The Crackpot Oracle

Best front page ever

2008-01-30T12:13:00.001-05:00

Steve Gilliard would have loved this one.

Ma Bell, Big Brother, what's the damn difference?

2007-12-15T17:24:00.000-05:00

From The N.Y. Times, Sunday 12/16/07
"...But the battle is really about something much bigger. At stake is the federal government’s extensive but uneasy partnership with industry to conduct a wide range of secret surveillance operations in fighting terrorism and crime. The N.S.A.’s reliance on telecommunications companies is broader and deeper than ever before, according to government and industry officials, yet that alliance is strained by legal worries and the fear of public exposure."
Wasn't it supposed to be just fer fighting terr'ists that they wanted to violate that inconvenient fourth amendment? What the hell does the N.S.A. have to do with fighting crime? Notice how that word (crime) is just slipped past you in the article like it's a given? We've always been at war with Eastasia.
Once again, the slope gets oilier.

Take A Memo

2007-12-15T11:09:00.000-05:00

From AP:
Judge urged not to ask about CIA tapes
First you read this:
government lawyers told U.S. District Judge Henry H. Kennedy that demanding information about the tapes would interfere with current investigations by Congress and the Justice Department.
Later in the same article:
On Friday, the Justice Department urged Congress to hold off on questioning witnesses and demanding documents because that evidence is part of a joint CIA-Justice Department investigation.
Attorney General Michael Mukasey also refused to give Congress details of the government's investigation into the matter Friday, saying doing so could raise questions about whether the inquiry was vulnerable to political pressure.
Let's see:
A. We don't want a judge to find out the truth, because that would interfere in Congress and the Justice Dept.'s investigations.
B. We don't really want Congress to actually investigate, because that would be playing politics.
Conclusion:
Let the fair-minded apolitical types (spit coffee on keyboard here) at the Bush Administration justice dept. (along with the accused spy agency) jointly conduct a fair and balanced investigation of themselves.
Nothing to see here folks, stop rubbernecking. You're slowing down traffic on the road to perdition.
Would it be too much for the AP typer to point out the obvious strategy here? It's not editorializing to highlight facts.

Coltrane!

2007-11-13T20:47:00.000-05:00

In the future...

2007-11-13T20:36:00.000-05:00

...maybe every asshole Republican will have their own personal News Channel. Rudy already does.

Just A Coincidence, I'm sure

2007-10-22T23:20:00.000-04:00

Do you wonder why a powerful Democrat would push for retroactive immunity for telecoms that gave private customer data to the government? It seems odd, considering that the tidal wave that gave Democrats both houses of Congress was powered in part by grassroots anger at Bush administration abuses of power. Gee, Senator Rockefeller, it wouldn't be related to those fat telecom donations, would it? The corporate wing of the party is alive and well, and selling out again.

Via Huffington Post

$720 Million a day could solve a few things.

2007-09-22T23:30:00.000-04:00

Cholera In Iraq

2007-09-22T14:04:00.000-04:00

What is this, 1923? This is completely preventable, and shouldn't exist anywhere.
Seriously, clean water and sanitation systems are what's needed, and for the cost of a couple of oil wars, could be in place worldwide.

I feel so safe.

2007-09-22T11:08:00.000-04:00

When we wuz fab (ancient me)

2007-09-21T21:38:00.000-04:00

One of my early tunes. (The first of the 2 songs on the clip.)

Ornette!

2007-09-20T22:03:00.000-04:00

Senate to make lawbreaking illegal.

2005-11-20T15:24:00.000-05:00

From AP:
"WASHINGTON - The White House and senators are discussing the implications of a Senate-passed ban on the torture of suspected terrorists in U.S. custody and what part, if any, of the proposal the administration might find acceptable, the Pentagon chief said Sunday. The Senate's plan would restrict the techniques used to interrogate foreign terrorism suspects and ban "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of anyone in U.S. custody. Those sections have drawn a veto threat from the White House..."
Doesn't torture already violate the law? Whatever tortured (ouch) legalistic loopholes the administration has tried to create are bogus.
Here's the money quote, though: "The Senate measure also would require U.S. troops to follow interrogation procedures in the Army Field Manual."
Well, since the freakin' commander-in-chief won't make them enforce their own rules, I guess the Senate needs to.
The reason the Senate is doing this is because the Republican majority would never allow what should really be done: A real investigation of the Defense Dept., CIA, and the Armed Services regarding torture, prisoner abuse, and human rights violations. If this were to be done, it would likely be discovered that many existing laws have already been broken, and not just by low level scapegoats.

