Have you left no sense of decency?

These words spoken more than a half century ago about one of the Senate’s most vicious hate mongers have new relevance to Senator John McCain. Who we have largely taken to be a decent man has descended into the most dangerous attack on a fellow candidate in recent times. It is time he rescue his honor, remove Sarah Palin from his ticket and offer an apology to America and Senator Obama specifically. He has disgraced himself and unleashed forces that portend evil.

Palin’s irresponsible claim that Obama is a terrorist can fairly be interpreted as summoning up the crowd’s responsive calls for harm to his person. It is one thing to decry what proves to be a weak link between Senator Obama and William Ayers. It is quite another to claim that because of any such association Obama is a terrorist. That is irresponsible and beneath the dignity of the American people.

We should have gotten a clue of what the real purpose of naming Palin when as Frank Rich points out in the New York Times , she quoted Westbrook Pegler, a man who called for someone to splatter Bobby Kennedy’s brains; a man for whom hatred was the serum of life. We might have been wary when she told us she didn’t care what anyone asked she would say what she wanted heard.

Sarah Palin’s lack of contact with mainstream America of so many values and issues is troubling enough, but for her to become the cheerleader for hatred is beyond the pale. She has raised to the surface that strange brew of racism and violence unique to America in a way that is at once dangerous and insidious.

That senator McCain allows this horrible woman to spew hatred is unconscionable. It is both beneath his own standards but a complete repudiation of the one good attribute his candidacy once offered America – his willingness to bridge our divides. All that is gone, sacrificed to the evil god of ambition and hunger for power.

It would be nice to pretend that McCain is the victim of an out of control campaign and that he retains his basic goodness, but I can no longer do so. Many of us have long worried that his well known volatile temper would be a danger for anyone in the office of President. What we, or at least I, did not discern that his temper would find outlet through a woman of such little character as Sarah Palin.

This is a governor who was so petty as to use her influence to fire a former brother in law for personal reasons. This is a governor who doesn’t have a clue about what 90% of America deals with on a daily basis. She is either rather dumb or just not interested in using her mental resources. She is a joke that allows for no laughter.

All of that can be put into a “that’s politics” container – after all we made it through Dan Quayle. But it cannot be tolerated in modern America that she be allowed to work crowds into a lynch mob mentality where it is acceptable to call for killing the opposition candidate. It cannot be tolerated that McCain publicly asks for calm while his ads speak hatred and he retains the mistress of hate to share his ticket.

It is time for McCain to replace Sarah Palin or resign from it himself. Just as the junior Senator from Wisconsin brought dishonor to the Senate, McCain has brought dishonor to his party, the Senate and the electoral process.

44 Responses to "Have you left no sense of decency?"

  1. Carl Nemo  October 13, 2008 at 7:45 pm

    duplicate post deleted

  2. Carl Nemo  October 14, 2008 at 12:58 am

    I’m actually glad that McCain/Palin have chosen a path of vile slander against Obama. It is their undoing and will insure victory for Obama. : )

    They’ve crossed the Rubicon and there is no turning back…!

    Carl Nemo **==

  3. RichardKanePA  October 14, 2008 at 10:23 am

    Many the commenters above, talked about what they remembered. I wonder if any of us commenting on this blog are under 60 years old. Perhaps CHB needs to appeal also to younger readers. Perhaps the latest October surprise piece will do that, “node/11569″.
    RichardKanePA

  4. Timr  October 14, 2008 at 1:17 pm

    Richard, I am under 60. Just because I remember the LBJ Daisy ad-I think that I was in HS or maybe jrHS then-does not make me an old person, could be that some of the commenters looked up on that ol internets-you know, the series of tubes thingy-and that is how they know about how politics was back in the day.

  5. Ladywolf55  October 14, 2008 at 1:50 pm

    I am under 60, also. I do remember the 60’s well. I was a young child, but I remember the turmoil, the sadness, fear,the pride in Martin Luther King and his courage (I’m caucasian, but have great pride and admiration in what MLK tried to accomplish), and well remember Kent State where our own government turned on it’s peaceful protesters and killed them. Our government is slightly DIFFERENT today, it’s worse. Beware.

