Bill Maher may be having his problems, but Loretta Sanchez conducted an interview with the LA Times wearing only a bra and underwear: http://www.solidpolitics.com

Maher is a jackass and should be condemned for that kind of talk. At a minimum he should lose his show.

Where's he getting his information? Al Qaeda?

From the dreaded MSM -- you know, all that stuff about Cheney's little war in Iraq, the elective war we didn't have to fight, the attack on this small country that we had already militarily contained, the ongoing occupation that has erased every bit of sympathy that was ever held out for us in the Muslim world -- not that you would know this, of course. There are wonderful things happening in Iraq, aren't there? I saw it on Fox.

So when Pat Robertson was calling for Chavez's assassination, what did you say? Or is just the assassination of Republicans that you object to? Does your morality extend beyond your political circle? When Jesus said to love your enemies and pray for them, what did you think He was saying?

This is the same type of irresponsible thoughtless nonsense as Ann Coulter, who seemed to wish the worst for both Lincoln Chafee in a HUMAN EVENTS feature, and Justice John Paul Stevens.

I like Bill Maher as a comic. But a Maher remark like this Cheney one is way over the line for any sane person, and simply wrong.

Thanks, astigafa, for reminding us to pray for our enemies. We should do this, and it sounds like we will need to add you to our list. Which is a shame, because I don't like to think of other Americans (you are one, right?)EVER as enemies. That's why Maher's words about Cheney are so offensive. It's not about Republicans, it's about AMERICANS. Wanting Al Gore (past VP or even at present) assassinated would be equally as offensive. SIDEBAR: By the way, if scientists keep coming out & saying Gore's view of the environment are WAY over done, will Gore have been mistaken or will he have LIED (shades of GWB-WMD)?

Since you believe we did not need to go to war, would you be willing to get out of the UN...Their sanctions have been meaningless in Iraq & pretty much elsewhere. Or is OK with you to continue to support a "meaningless" organization?

Maybe Iraq WAS militarily "contained" from hurting people on the outside....did/do you support helping the downtrodden people in South Africa, Bosnia, the Congo, Dafur...etc, etc. , militarily or with sanctions? Why not the people inside of Iraq---the hundreds of thousands killed by Sadam is not a myth or a GWB lie.

If you believe there is ANY sympathy for US/Western Civilzation anywhere in the ME outside of Israel...I've got some "prime" land in Florida I want to sell you--GET REAL---did you read the news about the conseravative Islam takeover going on in Indonesia in this weekend's news. WAKE UP!!!!!

I'm going now....to pray!

I hope Maher is correct that Cheney is causing the death of lots of people. Problem is that Maher and his ilk (Moore, Fonda, Kerry, Sheehan) equate Islamo-Fascist terrorists with peace loving Westerners - if only we didnt try to kill our enemies they would love us!

gc

Diane:
Since you're so into meaningless things I just wonder if you support "meaningless" wars?

"Bill Maher Argues for VP Cheney's Assassination." Coulter gets her tongue caught in a wringer and the "Conserv-o-Smear-o-Matic" lying machine goes into high gear, even employing the right's patented Distract-0-Matic as a secondary weapon.

Kim's headline "Bill Maher Argues for VP Cheney's Assassination" is lie. He didn't suggest -- much less argue -- in favor of Cheney's assasination; he stated that fewer people would die tomorrow if Cheney was was dead.

"Maher: I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

So ignoring Kim's lie for the moment, why aren't any of the commenters here addressing the validity of Mahrer's statement?

Because it's true, that's why.

Asti,
Check the archives. You'll find the folks at Wizbang regulary decry idiocy like Robertson's.
Unless you can show where you denounce Maher and the HuffPo crowd, you ought to come down off that high horse you love so much. Cause your last post doesn't indicate anything like disaproval.

One could make the obvious and equally reckless comment that we'd all be better off if Bill Maher was dead. The main difference is that the MSM would be all a-sputter over it.

Like Al Franken, Maher stopped being amusing a long time ago.

So ignoring Kim's lie for the moment, why aren't any of the commenters here addressing the validity of Mahrer's statement?

Because it's true, that's why.

Do tell Lee, your thoughts are so profound on such things.

Lee said:

So ignoring Kim's lie for the moment, why aren't any of the commenters here addressing the validity of Mahrer's statement?

Because it's true, that's why.

Please provide a list of names of those individuals that Cheney has killed in the past and a list of names of those who will live tommorrow as a direct result if he were to die today.