Liberal Church May Lose Funds Over Sermon

2005-11-08T08:05:00.000-05:00

From AP:LOS ANGELES - "The Internal Revenue Service has warned a prominent liberal church that it could lose its tax-exempt status because of an anti-war sermon a guest preacher gave on the eve of the 2004 presidential election, according to church officials. The Rev. George F. Regas did not urge parishioners at All Saints Episcopal Church to support either President Bush or John Kerry, but he was critical of the Iraq war and Bush's tax cuts."
A liberal congregation hears an anti-war sermon on the eve of an election. Fancy that, a Christian sermon on peace. Highly controversial. How many anti-gay, anti-abortion, liberal hatin' sermons were there in the runup to the election? Your guess is as good as mine, but there was an awful lot of chest thumping from the religious right regarding the effect they had on the 2004 election.

Isn't that convenient?

2005-10-06T21:22:00.000-04:00

I flipped to channel seven ABC eyewitness news in New York this afternoon. They were just starting a story about tonight's mayoral debate at the Apollo theater in Harlem. This is the debate that Bloomberg passed on, and is widely seen as a snub to the New York City black community. As the story began, there was a clip of Bloomberg walking down the street. The voiceover said (I'm paraphrasing) "tonight is the first mayoral debate, but one candidate won't be there...". at that very instant, there was a break in for Bloomberg's news conference on the terror threat in NYC's subways. The timing of it gave me a chill. Sooo....
Politically convenient coincidence, or marionette strings being pulled? Instead of looking weak and afraid to face voters at a debate, Bloomberg gets to play daddy, telling everyone to remain calm.
This is the kind of hypothesis I usually snicker at, then move on. I believe that it's likely that it is just a coincidence. After all, terrorism is real..But... There is an atmosphere of unreality that has taken over the media in recent years that makes the more sinister interpretation seem to be not a tin foil excursion, but a real possibility. The same day that Bush gives his "major" speech on the GWOT, NYC goes on alert, diverting attention from the avalanche of bad news in Republicanland. I won't attach a poll on what anyone else believes, I haven't reached any conclusions myself. It does give one pause, though.

The Aristocrats (a variation)

2005-08-20T23:20:00.000-04:00

Stop me if you've heard this one.
The President comes to the American people and says: Do I have a plan for you! The American people say, let's hear it.The president says: "First we bomb the shit out of a third world dictatorship that's not a threat to anyone outside of its own borders, killing a lot of inoocent people in the process. If anyone tries to say the war is unnecessary, we'll smear them and basically ruin their lives (heehee). Meanwhile, we're over in this country see, torturing prisoners, allowing the anal rape of children, looting their treasure. After a lengthy period of slaughter and destruction in which 100,000 civilians die, and thousands of our own soldiers are killed, an Islamic Theocracy comes to power, more oppressive than the government we toppled. Women have no rights, the entire region is destabilized, and terrorism is encouraged."The American People say: "Sounds horrible! What do you call it?"The President says "Operation Iraqi Freedom"

More Evidence

2005-06-05T13:21:00.000-04:00

Not that it's necessary, but in case you need more proof that the Bush Crime Family* wanted war and only war in Iraq, here's a story about John Bolton illegally getting a U.N. official fired. Jose Bustani of Brazil was the head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which was created by a treaty signed by 168 nations. He was working on getting Arab nations to sign on to this chemical weapons treaty. This would have involved inspections of chemical facilities in Iraq and other countries in the Middle East, and the destruction of any weapons found. While Bush and his minions were stating publicly that they wanted diplomacy to work, privately their henchmen were doing everything possible to undermine it.

*Hat tip to Mike Malloy

Liars Club

2005-06-05T12:35:00.000-04:00

Check out these quotes on Amnesty International from assorted despots (via the Poor Man).

Framed

2005-05-27T09:15:00.000-04:00

Department of Defense interrogators impersonated FBI agents at Gitmo. The DOD memo below shows their intent to let the FBI take the blame for the criminal acts at Guantanamo Bay. This is getting dirtier by the day. Orders had to come from on high for this kind of treachery. Where's the indictments?
Note that they actually use the word "torture" in their own memo.
They knew what they were doing was torture, yet seemed comfortable discussing it in writing. There had to have been orders given. Remember the Gonzales torture memos?