  6. gazelle1929  October 14, 2008 at 4:37 pm

    Sorry, they were hardly peaceful protesters. At least one of the Guardsmen had just been injured by a thrown rock. They had been pelted all morning, and several said they felt justified in shooting because they were in fear for their lives. And if you look at the distance the dead students were from the firing line, you can make a very good case that the troops were firing over the heads of those closer to them.

    Remember, that riot had been going on for days, and at least one building was torched, firefighters were pelted with rocks and had their hoses slashed.

    Definitely not a peaceful protest. YCLIU.

    And it was hardly a matter of the Government’s turning on its citizens. This was the only incident that resulted in a death, so far as I know. Tragic though it was, the “Massacre” was an isolated incident.

  7. bryan mcclellan  October 14, 2008 at 6:18 pm

    Ah to be far under the magic number 60.
    I remember May 5 1970, Sarge called us together and announced.
    Boys we’ve just invaded Cambodia, drop your c#*ks and grab your socks, pack your grip we’re takin a trip.

    I’m a hair under Richard and I hear you loud and clear,we need the young to interact with because at this very moment our history is being politically corrected and theirs is in peril.

    Great point and a much needed observation. Thank You.

    Just an Ancient Cavalryman.

  8. Hoosier_CowBoy  October 14, 2008 at 7:28 pm

    The NeoCon Noise machine crossed the border between spin, distortion, and outright lying about Obama. They have no shame.

    The level of vitriol has increased markedly within the last two days, and multiplies by the hour.

    I can’t take much more. I will vote early and go out on a whopper of a bender, lapsing periodically into unconsciousness and waking up long enough to get wasted again. I will not watch the boober.

    Hopefully I will wake up to a better post election world, if not, I will be ready for the consequences of a McCain presidency by staying toasted.

    It will be up to the intelligence of the average American voter to discern between truth, spin, distortion, and lying.

    If the process takes more than ten seconds, Obama is in trouble.

  9. Carl Nemo  October 14, 2008 at 10:37 pm

    Yo gazelle 1929…

    I’ve read your posts over time and have come to the conclusion that you sir, are an “incendiary” poster; ie., an agent provocateur!

    Your thoughts are always totally juxtaposed against common sense with resultant judicious outcomes.

    So now you think it’s okay that a national guardsman should have the authority to shoot a college student that’s pitching rocks at them…NO?!

    Although Kent State is an event of many years past it indicates to me that you are a “reichwing” sympathizer and a supporter of Bushista freedom destroying, retrograde policies.

    “Tragic though it was, the “Massacre” was an isolated incident”…extract from your post

    Tragic > isolated > incident = death to a protestor against an over-reaching government then as now; evidently no big deal by your standards. They were just doing their duty…no?! : |

    I’m sure you are voting for McCain/Palin and you’ll also surely get the government you so sorely deserve in spades!

    Carl Nemo **==

  10. gazelle1929  October 15, 2008 at 8:26 am

    I said it was OK for a guardsman to shoot a citizen? Shirley, you jest. I said no such thing. Go back and look. All I did was try to show a big picture aspect to it. It was the only incident of its kind during the entire period and people here keep bringing it up to show how big and bad the Federal Government is/was.

    Your conclusion is incorrect:

    I ask questions and get no answers. This makes me bad somehow? For having the temerity to question supposed facts and to impale on the lance of scrutiny the often times strange ideas set forth here? Ideas like 9/11 having been planned by the Bush Administration. Little things like that. I ask for clarification and get nothing but obfuscation. I ask for citations to support facts alleged here and get things like the post above. But I continue to ask because it might make one or two others ask questions and challenge the status quo here and elsewhere.

    If you don’t like my questions and comments you are free to ignore me.

    For the record I have been a supporter of Barack Obama since 2004 when he delivered the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention. I recognized in him a man who was capable of galvanizing our country, in particularly our younger voters, and turning us away from the toxic sort of politics and politicians who at that time held sway in Washington and elsewhere in the country.