Pray, Lee, explain to us all how killing the VP would menan fewer deaths? Would it stop conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan? How would it do so?
Are you sure it wouldn't just stiffen the resolve of the US population? Perhaps give a solid reason to drop a few MOABs in Pakistan on those camps Al-Queda has set up, but NATO cannot touch because they are on the wrong side of the border.

His "I'm just saying..." defense, which you endorse, is like saying "No offense" or "With all due respect" in one breath while calling someones mother a whore in the other. It doesn't change the intent, just the cowardice of someone unwilling to stand behind a statement.

Lee, just missed your comment:

"So ignoring Kim's lie for the moment, why aren't any of the commenters here addressing the validity of Mahrer's statement?

"Because it's true, that's why."

It's true only in your world, Lee. Most grownups don't agree that Maher's comment is valid. I certainly don't.

How about Nancy Pelosi and Jack Murtha? Would it be an equally valid statement to suggest that they should be assassinated? One could argue, with more logical authority, that these two are prolonging the war and encouraging more violence in the middle east with their craven political maneuvering than Cheney has. He's only the Vice President and has no authority to set policy. Pelosi and Murtha are actively militating for America's surrender for their own political gain. How about Feingold? Harvey Waxman? John Kerry? Dick Durbin? John Conyers? Why not you? You do the same thing here on a daily basis.

Hey, let's just kill everybody we disagree with. I'm not worried. Our side still has guns.

Wow. You gotta be quick around here today...

"Please provide a list of names of those individuals that Cheney has killed in the past.." by Ohiovoter.

Well here are the last 20. If you need more examples, there are are about 3,500 more I could provide.
Vahaviolos, Steve
Gebur, Ronald W.
Burkart, Armer N.
Conboy, Adam C.
Clark, Eric D.
Snowberger, Stephen P.
Marin Dominguez, Jose S.
Yearby, Hatak Yuka Keyu M.
Teeters, Brandon L.
Flint, Marion
Dampier, Grant A.
Kelly, Dale J.
Veverka, David M.
Legaspi, Emmanuel L.
Burnett, Jason K.
Grames Sanchez, David J.
Licalzi, Michael L.
Worrell, Matthew W.
Weeks, Jamie D.
Mahaffee, Shane R.

Barney, you have no shame.

JR,

I think you mean "brain".

Read about the retired Iranian general disappeared from Istanbul last month. He had probably masterminded the raid In Iraq using terrorists in American uniforms that killed 5 of our soldiers.

Poof!
======

Hugh:
Unequivocal statement of condemnation: 10 points
Needlessly picking a fight with Diane: -20 points

BTW, does anyone else sense the sword of Damocles lurking above BG2K?

I'm sure the secret service is all over this.

Dave,

I proudly suuport my country to win a war (meaningless or not) any time the decision has been made to go to war & the soldiers arrive there--winning can offset meaningless. Losing never offsets meaningless.

BarneyG just went over the line from passionate debater of his side to opportunistic scum.

That was vile, man, absolutely, irredeemably vile.

Diane

So, Diane, My country, right or wrong.

BarneyG2000

You R a piece of shit!

Who the hell is Bill Maher?

Come-on, I was just helping ohiovoter out. It was just a joke. Just like when Ann Coulter says, "It's a joke", and you give her a pass every time she says something vile and disgusting, so I was joking.

Barney is one sick puppy. But the left seems infested with his type. At least Hugh did criticize Maher.

Can the proprietors of this site please see to it that one BarneyG2000 is banned?

I'm all for free speech, but this person is simply playing politics with the lives of our troops and their families. He has gone over the line, plain and simple and we don't need to hear his disgusting rhetoric on this site. DKos and others are there for that...go there Barney to get your sick fix.

Hugh:

Have you looked at your heels lately?

Come-on, I was just helping ohiovoter out. It was just a joke.

You call listing the names of soldiers killed in action, just a joke? Are you that dimented to think that's funny?

Just like when Ann Coulter says, "It's a joke", and you give her a pass every time she says something vile and disgusting, so I was joking.

Yet she has been condemned on this very site.

Barney, you are one of the most vile, lowest, wastes of a person I have come across. You're not funny, you're an ass.

barney you are full of shit, I don't see anyone here sticking up for Coulter, in fact I am seeing quite the opposite in conservative quarters. Sticking up for anything idiotic your side does is a lib trait, we don't roll that way.

Guys, you are missing the real point. What Maher and Lee said IS true. If Cheney were to die, there would be a lot less people who would die as a DIRECT result.

