Not so long ago the name on every one's lips was Newt Gingrich- big hitting republican, instrumental in pursuing Clinton from a moral stand point over the Lewinski affair. He's now admitted that he was having an affair with a woman 20 yrs his junior while he was pursuing the president but, salvation is at hand. The Rev. Jerry Falwell ( remember him ? ) has decided that, among other things Newt has redeemed himself by seeking god's forgiveness, 'how does Jerry know that god has forgiven Newt ? but I digress. Newt ( now with wife number three ) remains a staunch supporter of family values and, with the help of the christian right wing knuckle draggers, hopes to still reach the White House, his opponents have used the word hypocrite, the swines.
Meanwhile San Francisco has been polluted by an influx of bible bashing anti gay Christians who want to stamp out homosexuality, by force if necessary. They reckon that America's children are being raped and pillaged and it's all the fault of gays, what would Jesus say ? would he join in with such hatred ? After all as I've pointed out before, he still stayed with his mammy at the age of 33 and only ever had men friends, 12 of them, he said he loved the one called John, as in loved like a brother I suppose, not unlike Tam o Shanter and Souter Johnnie, at least I think that's what he meant, didn't he ? No gentle reader I'm not making this up it's in the papers at the moment.
Two weeks ago I stumbled on an old film and watched it again. it was 'Inherit the Wind' about a young teacher in a southern USA state charged with teaching Darwin, I saw this as a youngster and thought that the people exposed by the great Spencer Tracy's character Henry Drummond (based on famous left wing lawyer Clarence Darrow) were neanderthals and could not possibly exist.
Now, sadly I'm older and I know differently, think about Newt Gingrich, Jerry Faliwell and of course, good ole boy Bush, "God bless Amurka" an help us to kill more Ayerackies, bless you lord. Meanwhile, there are already Iraq veterans wandering the streets of American cities homeless and bewildered, you couldn't make it up, what a place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
58 comments:
You do realise that whole last paragraph was one sentance. Even the Victorians would be aghast at sentances that long.
oyThere is an old saying that goes:
"A patriot loves his country;
A nationalist hates other peoples".
Care to remind us why Clinton was pursued again? Was it the affair? Is that what the impeachment centred on?
I almost take your point:
"Meanwhile San Francisco has been polluted by an influx of bible bashing anti gay Christians who want to stamp out homosexuality, by force if necessary. They reckon that America's children are being raped and pillaged and it's all the fault of gays, what would Jesus say ? would he join in with such hatred ?"
You almost get it right here, but then you say:
"After all as I've pointed out before, he still stayed with his mammy at the age of 33 and only ever had men friends..."
Oh dear. Welcome to Stereotype Country, Population: You. You were doing so well and then you blew it. If you're going to challenge a group that's being condemned simply for existing, it does help if you don't stereotype them in the process.
Hi again Terry
I hadn't realised that
Mary Magdalene,
Martha, and her sister Mary,
the woman from Samaria,
and the other un-named women recorded as being amongst the broader band of Jesus' disciples
were all trannies
thanks for the insight
Go on... I dare you to say something nasty about Islam. Christianity is such an easy target...
Also, does being Anti American count as Racist?
A bit of Hypocrisy there but nevertheless a good post. A marked improvement on earlier efforts.
Well Done. Have a biscuit.
will - Far too long - I enjoy baiting the right wing fundamentalists on such things. That's why I still deal with you.
RFS - "a patriot loves" etc. I don't hate anyone, not even you.
Newt, pursuing Clinton because of his sexual peccadilloes was, and is hypocrisy, I realise of course that you know more about these matters than me.
Remind me when the impeachment was will you ? I've forgotten.
Cllr Terry Kelly said...
jan tregeagle - Guilty as charged, I was tired and very busy, but I've now tidied it up. Did you though, understand what was said, surely that's the point.
I receive comments all the time some are written correctly and some, like yours are not but, as long as I can understand them I settle for that.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:27:00 PM
scunnered - Are you not being too literal here. Who said irony was dead ?
Jackart - Christianity can look after itself, I'm no expert on religions, anyone who acts like these people in San Francisco is wrong and indeed IMO fundamentally un-Christian.
You could describe me on many issues as anti America not anti American.
Bill Clinton was impeached in 1999 and acquitted after the votes failed to reach the constitutionally mandated minimum for conviction.
If you subbed Pakistan for America and Islam for Christianity (and Mohamed for Jesus) in this piece would you still have written it? And if so then why?
"Christianity can look after itself,"
So other religions need looked after then? How patronising!!!
RFS - Don't tell me you're a Christian, haven't they got enough problems ? My remarks in this article would be applicable anywhere and to anyone who would act like this.
So, why America ? I don't think you need ask do you ? But you will won't you.
Would it not be more accurate and honest to say that attempts to impeach Clinton failed, honest ? Accurate ? It would mean you were wrong not quite right.
RFS - "Other religions" - how pedantic !!!
Terry my man traps come fully fact checked.
Impeachment is the process of laying charges against an office holder. Its counterpart in criminal law would be charging.