    I will stop calling you Shirley.

  11. Ladywolf55  October 15, 2008 at 10:47 am

    Rocks against guns. The Guardsmen were COWARDS of the worst sort, on a power trip.

    The people who were killed were not all being aggressive. One was shot in the back, another was just a student walking to class, not even involved in the demonstrations. Although some of the protesters were not peaceful, I admit, some of the ones killed by our own government weren’t even involved in the protest. They were innocents.

    You will find the facts here:

    http://dept.kent.edu/sociology/lewis/lewihen.htm

    You, Gazelle1929, need to get your facts straight before posting.

  12. gazelle1929  October 15, 2008 at 12:30 pm

    Dear Ladywolf:

    You asked me to get my facts straight. These are the facts that I set forth previously.

    “Sorry, they were hardly peaceful protesters. At least one of the Guardsmen had just been injured by a thrown rock. They had been pelted all morning, and several said they felt justified in shooting because they were in fear for their lives. And if you look at the distance the dead students were from the firing line, you can make a very good case that the troops were firing over the heads of those closer to them.

    “Remember, that riot had been going on for days, and at least one building was torched, firefighters were pelted with rocks and had their hoses slashed.”

    Please point out to me which facts are incorrect and your citation to a credible site to support that conclusion. I based my statement of facts on the wikipedia.org article on the incident.

    I suppose I could have made the first sentence say “The rioters facing the Naitonal Guardsmen were hardly peaceful protesters.” But the “they” referred not to the victims but to the protesters. If spending three days torching at least one building, trashing cars, throwing stones, cutting fire hoses, etc., is peaceful I wonder what you would consider a violent demonstration.

    I disagree with your conclusion that the Guardsmen were cowards on an ego trip. They were a few scared scared young men, 77 in all, most of them not much older than the hundredss of rioters who surrounded them. throwing rocks and tear gas canisters at the guardsmen. Of those 77, 29 fired a total of 67 bullets.

    If I have any facts wrong, please correct them rather than firing nasty-grams at me.

  13. ekaton  October 15, 2008 at 12:59 pm

    Sadly, the only thing this government seems to understand is violence. How many more tax dollar thefts are we to allow? Complaining about these fascist actions obviously doesn’t work. Peaceful demonstrations are ignored. “Free speech zones” far from the protested events are provided for ignored demonstrations. How many more trillions must be spent on illegal wars for “American Interests” otherwise known as tax dollar gouging crony capitalists? How many more trillions must be spent to bail out so-called private enterprises whose losses should be borne by stockholders but are assigned to taxpayers instead? Peaceful demonstrations don’t work. Voting doesn’t work. How many more times before the sleeping beast awakens? Or is the beast not sleeping, just dead?

    — Kent Shaw

  14. Carl Nemo  October 15, 2008 at 2:03 pm

    My apologies gazelle 1929 for my negative comments towards your post. It’s foolish for me to rant about something that happened so long ago and to vent on you. I think I was simply having a “sore arch” evening. It won’t happen again.

    I’m happy to hear you are supporting Obama although that in no way influenced my need to apologize.

    Carl Nemo **==

  15. martman  October 15, 2008 at 2:45 pm

    Your recollection of the happenings around Kent State are very cherry picked. Let us not forget that the Ohio Guard at the time tried to claim that snipers were firing on them in order to cover up this massacre.

    “The Adjutant General of the Ohio National Guard told reporters that a sniper had fired on the guardsmen, which itself remains a debated allegation. Many guardsmen later testified that they were in fear for their lives, which was questioned partly because of the distance of the wounded students. Time magazine later concluded that “triggers were not pulled accidentally at Kent State”. The President’s Commission on Campus Unrest avoided probing the question regarding why the shootings happened. Instead, it harshly criticized both the protesters and the Guardsmen, but it concluded that “the indiscriminate firing of rifles into a crowd of students and the deaths that followed were unnecessary, unwarranted, and inexcusable.””