(Via Democratic underground).

DETAINEES-2797BE-mail (from CTD employee to Frankie Battle) noting that sender is forwarding this EC up the chain of command, concerning alleged impersonation of FBI Agents at GTMO12/05/03Same document as Detainee-2797 with the following unredacted: "Of concern, DOD interrogators impersonating Supervisory Special Agents of the FBI told a detainee that the FBI…" and "These tactics have produced no intelligence of a threat neutralization nature to date and CITF believes that techniques have destroyed any chance of prosecuting this detainee." and "If this detainee is ever released or his story made public in any way, DOD interrogators will not be held accountable because these torture techniques were done (by) the "FBI" interrogators. The FBI will (be) left holding the bag before the public."

Losing hearts and minds

2005-05-20T07:58:00.000-04:00

Is it paranoid to think that someone (Rove) in the administration planted the story about the Koran being flushed, then disowned it, hoping to cause a smokescreen of media self-flagellation? What could they be diverting attention from? Could it be this? (NY Times, free access, but signup required). WARNING: This is a very disturbing, sickening story. It is clear that this is the type of story the administration would like to squash.

The administration wants to blame a Newsweek article for anti-Americanism, but it's possible that they knew that this new torture story was about to break, and created a diversion. This is not a new technique.
For background on media manipulation, read here.

Update: There is more than one source for the Koran story, but at this point the waters have been muddied enough to suit the wingnut agenda.

Morally Devalued

2005-03-06T20:22:00.000-05:00

The President signed a directive authorizing a practice that is a violation of treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory. When a treaty has been ratified and signed by the U.S., it has the force of law, it is the law of the land, as much as any other law on the books. The President is the chief executive officer, sworn to uphold the laws and protect and defend the constitution.
So: He broke the law! His advisers who told him it was okay broke the law.
What's that you say? He's also supposed to protect us against all enemies, both foreign and domestic? Of course he is, but there are plenty of legal ways to do this that are equally effective, or probably more effective in the struggle against terrorism. When you engage in torture, you lose your moral authority, you betray weakness, and it doesn't work. Trust me, prisoners hanging by wrists, electrodes on genitals, will eventually tell you what you want to hear, whether it's true or not. Is that good, reliable intelligence?
When WWII was winding down in Europe, German people (military and civilian) fled from the Soviets, preferring to surrender to the U.S., whose troops had a reputation of being tough but fair. Engaging in torture is an insult to the honor of every individual who has ever served in the armed forces, and is disgraceful.

It can't happen here?

2005-02-18T23:13:00.000-05:00

Creepy stuff sure to be labeled as "conspiracy theory" territory by those who are afraid of learning the truth, or by those who are guilty, either directly or by association.

Safe For Hypocrisy

2005-02-18T10:58:00.000-05:00

Bob Herbert makes a great point: If the Syrians are such bad guys, why is the government handing over suspected terrorists to them? The U.S. accuses them of supporting terror, makes noises about regime change and warns them not to meddle in Iraq, and at the same time trusts them to conduct interrogations for us, (obviously involving torture). Of course, it's nothing new for governments to criticize each other publicly while dealing behind the scenes, but it would be nice if they would tone down the pompous bullshit "freedom" rhetoric. It's all about power for these people, and whatever twisted realpolitik games they feel like playing to hold on to it.

Negroponte Named Director Of National Intelligence

2005-02-17T17:30:00.000-05:00

This guy was ambassador to Honduras during the one of the worst periods of right wing death squad activity in Central America.
The CIA was involved with these despicable groups, and Negroponte at the very least helped to cover it up. Billmon has some details.

New Gannongate Developments

2005-02-14T17:35:00.000-05:00

This is a story involving hypocrisy of the highest order.
How did this guy get into the White House press room?
A right wing "journalist" who lobs softball questions at White House Press conferences, writes gay-bashing articles for Talon News, did what...?
This same guy is somehow mixed up in the Valerie Plame Affair as well. If this was a Democratic administration, Ken Starr would already be leaking details from his grand jury investigation.

How To Write A Headline

2005-02-13T08:46:00.000-05:00

There has been coverage in U.S. papers of this story, but no headline that I've seen has been as blunt as this one. The fact that Bush tried to suppress or delay release of this info usually isn't part of the lead.