Like terrorists, Islamic butchers, etc.

The people who would die indirectly, as a result of those miscreants not assuming room tempreature, would increase exponentially though.

Barney, the only ass that argument has worked for in recent memory is your beloved John F'n Kerry.

"I don't see anyone here sticking up for Coulter,"

Hugh You are such a hypocrite!! You prove Anns points perfectly.
Posted by: 914

I think Ann's intent was even more simplistic - to point out how much outrage is generated at anti-gay commments while anti-Christian comments were ignored by John Edwards until the media called him on it.
Posted by: Jim at March 5, 2007 09:49 AM

LMAO... This is amazing, a so called conservative website buzzing over Ann's WORDS. DO WE ALL need to go to REHAB??!!! as she joked? 
I can understand the kiddies at Kos and other lefty troll sites jerking off all over themselves over this story, but WTF...here!!!! Other Red conservative websites going cannibal. Lefty's like Hugh have their head up their arse who cares what they think, but conservatives better understand, the left will not like you NO matter what you say good or BAD. Jay Tea put a nice perspective to this NON-story.
Posted by: Knightbrigade at March 5, 2007 03:25 AM

Those came from a very short review of the last few comments in only one of the posts dedicated to the subject, so who are you crapping d-hogg?

"Bill Maher Argues for VP Cheney's Assassination." Coulter gets her tongue caught in a wringer and the "Conserv-o-Smear-o-Matic" lying machine goes into high gear, even employing the right's patented Distract-0-Matic as a secondary weapon.

Kim's headline "Bill Maher Argues for VP Cheney's Assassination" is lie. He didn't suggest -- much less argue -- in favor of Cheney's assasination; he stated that fewer people would die tomorrow if Cheney was was dead.

"Maher: I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

So ignoring Kim's lie for the moment, why aren't any of the commenters here addressing the validity of Mahrer's statement?

Because it's true, that's why.

Posted by: Lee at March 5, 2007 09:54 AM

AMEN BROTHER!!!

Bill Maher thinks lives would be saved if Cheney were killed.

Big deal.

He lives in Hollywood, of course he's swallowed the "murderous, night of the sodomizing cougar man" image of Dick Cheney.

I'd be more shocked if a left-winger came out and said they disagreed with Cheney on every single political issue, but found him to be an honorable and decent man who truly cares about his family and country.

But unlike Ann Coulter, without some periodic bout with diarrhea of the mouth Bill Maher isn't on anyone's radar. Ann thrives on creating controversy, Maher's survival depends on it.

Oh, and I think lives would be saved if Kim Jung il and the moolahs were killed.

But it's more comfortable to live in the liberal dream world where Dick Cheney's working behind the scenes to publically execute homosexuals rather than confront the reality of regimes which actually do so.

Do you know why 800,000 people died in Rwanda? Confused by his blood lust, Dick Cheney lost count around 400,000 and came up short of his stated goal - 1 million dark skinned people killed.

He's making up the difference in Iraq. Because that's how Dick rolls.

I hope to God whomever becomes the Republican nominee in 2008 asks Cheney to stay on as Veep.

Has out society really gotten to the point that use of the word "faggot" in any sense is equivalent to calling for the death of the Vice President, or saying that he personally caused the deaths of American soldiers? Yuck!

If you want to see hate speech? Well here it is. Are you righties going to denounce this?

"The Jews brought the Holocaust upon themselves by rebelling against God and that the Holocaust was God's way of forcing Jews to move to Israel" Pastor John Hagge, Jerusalem Countdown: A Prelude To war

Hagge is a well-known Christian leader and Chairman of Christians Untied for Israel.

Here are two other members of the board

Rev. Dr. Jerry Falwell
Founder and Chancellor, Liberty University

Gary Bauer
President, American Values

bill maher is absolutely right!! too bad others don't have the balls to speak out! WE LOVE YOU BILL MAHER!!!keep up the good work!!

"Those came from a very short review of the last few comments in only one of the posts dedicated to the subject, so who are you crapping d-hogg?"
Posted by: BarneyG2000

Uhh, right barney, except hugh's OWN comments contradict your idiotic attempt to selectively choose comments.

"At least Lorie in her post and some others have had the integrity to call it what it was.
Posted by: Hugh"

"See, at least they have some intellectual and moral honesty unlike.....
Posted by: Hugh"

Even when Jay lists a bunch of lefty talking points and says it is pointless to argue which side throws out more garbage as the loony left will win hands down, Hugh agrees with him.