    As for your defending Ohio’s National Guard:
    “Ohio National Guard barbarian dies

    Myron Pryor is dead — a leader of Kent State death squad in 1970

    The AKRON BEACON JOURNAL has reported the August 1, 2002, death of 71-year-old Myron C. “Mike” Pryor, a leader of the death squad of killer National Guardsmen at Kent State University on May 4, 1970. Pryor was photographed firing his pistol left-handed in front of the other rifle-killers of Troop G at Kent State.

    Too bad the newspaper obituary failed to even mention he was in the Ohio National Guard and only mentioned his 30 years experience in the “US Army”. Fortunately, some of us remember and know the pitiful history of this guy, the late Sgt. Myron “Mike” Pryor.

    Here is a more proper obituary for this despicable, wasted person named Myron J. “Mike” Pryor:

    Sgt. Myron Pryor was a beady-eyed, bald, 41-year-old Ohio National Guardsman in 1970. He was an experienced military “leader” with previous deadly action against African-Americans in bloodshed during Cleveland’s ghetto “riots” in the mid-1960s. Pryor was one of many very experienced, older guardsmen at Kent State which disproves the myth that the Kent State killers were just young, inexperienced triggermen.

    This hard-core guy was later plagued by severe guilt which contributed to his hard-drinking habit. After 1970, “Uncle Mike” Pryor was in charge of the Ohio National Guard unit’s headquarters in Barberton. Sometimes he would frequent bars in my Barberton hometown where he was known to drunkenly approach strangers and proclaim his “innocence” at Kent State.

    Pryor claimed he never fired his powerful .45 caliber pistol during the 13 seconds of deadly mayhem when 67 shots were fired into our crowd of unarmed students. However, photographs indicate he fired his weapon and ejected spent .45 caliber bullet-shell cartridges there at the scene of the crime. Others claim he fired his weapon and then switched guns with another guardsman to conceal his guilt.

    Ohio National Guardsman Sgt. Myron Pryor has gone to hell where he joins others responsible for the Kent State massacre, including former Ohio Governor James Rhodes and Ohio National Guard generals Robert Canterbury and Silvester Del Corso. In Kent, Ohio, people remain hopeful that other guardsmen still alive will not also take the truth about Kent State to their graves.

    To see the late Sgt. Myron Pryor in action firing his pistol out in front of his fellow-killers during the Kent State massacre, check this well-known photograph taken by KSU journalism student John Darnell on May 4, 1970:

    http://www.library.kent.edu/exhibits/4may95/box113/113exhibit34.html

    I’d like to add a note of sarcasm here: Throwing stones amounts to a reasonable excuse to kill 4 and wound 9 people with guns.

  16. ekaton  October 15, 2008 at 3:10 pm

    “I’d like to add a note of sarcasm here: Throwing stones amounts to a reasonable excuse to kill 4 and wound 9 people with guns.”

    This seems to be the operative standing order for the Israeli military as well. Apoligies for going off topic.

    — Kent Shaw

  17. gazelle1929  October 15, 2008 at 6:30 pm

    The point I have been trying to make was that the Kent State Massacre was not a national policy of the United States, nor was it anything more than an isolated incident. From the wiki article:

    “There was a significant national response to the shootings: hundreds of universities, colleges, and high schools closed throughout the United States due to a student strike of eight million students, and the event further divided the country, at this already socially contentious time, along political lines.”

    Think about that. Eight million students. Out of a population of 203 million. That means that one out of 25 people in the United States participated in this strike in protest of Kent State. Had the Government wanted an excuse to crack down, it could have done so. In many countries throughout the world there would have been massive attacks on the strikers with equally massive fatalities.

    This whole subthread started when Ladywolf said that the Government turned on “it’s (sic) peaceful protesters” and killed them. I pointed out, quite correctly, that it was not a peaceful protest.

    And the bit about Sergeant Pryor:

    The four people who were killed were all over 85 yards away from the Guardsmen. Of the wounded, only two were less than 70 yards away, and one was 250 yards away. I assume some of you may have fired a Colt .45 pistol. At anything over 100 feet just about the only way you could hit anything aimed at is by accident. Granted there were a hell of a lot of people surrounding the troops, but isn’t it strange that almost no one really close by was shot? Does that not lend credence to the possibility that the Guardsmen were shooting more to scare than to do bodily damage?

