ 4:05 pm - May 31, 2007

  89. Interesting, NDT. Can’t say I’m surprised. And I also found it more interesting all the hoops the administration had to go through, including perjury, to defend themselves against something that was patently obvious then.

    Not unlike how Clinton had to perjure himself to cover up for his patently-obvious playtimes.

    It’s natural to try to cover up mistakes. But quite often it gets you in more trouble.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 31, 2007 @ 4:49 pm - May 31, 2007

  90. More lies from the foaming-at-the-mouth crowd!

    Nice try, Ian.

    Oh great, NDT, an old article.

    Mhm — with information demonstrating rather convincingly that the CIA made “covert” a woman who a) worked at its headquarters, b) was known to work for the US government, and c) had been outed as a CIA agent to foreign intelligence services nearly a decade prior.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 31, 2007 @ 5:01 pm - May 31, 2007

  91. ND30, I think the “foaming-at-the-mouth” phrase is this week’s DailyKaka and DemonicUnderwear talking points for the intellectually challenged. Michelle Malkin has a good idea – let’s make it into a T-Shirt!

    http://michellemalkin.com/archives/007639.htm

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 5:07 pm - May 31, 2007

  92. #85 – You are more than welcome, ILC. Of course, no liberal or socialist would even be able to grasp the concept of “evil,” much less condemn it.

    At least, none of the libtrolls on this board.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 31, 2007 @ 5:34 pm - May 31, 2007

  93. The only things that are evil to the left are Christianity and Capitalism. As one of our trolls puts it in his handle, Right is Wrong.

    Comment by V the K — May 31, 2007 @ 5:58 pm - May 31, 2007

  94. #90: Well, I’m not surprised that someone who lies through his teeth would cheer on passing off fiction as history. You really should try honesty for a change, NDT.

    Comment by Ian S — May 31, 2007 @ 6:41 pm - May 31, 2007

  95. Peter thanks for the invite. I´m considering returning to L.A. to meet my great niece. I could detour via Houston. Please send details on how to contact you to my e-mail address: alessandrerossetti@integra.com.sv

    Comment by Roberto — May 31, 2007 @ 7:18 pm - May 31, 2007

  96. #95: Hey Roberto, be forewarned, Peter seems to have a thing for “massive members.” Just ask him. Oh, and he’s a Constitutional scholar too. LOL!

    Comment by Ian S — June 1, 2007 @ 12:20 am - June 1, 2007

  97. Peter seems to have a thing for “massive members.”

    Ummmmmmmmmmm………..Help me out here. We’re (mostly) gay men on here. Having a thing for “massive members” is wrong…….HOW?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 1, 2007 @ 2:59 am - June 1, 2007

  98. I get the sense Ian prefers carpet snacks.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 1, 2007 @ 3:00 am - June 1, 2007

  99. 89, NDT, when I wrote the post you referred to, I was thinking of writing that Clinton had done the same type of thing. Your example is not quite comparative though. Clinton’s affair was wrong and embarrassing, and there apparantly was something to hide. If what you contend about Plame is true, then what was their to hide? Why the big production, including a perjury conviction when all someone had to do was pull out a piece of paper showing Plame was not a covert operative? Investigation over in two seconds. No, this does not excuse Clinton for his actions, but at least I can understand why he has trying to hide it. But I’m sure there was an occasion where the Clinton Administration claimed they did nothing wrong or embarrassing, but acted like it was the second coming of Watergate. Anyway, I’m finding more and more that Bush and Clinton have the same leadership skills and follow the three Ps of leadership: poor, pandering, pathetic. But since both these persons were reelected as President, it seems that’s what the electorate wants. Maybe the fact that they ran against opponents that were almost as weak as they were gives some hope.

    Comment by Pat — June 1, 2007 @ 9:30 am - June 1, 2007

  100. #98 – Well, he’s called Wonder Woman for a reason, TGC. Just do the math.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — June 1, 2007 @ 10:30 am - June 1, 2007

  101. Actually, truth be told, Wonder Woman believes in “DE MINIMIS LEX.”

    Translation: “The law ignores little things.”

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — June 1, 2007 @ 10:32 am - June 1, 2007

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.