"Hugh:
Rethuglicans, repukelicans, fascists, Bushitler, Chimpy, Nazis, wingnuts (although that one is a nice little counterpoint to "moonbats," but not quite as amusing), Jesus freaks, Bible-thumpers, fundies...
You wanna play the "who has more and worse names than the other?" Pretty pointless to me.
J.
Posted by: Jay Tea"

"Well Jay that was exactly my point to Ohio Voter and in 2 of my comments. Duh
Posted by: Hugh"

So once again barney, hugh is full of shit, and you are too.
And for your last comment, yes, I do denounce that garbage, and I most definitely don't see many conservatives making excuses for Falwell, so don't even try that bullshit.

" I most definitely don't see many conservatives making excuses for Falwell," Really D-hoggs, then how did this happen (Falwell is member of the board of CUFI)?

But On July 19, 2006, at a CUFI's Washington DC inaugural event, with GOP Party head Ken Mehlman and US GOP Senators Sam Brownback, Rick Santorum, Kay Bailey-Hutchinson and John Cornyn in attendance ( President George W. Bush sent recorded greetings to the event ) , Pastor John Hagee declared :

"The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West... a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation [...] and [the] Second Coming of Christ.".

Leading members of the Republican party including our President and a candidate for President supports this clowns hate speech, and the extermination of the Jews.

Holy man Reverend Pat calls for the assasination of Hugo Chavez and opines that Ariel Sharon's stroke was delivered by God because He didn't like his Palestinian policy. Now there's a true christian! Coulter wishes terrorist bombs had been detonated at the NYT bulding and that certain Supreme Court justices should be poisoned. Bill "mr.regular guy" O'Reilly tells SF not to expect help if their city is attacked by terrorists. Man, this compassionate conservatism is killing me.

BFD. What are the boundaries of outrageous speech anymore anyway? There don't appear to be any these days. When you decide on them and apply the same standards to everyone, let me know. I'm a big fan of Maher and have not seen the show yet, but to me it's all just words, regardless of whose mouth they're coming from. Just more sanctimonious blather from Kim and the rest of the "conservatives".

Can you tell me where exactly someone defended Falwell in the crap you just sent me? You're ridiculous barney, ignore everything I wrote previously, ignore the fact that I said I don't see anyone defendnog FALWELL, pertaining to his comments you yourself included, and then add some shit about Hagee to try to prove me wrong, when I specifically said FALWELL, he isn't even mentioned in your comment barney. Better get back to the interwebs to try to selectively pick some more quotes that have absoulutely nothing to do with anything I have said.

OK Barney, you quote Pat Robertson and we'll quote Lewis Farakan......now who's a "hate monger"?

btw, Nice use of dead troops to your betterment. As a combat vet I gotta say you are lower than what swims in a slit trench.

I found someone defending Falwell. Wait, it's the ACLU! But, but, the ACLU are nothing but religion-haters! The cognitive dissonance is hurting my brain.

Finely. Everyone now knows what barneygoole is. The list is so long that I will let you fill in the rest of the blank: scumbag,___________________
___________________________________________________

what does that prove mantis? so you think the constitution should be trampled just because falwell is an idiot? The pain in your brain is hardly from the cognitive dissonance.

Is this better d-hogg?

Many are still unnerved by Reverend Jerry Falwell's announcement that the Evangelical Christian's Antichrist is "a male Jew". History has shown that insensitive theological concepts such as this can stir up latent Jew-hatred ("anti-Semitism"). The American Jewish Congress observed that Falwell's declaration will have "an inevitably incendiary and degrading effect on Christian attitudes towards Jews." [PRNews wire] Pastor Kenneth Rawson

Or, how about Falwell's statement that Jews can not ascend to heaven without first converting to Christianity?

"Leading members of the Republican party including our President and a candidate for President supports this clowns hate speech, and the extermination of the Jews."

Weird, I thought they were neocon marionettes dancing on strings pulled by their Zionist puppetmasters.

So now the Zionists are trying to exterminate the Jews? Geez, we go to the Middle East to innocently kill a few hundred thousand muslims... and now Zionists have turned on the Jews.

Fucking Dick Cheney.

barney, are you fucking retarded? Seriously man! I condemn him for those idiotic beliefs as well, but where in what you just posted does it show anyone defending him?!! You just proved yourself wrong by your very own post,

"Many are still unnerved" that is quite the opposite of support barney. I saw you earlier giving someone crap for their reading comprehension skills, uhhh, ok barney.