    I will also point out that the National Guard troops were combat troops, neither trained nor equipped to deal with crowd control.

  18. Phil Hoskins  October 15, 2008 at 10:45 pm

    Well this is very far off topic, but I will risk the “he’s old” label and comment on the Kent State issue.

    First, it was clearly not national policy to shoot protesters. But I can attest from personal experience that beatings, arrests and harassment of various kinds was very much national policy.

    Remember Chicago? Oakland?

    Phil Hoskins

  19. DonKrieger  October 25, 2008 at 11:09 pm

    Betrayal:

    With this ad, and with his fear engendering robocalls, Senator McCain betrays both his supporters and his opponents.

    Senator McCain is shouting “fire” at the top of his lungs in crowded theater. How will those who are frightened by his shouting react to the election of President Obama? How can they fail to live with dread?

    And how will those who are unmoved by Senator McCain’s charges react to the election of President McCain? How can they fail to view him as having given up all of his integrity and honor?

    George W. Bush did a far better job of convincing us that he would be an acceptable president with his committment to “compassionate conservatism.” Senator McCain has long since given up on his claims of “reaching across the aisle” or “unifying the nation.”

    This ad and the William Ayers robocall are clear representatives of unacceptable political messages. They are over the line, not because they are lies, but because the undermine the presidency of both candidates.

    And they are financed with public money since Senator McCain accepted public financing. Our money need not be used in this way. The law should reflect that. If a candidate wishes to excercise his/her free speech rights in this way, they should do so on their own dime. And since the RNC is controlled by the Presidential candidate of the party, the candidate should be fined if the RNC places ads of this nature for him/her.

    Finally, why is there a Federal “do not call” list which only applies to “for profit” callers? We have been getting robocalls several times each day because we live in Pennsylvania. We don’t pick up, but the messages are run onto our answering machine. The “do not call” list should apply to non-profits as well.

    Don Krieger
    Pittsburgh, PA
    http://publicservice.evendon.com
    Everything is free and permanent.

  20. RichardKanePA-2  October 13, 2008 at 7:15 am

    Perhaps if we could get Sarah worried about a new Black Hole, she might stop subconcously thinking that working toward the end of the world has something to do with loving Jesus.

    By the way, the world working together to stop econominc meltdown, may make the UN not a dirty word anymore.

    RichardKanePA-2

  21. Harve3  October 13, 2008 at 5:02 pm

    Palin’s irresponsible claim that Obama is a terrorist can fairly be interpreted as summoning up the crowd’s responsive calls for harm to his person.

    Phil, pls provide source for Palin’s accusation of Obama as a “terrorist”. Thanx in advance.

    We should have gotten a clue of what the real purpose of naming Palin when as Frank Rich points out in the New York Times , she quoted Westbrook Pegler, a man who called for someone to splatter Bobby Kennedy’s brains; a man for whom hatred was the serum of life.

    Phil, which part of the unattributed quotation Ms Palin used do you find offensive? Are you suggesting Ms Palin in her use of the quotation subscribes to the extreme views of the source? If yes, then aren’t the supporters of Ms Palin justified in associating Mr Obama with the views of unrepentant bomber William Ayers?

    That senator McCain allows this horrible woman to spew hatred is unconscionable.

    Phil, pls provide an example of alleged “hatred” being “spewed”[?] so others can better appreciate your values; maybe it isn’t hatred at all, just an opinion with which you disagree?

    Hill Country Weisenheimer

  22. CaliforniaMike  October 14, 2008 at 12:57 am

    It’s in code words, like when she says “Obama is not like us.”

    Oooh, he’s a Negro!

    She’s smart enough — or her handlers are smart enough — to keep laying it between the lines, but if people are responding with “kill him” or “off with his head,” she’s saying something.

  23. 33rdSt  October 13, 2008 at 12:14 pm

    Bravo, Phil!!!