Blood in the water

2005-02-11T07:39:00.000-05:00

Maybe now the press will do its job and vigorously pursue this story where the connection between government propagandizing and the treasonous outing of a CIA agent by the White House is becoming apparent. Uh huh. Maybe the cable news folks will devote some time to this. Wait a minute, doesn't the Michael Jackson trial start soon?

Secretary Of Lies

2005-02-11T07:26:00.000-05:00

From Dailykos, excellent piece on what the Bush administration knew about Al Qaeda, when they knew it, and when Condi lied about it. They managed to delay releasing these documents until after the election.

Bush To Veterans: Drop Dead

2005-02-09T18:41:00.000-05:00

This never would have happened under FDR or Truman. Remember that. This never happened under Clinton. Kerry, who was an actual combat veteran, would never have let this happen. Those little yellow bumper stickers won't erase your complicity in keeping these thuggish clowns in office. Selfish bastards. Free ride neoconmen. Turnstile jumpers. You want the benefits of our country, but don't feel the need to pay your way. Self made men indeed. God forbid Tim Russert has to give back his tax cut so we can fix problems like: homeless vets, hungry kids, empty firehouses, outgunned cops, families living without heat, a fraying social contract, unsafe borders. How about it, Tim? Instead of trying to get Ted Kennedy to say that evil word "tax increase", how about grilling a rich Republican about social responsibility? Why not say: "Don't you think us rich guys should kick in our fair share so those working class kids can have some kind of decent life when they return from serving our country?" Remember the GI Bill?
Remember VA home loans? Oh, but those were Democratic programs, perish the thought that the GOVERNMENT should play a role in improving people's lives. No, it's a new era, let's all pray to the supremely intelligent market voodoo forces that separate good from evil, and cast out the unworthy. We must liberate all corporations yearning to be free of the bonds of liberal democracy. Oogabooga bow to the mighty golden market forces!
Privatize everything!

Fascism?

2005-02-07T17:46:00.000-05:00

When left/progressives/liberals dare to utter the F word regarding the authoritarian climate in this country, there is much wounded outrage from the neocon camp. How about when it comes from a leading conservative publication?

Also, show this article by Bob Herbert in today's N.Y. Times to any acquaintances who snicker at those concerned about human rights. Innocents caught in the dragnet, tortured mentally and physically. This is not merely unacceptable behavior. This is despicable, criminal behavior, and in this administration, the fish is rotten from the head down. Those at the top must be held responsible.

Is cheating a moral value?

2005-02-05T18:35:00.000-05:00

Read this FAIR piece. Just read it!

Paging Doctor Bush

2005-02-05T13:40:00.000-05:00

Performance Review

Foreign Policy: After a catastrophic attack by an Islamic extremist terror group based in Afghanistan, he commits a small percentage of U.S. forces there, and the majority of available forces go to invade a country completely unrelated to the problem, and which was not even close to being an imminent threat: Iraq! How does he pay for this costly foreign adventure? By cutting taxes for the wealthy and increasing the deficit, of course.
Domestic policy: After four years of economic stagnation, weak job creation, and an increasing health care crisis, all issues that voters of both parties expressed concern about, he commits a small percentage of his time working on these issues, and the majority of his time working on an issue completely unrelated to these problems, and which is not even close to being an imminent problem:Social Security. How does he want to fix this non-problem? By pushing a bogus privatization scheme, cutting guaranteed benefits, and increasing the deficit...
It's a good thing he's not a doctor:

Dr. Bush: So, what's the problem today?
Patient: My left arm, I think it's broken.
Dr. Bush: Here, take some aspirin for that while I amputate your right leg.

(cue rimshot)

Red State Road Trip

2005-02-05T10:40:00.000-05:00

Excellent series from Chris Hume via truthout.org. Scroll down, start with day one.