D-hogg, Rush just said on his show that the majority of the comments on the conservative blogs were in favor of Ann's comment, and that the blogers that were against Ann's comment were "taking it on the chin". He also said that "people thought her comments were fantastic and wanted to hear more".

Still proud of your party?

what does that prove mantis?

Nothin, 'cept the ACLU isn't so anti-religion. Not that that's at all relevant to this discussion, but it seems to have gone off the rails long before I go here, so what the hell.

so you think the constitution should be trampled just because falwell is an idiot?

That's a pretty deep reading there, chum. Do you do feminist criticism too?

The pain in your brain is hardly from the cognitive dissonance.

Hey, how'd you know I'm hungover?

You know BK2G - I could start listing all the names of those that died in 9/11 and say that they'd still be alive if Clinton and Gore had been assasinated ... but that would be base.

Thought you were made of better stuff. I stand corrected.

And you started listening to Rush when now barney? I don't listen to him, but its odd that you choose now to take stock in what he says. Once again barney, keep ignoring all the comments at hand and the fact that you constantly change topic when its inconvenient for you, which is always.

mantis, you call it "hungover" now? Interesting. And its hardly digging deep when you are the one that picked that story to post in the first placed, and then pointed out the "cognitive dissonance".

And its hardly digging deep when you are the one that picked that story to post in the first placed, and then pointed out the "cognitive dissonance".

Kinda dim, aren't you? The dissonance I professed was satirical, friend. See, if I were an super-religious, anti-ACLU nut, as so many on the interwebs are, I would have a hard time reconciling the fact that the ACLU sides with the likes of Falwell (and religious organizations in general). Since I am not such a nut, and I agree with ACLU on this, I'm not actually experiencing any cognitive dissonance. The fact that I need to explain this to you is pretty sad.

I just read the thread and decided to inject some smartassery into what is a really stupid discussion. Pardon me. Carry on.

kind of "hungover" aren't you? You posted the story manits, the story was not only about the aclu and falwell agreeing but about constitutional protections of religion. if you don't want to discuss the scope of a story, don't frigging post it!

Kim is a trip. While cheerleading this futile and worthless Iraq war that has already resulted in the wasted life of a family member she is angy at Bill Maher, a comedian? The whole post is a lie anyway I have it on TIVO, just watched it again and Kim is still a liar.

As far as the war on terror lets see some of you Bush submissives refute this:

http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2007/03/iraq_effect_1.html

And if you don't know who Peter Bergen is at this late date you know nothing.

You posted the story manits, the story was not only about the aclu and falwell agreeing but about constitutional protections of religion.

Ok, so what?

if you don't want to discuss the scope of a story, don't frigging post it!

Hey, I'll discuss it if you want to. My problem was you reading into it that I somehow disagreed with the ruling. I don't.

After having read all of the comments posted here, it leads one to believe those on the right are far more intelligent than the blathering idiots on the left. At least the ones who post here. What the liar, Bill Maher stated has no ring of truth to it, whereas what Anne Coulter spoke, that she was not going to comment on John Edwards as the need to go to rehab after saying the word faggot. She did not infer Edwards was a faggot. That leap was left to the mind of the listener. Seems those offended think Edwards is gay. Coulter did not explain in what context she intended to use the word faggot, which is a English slang term for a cigarette. Dirty minds have dirty thoughts!

HOW - again, exactly HOW would Cheney's death save ANYONE? Whether you hate him or not, what is the logic of this statement? Cheney is NOT presisdent. Neither the war in Iraq nor the war in Afghanistan would end because of Cheney's death. So how would anyone be saved?

"..barney you are full of shit, I don't see anyone here sticking up for Coulter," by D-hogg

O-really?

"..much like I found myself defending Ann Coulter over the weekend,.." by Jay Tea

Now, what are you full of?

To the editors of Wizbang:

If I see BG2K's name on one more comment on this blog going forward - I'm never visiting Wizbang again.

Bye

This is muuuuuuuuuuuuuuch worse than calling someone a faggot.

Much.

HOW - again, exactly HOW would Cheney's death save ANYONE?

I agree, if Cheney died it would not prevent anyone's death--except maybe his hunting partners'.

Bye

Don't let the screen door smack you in the ass.

By far the best comment of the thread:

BTW, does anyone else sense the sword of Damocles lurking above BG2K? Posted by: Dave A. at March 5, 2007 10:41 AM

Me thinks the sword dropped already Dave. However he tossed up some chaff (a foil hat) and diverted the threat.