  24. bryan mcclellan  October 13, 2008 at 12:19 pm

    No line exists between hatred and outright spoken contempt.Republican neocon sorehead tactics have brought us to the brink of civil unrest and they should be prosecuted for inciting a mob mentality, retroactive in it’s scope of indictment to take down Fox , limbag and the rest who spew hate at will.

  25. Harve3  October 13, 2008 at 12:46 pm

    So you propose to suppress political opinions with which you disagree under color of law; is this the policy we can expect from a prospective Obama administration? Won’t such a policy require repeal of Amendment I of the Constitution of the United States?

    Hill Country Weisenheimer

  26. Flapsaddle  October 13, 2008 at 1:04 pm

    “No sense of decency”, as in Mr. Clinton’s disgraceful conduct and badge-of-honor behavior? As in Lyndon Johnson’s blatant lie of a claim that Goldwater wanted to put Sr-90 in children’s milk and to get us into a land war in Asia? As in Robert Kennedy’s attempt to present himself as the “peace candidate” after having been quite instrumental in upping the ante in Southeast Asia?

    Decency and political campaigns tend to be mutually exclusive.

    Most sincerely,

    T. J. Flapsaddle

  27. barak  October 13, 2008 at 3:41 pm

    Another Clinton blamer.

    According to your type, Clinton is to blame for ALL our troubles. Facts get in the way so you choose to ignore them. The truth is put aside by you, and the lies, the same old tired lies are trotted out because you are too lacking in originality to create new ones.

    Robert Kennedy changed his mind when he saw his mistakes. He was a NOBLE man, but that is something that escapes definition for people like you.

  28. Malibu  October 13, 2008 at 1:55 pm

    I never bought the idea that if the otherside lies, it is okay for ourside! The time has come to take no sides and work for the truth with maybe some honor.

    Malcolm

  29. griff  October 13, 2008 at 7:07 pm

    It’s too bad we’re so deep in this shit that reason and logic has no place. There is no honor among thieves, so you’ll find none in our politics.

    Unfortunately everyone is forced to take sides. The truth is what’s on TV. Independent thought and real reform have gone the way of the dinosaur, to be replaced with the embarrassing spectacle we have before us now.

    In all my life I have never been more ashamed of my country and its people. The way we allow the media to control the dialog and – sadly – our minds, is flat out disgraceful to thinking people.

    Oh but it gets people riled up – for all the wrong reasons, in support of all the wrong people.

  30. Timr  October 14, 2008 at 1:22 pm

    ahh yes, I remember all of them well. The LBJ Daisy ad is an oldie but a goodie. The problem as I see it is not political speech at all, but rabble rousing. Taking the extremes to extreme. When McCain stated that he was going to run a dignified campaign he set the limits beyond which he would not go. But then when he said that Obama was “making” him go negative because Obama did not agree to weekly town hall debates with him, that showed a very petty person, blaming someone else for your own decision. While I will admit that politics was a lot dirtier back 200 years ago, and even as far back as the RFK campaign, they did not suffer under the 24/7 TV news bombardment. As we have seen over the last year with some Malkin blogs, it does not take very much to make some people unhinged. anonymity encourages extremism.
    There have been some rather famous social studies experiments done that tend to prove my point. Remember the blue eyed vs brown eyed children experiment where the blue eyes were encouraged to believe that the brown eyed kids were inferior. I believe it was stopped because it got out of hand. The same thing happend with “the prisoner” study. Where some kids were guards and others prisoners the experiment once more got out of hand when the “guards” kind of went ape.
    The point is that free speech or protected political speech is neither free nor protected when taken to extremes. You can’t yell “FIRE” in a crowded theater, so you can not, or should not because an adult could see the reaction, say that a presidential candidate who looks different and who has a different name is a “terrorist” or “pals around with terrorists” simply because of the precarious state of the nations nerves following 911 and 7 years of our own govt telling us over and over that we must be very afraid. We must be afraid and suspicious of everyone who does not look exactly like us(oh, and by the way-whisper-did you know that he is black? said in a slightly scandalous tone). Communism is dead so we can’t use red baiting tactics. But socialism seems to have become a good substitute. The republicians have been running a campaign since the early 90s to make “liberal” into a dirty word, they have done a very good job of doing just that.
    In the end it all comes down to one thing. McCain promised us an “honorable campaign” He has not delivered. The comment is still valid. “Sen McCain, in the end sir, have you left no sense of decency”

  31. barak  October 13, 2008 at 3:32 pm

    Phil, if you think McCain is a ‘decent man’ then you don’t know McCain at all.