Go Away Joe

2005-02-04T09:32:00.000-05:00

Lieberman yesterday regarding Gonzales, torture, and the Geneva conventions: "I think Judge Gonzales was being restrained and diplomatic in using the word “quaint” to offer these benefits -- access to a canteen to purchase food, soap and tobacco, a monthly advance of patience, the ability to have and consult personal financial accounts, the ability to receive scientific equipment, musical instruments or sports outfits. Giving these benefits to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who planned the attacks against us on September 11, wouldn't be quaint. It would be offensive. It would be ridiculous. It would be ultimately unjust."
Bottom line: If Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is not a combatant of a foreign government, or did not plan the attacks on behalf of a foreign government, then it may be correct that the Geneva conventions do not apply. If this is true, however, that automatically changes his classification to criminal suspect. Does the Bush Administration have so little confidence in our criminal justice system that they are afraid to bring this scum to trial? Aren't the American people, and all relatives of victims of the attacks, better served by seeing him tried, convicted, and sentenced, instead of vanishing into a mysterious black hole?
By creating this third category, neither enemy combatant nor criminal, the government is depriving the nation of the closure it needs.
This third category also creates a black hole that can swallow up innocents. If a mistake is made, what recourse does an innocent person caught mistakenly in the dragnet have? Furthermore, this begins the slippery slope toward a nightmarish system of gulags, that in the wrong hands, (and they're in the wrong hands right now) can be used on political opponents.
I can already hear the knucklehead trolls responding (and I've also heard Lieberman make statements to this effect): "Why do you care about the rights of terrorists? The 9/11 hijackers didn't respect our rights." My preemptive response is: Read more carefully boneheads, don't put words in my mouth I didn't say and try to lift your critical thinking skills above a seventh grade level. But then again, seventh grade critical thinking skills will get you a show on MSNBC or FOX, so what do I know?

Update:Joe Lieberman must really be doing a great job for his president, take a look at how thankful Bush is.

Remember Enron?

2005-02-04T07:53:00.000-05:00

Thursday, February 3, 2005 Posted: 11:28 PM EST
(CNN) -- A Washington state utility released audiotapes Thursday that it said revealed bankrupt energy trader Enron Corp. plotted to take a power plant off-line in 2001 to jack up electric prices in Western states.
Can you imagine if someone in a Democratic president's inner circle had run a company this way? The story would be pounded nonstop by all the cable channels, the "liberal" N.Y. Times, there would be house committee hearings, Rush would be outraged, and it would be the political story of the week, every week on the Sunday morning shows. But since Ken Lay is a Bush family butt buddy... ehhh, no real story here. Nothing to see folks, move along.

Google Onslaught

2005-02-03T21:41:00.000-05:00

Opinions You Should Have is a funnyass blog.

Google to start indexing brains.

Damn liberal media

2005-02-03T17:29:00.000-05:00

From Media Matters: Pre-State Of The Union Hardball featured 6 Republicans, 1 Democrat.

Couldn't watch, (I had just eaten) but I'm sure it was the usual nauseating wankfest of kissassery.
Something like:
"How do you think the president will display his resolute firmness while laying out his bold freedom agenda tonight?"

Grand Old Hypocrisy

2005-02-01T17:40:00.000-05:00

And later, the Three Stooges will be teaching a conflict resolution class.

From David Sirota's blog:

Virginia Sen. George Allen (R) is introducing a bill essentially condemning the Senate for filibustering
anti-lynching laws earlier in the 20th century. It's a laudable bill – but its author has anything but a laudable record on
civil rights and racial issues. According to the Associated Press in 2000, Allen was discovered to have been
displaying a hangman's noose and the confederate flag in his law office.

Read the article.

The Coming Wars

2005-01-31T22:06:00.000-05:00

A must read in the New Yorker by Seymour Hersh. As usual, when someone tells the truth, the slime machine cranks up into full character assassination mode. You can tell just how accurate the story is by the level of nastiness coming from the administration and their press lackeys.

Destroy The Propaganda Machine

2005-01-30T21:47:00.000-05:00

Why am I harping on media reform? Robert Parry at Consortium News draws a chilling picture of the corruption of our information sources. It didn't start with Armstrong Williams accepting Bush administration payola to hype their programs. It certainly doesn't end there. There has been a systematic disinformation campaign underway to push the right wing agenda for a long time now. These techniques were developed during the cold war, and are now being used on the American public. Anyone who grew up during the cold war period in the U.S. remembers hearing about the communist propaganda machine, Pravda, Tass, etc. "Those poor Russians, the only news they get has been edited and sanitized to support the government viewpoint." Hmm, sounds familiar doesn't it? The difference is, the Soviets were clumsy and amateurish compared to the modern day propagandists in corporate ruled America. The people in the Eastern Bloc countries probably had a pretty good idea of just how full of crap their newscasters and journalists were. Nowadays, in our own country, people don't even feel the needle as the poison goes in. Read the article.