Yes, Barney is retarded, socially and emotionally retarded. His rant about the "3,500" that Cheney has "killed" indicates his mental instability.

But we knew that from all the heavy posting he does here.

Must be an aspect of his Bush Derangement, that he spends his days toiling over a key board on this site, where he posts without knowledge or intellect to back it up.

That he should spend so much time on his computer tells me plenty about his life. It's more than pathetic; it is "retarded."

Mr. VIce President,

I hope you feel better soon, Best of luck.

Barney (seriously)

What a bunch of hypocrites.

Sure, Barney's colorfully made point was likely in bad taste. There are other ways he could have made the same point, but quite honestly, any of you people who are beating the war drum and cheering on this administration's war plan (and not in the service yourself) are almost as responsible for these deaths as the administration that's pushed these poor guys into this hell.

Not quite, because you haven't had the power to pull the trigger - but you've given this administration the ammunition.

Fortunately, most of the country has seen the light on this. Not you ignorant fools, of course.

Has anyone from the right addressed Kim's lie? That she lied about what Maher said?

[crickets...]

We all recognize your sincerity, Barney. Now drink your milk and go straight to hell like a nice little boy.

What an obnoxious cretin you are.

I believe there were about 4 posts about your ridiculous lie assertion directly following your comment. crickets indeed.

Haven't seen your explanation of why Maher's comment is "right," Lee.

C'mon, we're all interested in your opinion.

Lee,

I don't see any lies. It could be construed that he was arguing the benefits of Cheney's death by that comment.

In my opinion, if Cheney died by suicide bomber alot of others would die shortly after in retributive strikes. Meanwhile, the Vice President of the United States is not killing people simply by being alive himself...and it's absolutely asinine for people to think so.

I'll be back in the morning in case the discussion is still going.

I don't see any lies. It could be construed that he was arguing the benefits of Cheney's death by that comment.

There's a difference between positing a hypothetical and arguing for action, is there not?

While I don't agree with Maher, he did only say that "if this happened, this would be the result." He did not say "someone should do this." So Kim's headline, "Bill Maher Argues for VP Cheney's Assassination," is a tad hyperbolic. Especially considering the fact that Maher said "if he did die" not "if someone killed him."

For instance, I could say "if we did abolish all heavy industry, there would be far less pollution." While that's true, it doesn't mean I'm calling for the end of heavy industry.

On the other hand, maybe Maher does wish someone would kill Cheney. He very well may, but his comment doesn't bear that out.

If BarneyG were banned from this site, it would be a much less interesting place. I am in no way "arguing" for BG's banishment.

Groucho, it would be less irritating. He offers nothing of value here.

Unless you see value in a train wreck (his miserable life).

Maher: "I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

ummmmm ok....so as not to LIE.........right Lee wink* wink*

Knightbrigade: "I'm just saying if he/(Maher) got hit by a truck, other people, more people would chuckle. That's a fact."

YA YA .....I know I'm an ass ho*e

I know I'll probably regret this, but in regards to Barney2G. Yes he's a train wreck, yes he's off his rocker, but it's good to have the "other" Loony left side come dance. I know instead of a debate it turns into trying to give a ragged junk yard dog a bath, but so what. I say let Jay Tea decide if he actually hurts the site in any way. My vote is for BarneyG2 to stick around, and more people leave teeth marks in his ass. Just my opinion.

"Has anyone from the right addressed Kim's lie? That she lied about what Maher said?" - Lee

I addressed your accusation Lee.

Maybe it got lost in Barney's sheer lack of taste.

Knightbrigade just used an example of the arument I made.

If one were to say that "BarneyG and Lee both have 2 things in common Barack Obama: They are leftists and have brown dicks." and added "But I kid." would not offset the fact that it was implied 2 of the 3 were homosexuals. It may be funny. But it is still unkind, crass and has no place outside of a Don Rickles routine. And neither Coulter or Maher are Don Rickles.

Now, my question since Coulter's comment came to light (which I don't care for because it hurts any real points she may have made well): Who is it that was supposed to be offended? Gays for being likened to Edwards, or the other way around?

"I addressed your accusation Lee."

Not that I can find anywhere SCSI.

So I ask again why hasn't anyone from the right addressed Kim's lie? That she lied about what Maher said?

Your sophistry is boring, Lee. Did you flunk Logic 101?