    He chose Sarah Palin because she is just like him–a lying, cheating, ‘holier-than-thou’ person who thinks she can do no wrong, and who, given power, abuses that power and disregards the wishes of her constituents. Both McCain and Palin are the bottom of the barrel, scum of the earth, typical lying politicians.

    Just like Bush/Cheney.

  32. barak  October 13, 2008 at 3:36 pm

    No, it is a policy that will be put in place if McCain wins. Not many Republicans and too many Democrats feel that the Constitution is antiquated and that the Amendments are made to be ignored.

  33. bryan mcclellan  October 13, 2008 at 5:41 pm

    What I plainly said is that it is still against the law to yell FIRE in a crowded theater. If anyone feels it appropriate to spread slander and lies and then step back as the mindless hate they have fomented boils over, then the 1st amendment does not apply to them or their speech.

    It transcends law and is based on human decency and the rights of those persecuted wrongly and unfairly accused.

    An old text calls it, to bear false witness.

    It is not a difficult standard unless one is a sore headed loser.

  34. peagcu12  October 14, 2008 at 12:06 am

    Hill Country, just where do you think the momentum for the folks saying things like “off with his head” come from? It’s basically a frothing at the mouth desperation they hear from Rush and others that is trickling into the McCain-Palin ticket. I would not be surprised if someone shot Obama any day the way that guy and others he influences get worked up about someone who just has a different view about the way this country could be run. I can almost hear him, the shooter, saying…”this guy was going to turn us all into communists/socialists. I had to stop him. He was going to ruin my country,” and feeling like a patriot.

    We have a right to choose anyone we want. Leave the threatening out of it.

    Cruzn

  35. CaliforniaMike  October 14, 2008 at 12:58 am

    It’s still against the law to incite to riot.

  36. Flapsaddle  October 13, 2008 at 4:01 pm

    I blame Clinton only for his own lack of character and personal/political failings, just as I blame Bush only for his faults. I find it astounding that anyone of either side would be so naive as to try and assign all of our problems to one party or to one politician.

    Robert Kennedy was a grasping, power-obsessed little bully with only a thin facade of civility about him, a political opportunist who was, thanks to the Kennedy obsession with being “tough”, one of the chief culprits in getting us into Vietnam.

    The truly noble politician of that era was Wisconsin’s junior senator, Eugene McCarthy, who challenged Johnson first. Kennedy slithered into the picture after that.

    Most sincerely,

    T. J. Flapsaddle

  37. Phil Hoskins  October 13, 2008 at 5:12 pm

    Flapsaddle, I knew Robert Kennedy and he was nothing like your vile description of him. He was a hard player and felt strongly about his beliefs. He changed dramatically after his brother’s assassination and experienced what I felt was a true conversion.

    Did you know him or is this an opinion based upon what others say?

    Phil Hoskins

  38. Malibu  October 13, 2008 at 8:08 pm

    Then I would assume the only way to stop this who is guiltier game is to find a candidate who has a clean record without corruption. We had one Flapsaddle but I didn’t see you or any of the others get out the vote for Paul. I don’t mean St. Paul but Ron Paul.

    Those of you who whine the loudest are the last to pitch in for the votes.

    Malcolm

  39. Flapsaddle  October 14, 2008 at 12:26 am

    You are entitled to your opinion of Kennedy, but do not expect the aura from being in his presence to necessarily translate into adoration from another perspective. I prefer to judge him on his actions and what I regard as his hypocrisy.