Hitting the brakes on media consolidation.

2005-01-30T13:52:00.000-05:00

From the NY Times:
"Media companies hoping to expand their television station holdings and to own both TV stations and newspapers in the same markets suffered a setback yesterday when the Bush administration decided to abandon its challenge to a ruling that blocked the relaxation of ownership rules."

Sounds like a small victory, but they'll be back again to try and expand the grip of the media borg when public attention has drifted elsewhere. Besides, it's already gone too far and needs to be reversed.
I really love this line of bull:
[Michael Powell] "... has said that the ownership restrictions are outdated because of technological changes, like the Internet and cable and satellite television that offer viewers hundreds of channels. He maintained that the increased concentration would not hurt competition."

How many of those hundreds of channels are owned by the same handful of companies?

Wingnut porno

2005-01-28T21:20:00.000-05:00

Digby tells of a lame joke letter making the rounds concerning torture, written on a blog maintained by U.S. career diplomats
(the poor, persecuted Republican variety).
It's good to know we have such diplomatic people working for us.
Meanwhile, The Crackpot Oracle has obtained a real Defense Dept. memo*, not some crass right wing liberal bashing fantasy.

INTERNAL MEMO CLASSIFIED TOP SECRET
From The Desk of Donald Rumsfeld:
We’ve been getting lots of letters from citizens whining about the fact that wounded servicemen in military hospitals are being forced to pay for their own meals, that our troops don’t have the proper equipment, the pay is too low, the death benefit too meager, etc. Lets face it, there’s not enough money for these things, and we certainly can’t raise taxes on our buddies in the corporate world, not if we want those plum boardroom gigs when we leave office. We’re also taking a lot of heat for the torture photos.
I think I’ve come up with a fundraising solution, though. Take the lemons and make lemonade!
Here’s the concept: Interrogators gone wild! Buy the videos, support the troops!
I’ve got a vault full of hidden camera torture videos. Instead of hiding them, let’s sell them on the internets!
(That pervert Bill O’Reilly has already been bugging me for a copy of “the Dominatrix Interrogators”).
I will admit, some of these clips are pretty hot. Rev. James Dobson has agreed to post ads for them on his website. After all, our cause is righteous, and the victims are heathens anyway. No guilt, it’s a charitable cause, and the best part is, anyone who complains about these videos instead of buying them can be accused of literally "not supporting the troops" .

Let me know what you think.
Don Rumsfeld

*satire, for all you literal minded morons

Georgie hearts Osama

2005-01-14T10:40:00.000-05:00

Somebody's engaging in a "sensitive" war on terror.
"I remember when I talked about Osama bin Laden, I said we're going to get him dead or alive. I guess it's not the most diplomatic of language," Bush said. (Thu Jan 13, 2005)
Remember what Cheney said?
Thursday, August 12, 2004
DAYTON, Ohio (CNN) -- Drawing derisive chuckles from the crowd, Vice President Dick Cheney Thursday blasted Sen. John Kerry for a remark the Democratic presidential candidate made last week about fighting a "more sensitive war on terror" if elected.

Proud Yet?

2005-01-07T23:23:00.000-05:00

Dear Bush voters: What's that gnawing at your conscience late at night?
You know what I'm talking about, when the daily din and blather has been shut off, the echoes of Rush, Sean, Ann, etc. have faded into the background, the spoonfed outrage has been digested and your soul feels hungry still, does the doubt rumble up from your emptiness? Whispers in the dark...What if the war is really just a deadly lie? What if it really is torture they've been doing over there, not fraternity pranks like Rush said? What if it was me, just somebody out scrounging food for his family caught by mistake, forced into naked humiliation, unbearable pain and fear. Fear that he will never see his wife or children again, forced to dig his own grave, sure this is the end, then hearing the click of the empty rifle and the laughter as his insides empty out from the terror. What if they knew, those people in the White House, what if they ORDERED IT? No, it can't be. Oh well, can't sleep now, hmm, let's see what's on, I think they rerun the Scarborough report at this hour. Thank God for Joe, all you hear from libruls is the bad news anyway...
Update (1/8): My apologies for the above post. How silly of me to assume that you might have a conscience, especially when the people being abused and slaughtered don't look at all like you.