And you haven't explained why Maher's remark is "right."

Lee - 1st learn to read. Start with what you said. You asked for people to argue the validity of Maher's statement. Not to refute what you call a lie.

You called Maher's statement the truth. That's an opinion. Maher called it a fact. Also opinion. Just like it is your opinion that Kim lied about how she views Maher's arguement.

He did argue that Cheney's death would result in fewer deaths, and that would be good. And a "fact". The context of his arguement was discussing the attempt on Cheney's life, aka, assassination. He is arguing that Cheney being assassinated would be a good thing. He is arguing for it. Not advocating it, but arguing that it is a good thing.

2nd, go wipe the brown stuff off your John Thomas.
I'm just saying.

3rd, you've been asked by name, to explain how Cheney being killed would save lives. Do so.
Personally, I think it would open the floodgates even more, and MOABs would rain down on the border country of Afghanistan and Pakistan or anywhere else that Al Queda is believed to be taking shelter.

"Lee - 1st learn to read. Start with what you said. You asked for people to argue the validity of Maher's statement. Not to refute what you call a lie"

Actually I asked both, SCSI -- "So ignoring Kim's lie for the moment, why aren't any of the commenters here addressing the validity of Mahrer's statement?" and "Has anyone from the right addressed Kim's lie? That she lied about what Maher said? [crickets...].

Understandable - it's easy to miss something in these longish comment threads -- but I always enjoy it when you guys are insulting while you make false statements like that, SCSI.

"You called Maher's statement the truth. That's an opinion. Maher called it a fact. Also opinion."

Oh it's a fact, you just can't see it. Too bad -- someday you're going to look back on the years you spent defending Bush/Cheney and wonder how you could have been so stupid.

"Just like it is your opinion that Kim lied about how she views Maher's arguement."

So then Maher convinced Kim that he was calling for an assassination - and the rest of you have the excuse that you don't think but instead choose to have Kim think for you?

-- and since Kim thought he really meant it then she wasn't lying when she falsely stated what he "argued" -- it's just the belief of fool - a fool you happen to agree with. Lol! Thanks for clarifying your position, SCSI.

Actually, Maher made clear that he was not calling for Cheney's assasination:

Ridley: It's one thing to say you hate Dick Cheney, which applies to his politics. It's another thing to say, "I'm sorry he didn't die in an explosion." And I think, you know...

Maher: But you should be able to say it. And by the way...

[Maher confirmed the right for someone to say that they are "sorry he didn't die" -- he didn't say he himself was sorry, now did he?]

Frank: Excuse me, Bill, but can I ask you a question? Do you decide what the topics are for this show?

Maher: Yeah, I decide the topics, they don't go there.

Frank: But you exercise control over the show the way that she does over her blog.

Maher: But I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn't be dying needlessly tomorrow. (applause)

[Maher states his opinion that Cheney is contributing to needless deaths -- he didn't call for Cheney's assassination, now did he?.]

Scarborough: If someone on this panel said that they wished that Dick Cheney had been blown up, and you didn't say...

Frank: I think he did.

Scarborough: Okay. Did you say...

Maher: No, no. I quoted that.

[Maher clarified that he didn't make the statement, he was quoting someone else.]

Frank: You don't believe that?

Maher: I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact.

[Nothing here arguing in favor of assassinating anyone -- but simply Maher restating his opinion that if Cheney was dead more people would live.]

By the accounts I've seen Cheney pushed hard to invade Iraq under flimsy pretenses. He'd probably do the same, given the chance, in Iran and North Korea.

His pivotal role getting us into Iraq is not doubt contributing to us staying in Iraq, and Maher is correct that if Cheney was not in power or not alive more people would live is accurate. We'd either be out of Iraq sooner, or we'd be less likely to invade Iran, or both -- and either would mean less lives lost. Kim's characterization that Meher's argument is in fact an argument for Cheney's assassination is just wingnut buffoonery. Judging from the jackasses like wavemaker who stand around in their dung braying but never making a point, lies like Kim's have an audience.

I'm glad you nutcakes find something to talk about each day, I'm just looking forward to more of those fact-based discussions that happen (rarely) and fewer of these fantasy threads based on a lie. No one talks about the validity of Maher's statement until a liberal steps up and suggests it, and no one ever honestly addresses the base lie that the rest of the post used as it's foundation.

HEE HAW!

Unfortunately, Lee, you're the only one laughing, and you're the only one who's hysterical.