    Sorry you regard my description as vile, but I see it as the truth – he was a corrupt, power-obsessed hack from a disfunctional family who had no problems at all crawling atop his dead brother’s coffin in order to appear a bit taller than he ever could have been on his own.

    He lacked the balls of Eugene McCarthy to challenge Johnson on the war. He became a “peace candidate” only after McCarthy demonstrated LBJ’s vulnerability in New Hampshire, and then wanted McCarthy to drop out.

    Given he and his brother’s sign-off on the coup that killed the Nho brothers, given he and his brother’s many attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro, there is a certain karmic justice in him being killed by the assassin’s bullet.

    Worship him all you wish, sir, but do not expect others to uncritically drink the Kennedy kool-aid.

    Most sincerely,

    T. J. Flapsaddle

  40. Carl Nemo  October 14, 2008 at 11:13 pm

    I’m impressed TJF with your in-depth knowledge of the Kennedys and you’ve surely nailed “Bobby” with your spot-on indictment concerning his politically expedient choices when it came to furthering the Kennedy transgenerational agenda. You surely aren’t “vile” by my standards, but spot-on concerning the K-knaves!

    Carl Nemo **==

  41. bryan mcclellan  October 15, 2008 at 1:39 am

    Fringe observation question please;
    Breakdown Bushco – VS- K-knaves, please.

  42. Carl Nemo  October 15, 2008 at 2:36 pm

    Hi Bryan…

    Actually in the light of day I wished I hadn’t written that last sentence, referring the Kennedys as “knaves”. Obviously there’s no comparison between the lengthy laundry list of crimes against the people on behalf of the Bush regime vs. anything I could dredge up on the Kennedy’s which in comparison are minor to say the least relative to the abrogation of our freedoms under the Constitution, the Bill of Rights etc.

    The only thing I do have issue with is John Kennedy picking up the mess in Indo-China passed on to him from the Eisenhower administration and then committing Special Forces advisers in support of the corrupt Ngo Dinh Diem regime. As always our CIA manages to align this nation with corrupt, seemingly pro-west regimes. Let’s face it the money is good if you are buddies with the U.S.

    Post Kennedy’s assassination Johnson picked up the ball and continued to run with failed policies and methods of engagement. I believe we can chalk up four million plus dead mistakes for both sides due to our leaders failing to heed valid intelligence as opposed to “cooked” intel products that will allow them to wage wars for the purpose of simply enriching the MIC and their associates in the “oil patch”.

    Key into Google “Joseph Kennedy and the mob” and then select the link “JFK” and read about how the patriarch helped his son Jack pull off his 1960 victory. Jack then appointed his overzealous brother Robert to the AG office. Evidently old Joe Kennedy didn’t explain to his sons as to how they made it to the Whitehouse. Bobby proceeded to lean heavily on the crime syndicate and the rest is history. There are strong links to mob facilitated connections when it comes to the investigation of the Kennedy assassination. So Jack’s stiff-necked younger brother became his undoing representing payback for a campaign related doublecross as far as the mob was concerned.

    The Bush crime family has been waging war against Americans for the past eight years whereas the Kennedy’s were simply a family on the make driven by an autocratic patriarch; ie., Joseph Kennedy to see that his family made it to the top in American politics.

    Carl Nemo **==

  43. NorthrupP-61  October 13, 2008 at 4:27 pm

    Media darling Sarah Palin has given the right-wing of the Republican Party permission to remove the masks of politeness they’ve been hiding behind. What the world is seeing now is the TRUE face of American Conservatives.

    “I have learned silence from the talkative, toleration from the intolerant, and kindness from the unkind, yet strangely, I am ungrateful to those teachers.” Prentiss

  44. Ladywolf55  October 14, 2008 at 1:42 pm

    Griff, yours is the voice of reason and truth in a sea of ignominy and ignorance. How right you are.

    I met a man from Australia while on vacation last month. He said he can’t understand our electoral process, how it’s nothing but a big show, like a circus full of swindlers and traveling medicine men, touting their useless wares as if they are worth gold while the people worship them as if Gods. He said we’re laughable.

    He was right.

Comments are closed.