Ridley: ... It's another thing to say, "I'm sorry he didn't die in an explosion." (i.e., a failed assasination attempt)

Maher: But you should be able to say it. (i.e., I'm sorry the assassination attempt failed)

So, he defends that "you should be able to say" that you're sorry an assassination attempt on the VP failed, but he's not thereby "arguing for" assassination. He's only arguing for the right to argue for assassinating the VP.

I was wrong. Your sophistry is not boring. It's diabolical.

Actually I asked both, SCSI -- "So ignoring Kim's lie for the moment, why aren't any of the commenters here addressing the validity of Mahrer's statement?" and "Has anyone from the right addressed Kim's lie? That she lied about what Maher said? [crickets...].

So, Lee is nothing but a sock puppet?

He is so dishonest that he pretends to be another poster to bump up 'support' for his views?

It was obvious from his first post that "Lee, while laughing hystercially" was a sock puppet, but I have to confess that it never occurred to me that it was actually Lee. While I often (virtually always) disagree with Lee, I thought - until now - that he had integrity.

While overall, it is rather pathetic to resort to using a second persona, here it so transparent that I have to admit I find it amusing.

Lee said:

So ignoring Kim's lie for the moment, why aren't any of the commenters here addressing the validity of Mahrer's statement?

Because it's true, that's why.

I was only one of a number of people who asked Lee to prove the truth of Maher's statement.

Lee's response:

[crickets]

But, then, he came back with this gem:

Has anyone from the right addressed Kim's lie? That she lied about what Maher said?

[crickets...]

Apparently, he can't come up with anything in defense of Maher's comments being "true", so he changed the subject - AND pretended it was someone else who failed to respond to cover his failure.

Now, his spirited defense of his previous views (while now pretending to be "Lee, while laughing hysterically), his main defense to the idea that Maher was telling the truth and Kim was lying appears to be 'because I said so'.

*DISCLAIMER

My remarks were based on "Lee, while laughing hysterically" claiming to be Lee.

If, in fact, that poster was lying and is not Lee, then I apologize to Lee for my previous comments. While I do not generally support banning anyone, if that poster IS lying about being Lee, then he should be banned IMO.

Geez you're an idiot, OV.

It was obvious from his first post that "Lee, while laughing hystercially" was a sock puppet, but I have to confess that it never occurred to me that it was actually Lee.

Wow.

"Maher: But you should be able to say it. (i.e., I'm sorry the assassination attempt failed)"

The moron brays again.

"You should be able to say it" refers to free speech. It has noting to do with an assassination attempt, much less arguing in favor of an assassination.

mantis,

There's a difference between positing a hypothetical and arguing for action, is there not?

Indeed. Though I did say he was arguing the benefits of it rather than calling for action...which could also be said that he was arguing for Cheney's assassination.

Especially considering the fact that Maher said "if he did die" not "if someone killed him."

In the context of the conversation, however:

Ridley: It's one thing to say you hate Dick Cheney, which applies to his politics. It's another thing to say, "I'm sorry he didn't die in an explosion." And I think, you know...

--

Maher: I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact.

I think we know which explosion they are referring to. It wasn't an accidental explosion at a baby milk factory.

I'm not going to say he's outright calling for Cheney's assassination, but he does seem to be saying alot of good would come of it. Something I don't particularly agree with.

I agree with Heralder, he really knows what he's talking about.

Hey, thanks! You're the man.

No no, you're the man.

I'm not going to say he's outright calling for Cheney's assassination, but he does seem to be saying alot of good would come of it. Something I don't particularly agree with.

And I agree with you: he didn't call for assassination; he did say the results of such an assassination would be good; he's wrong about that.

Now if he had said that more people would be alive if Cheney had never been VP, I'd give him a maybe. But Cheney's removal now--if he died, retired, or otherwise--wouldn't save anyone.

Agreed, mantis.

Agreed, Heralder.

It was obvious from his first post that "Heralder's Sockpuppet" was a sock puppet, but I have to confess that it never occurred to me that it was actually Heralder.

I'm shocked, shocked to find that sockpuppetry is going on in here!

It was obvious from his first post that "Heralder's Sockpuppet" was a sock puppet, but I have to confess that it never occurred to me that it was actually Heralder.

Wow.

Did someone say sockpuppet?

Now that I've made a mockery of the argument, I'll just go ahead an move on...sorry guys :D

Long live Bill Maher. People like him are challenging the standard quo in this country and bringing a little truth to the masses. So tired of the lying, corrupt Bush administration.