Clinton WAS impeached and his hearing was in 1999. He was aquited by that hearing. He is the second president to be impeached.
And I never said I was a bible thumper. My question remains valid, do you think all other religions need "looking after" as your statement implies?
RFS - I asked a lawyer friend who is keen on that kind of thing and he said simply saying that Clinton was impeached is deliberately missleading, dissembling if you will.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment
"Impeachment is so rare that the term is often misunderstood. A typical misconception is to confuse it with involuntary removal from office; in fact, it is only the legal statement of charges, it is only the legal statement of charges, parallelling an indictment in criminal law. An official who is impeached faces a second legislative vote (whether by the same body or another), which determines conviction,"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton
"President Bill Clinton was acquitted by the Senate on February 12, 1999 of the December 19, 1998, impeachment charge by the House of Representatives. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_clinton#Impeachment_trial_in_the_Senate
"Clinton, like the only other president to be impeached, Andrew Johnson, served the remainder of his term."
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0764613.html
"Removing an official from office requires two steps: (1) a formal accusation, or impeachment, by the House of Representatives, and (2) a trial and conviction by the Senate"
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst.html
US Constitution Article 1 Section 2:
"The House of Representatives shall chuse [sic] their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."
US Constitution Article 1 Section 3:
"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."
Find a better lawyer.
RFS - Impeachment ? baloney ! Newt Gingridge ! hypocrite or not ?
As I answered before Gingridge cannot be a hypocrite as you put it because he has always stated on the record that his actions were based on the rule of law.
The impeachment was because Clinton perjured himself.
It is a common tactic of the Left to try to re-write history and claim that Clinton was impeached because he had an affair, he was not. He was impeached because he lied about having an affair under oath.
Gingridge recognised that no-one is above the law. If we find out later that Gingridge also lied under oath while holding public office then he would be a hypocrite.
Do you not accept that the world knew about this affair in 2000 and not "just now" as you imply in your article?
Hi Terry
I thought I had posted this yesterday but I maybe pushed the wrong button or something? So as I kept a copy, here goes again
Hi again Terry...
Come on, even you and your lawyer friend have just got to be impressed at how far RFS has gone in conspiring to prove that Bill Clinton was impeached. Have a look at
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/impeachments/clinton.htm
http://www.eagleton.rutgers.edu/e-gov/e-politicalarchive-Clintonimpeach.htm
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/19/impeachment.01/
To have planted such great fraudulent evidence, to support his future dissembling here, must make him a real master of the black arts. Wonder who he really works for?
Getting real, Clinton was impeached. He was tried. He was acquitted. Whether any dissembling took place, I wouldn't know, but if it did, it certainly wasn't perpetrated by RFS
and just in case something has gone wrong again, i've tried sending it twice.....
Cllr Terry Kelly said...
RFS - Impeachment ? baloney ! Newt Gingridge ! hypocrite or not ?
Surely you're not that dumb that you'll argue with wikipedia over the definition?
Scunnered - If you are joining in with this stuff about me not publishing your comments then you are lying.
I was told that they tried and failed to impeach him, so what's the big deal about that ? He was impeached and got off, so what ? I'm calling Newt Gingrich a hypocrite and RFS is defendingt him, that's what RFS is dissembling about, not impeachment.
shotgun - What's a wikipedia ?
RFS - 'about this affair ' I didn't know about it, I've just found out, that's why I wrote about him.
You stick up for Newt and I'll attack him, I'm OK with That.
Wikipedia is the great internet project of our age. Follow one of the links I gave you and see.
I understand that you attack him but on what charge?
I can also accept that you only found out about the affair. I myself knew nothing about it until you mentioned it. I then typed "Newt Gingrich affair" into google, got his wikipedia entry and noted that people knew about this in 2000. You did not bother to research before you wrote and you have been called on it.
A couple of other things:
You brought doubt about impeachment into this, attempting to claim I was wrong by citing an unnamed source. I replied with multiple sources including the "original" source of all US law.
"I'm calling Newt Gingrich a hypocrite and RFS is defendingt him, that's what RFS is dissembling about"
I am sure scunnered will point out:
"RFS - I asked a lawyer friend who is keen on that kind of thing and he said simply saying that Clinton was impeached is deliberately missleading, dissembling if you will. "
You are clearly talking about impeachment here.
You have not clearly proven a case for hypocricy so I think it is right and just to attempt to defend him. As I have said if we find out later that he committed perjury then he would be a hypocrite but until then I would say he is not. It is really up to you to prove your case.
RFS - Thank you for that info on wikipedia. Keep telling yourself about Newt you will eventually convince yourself that he's not a hypocrite.
Brilliant comeback terry. Very grown up.
RFS - There are already Iraq veterans wandering the streets of American cities homeless and bewildered - that's what capitalism is all about.
"There are already Iraq veterans wandering the streets of American cities homeless and bewildered - that's what capitalism is all about. "
During and after The Long March Mao discharged troops not fit to fight into the local communities that they were passing through. These sick and wounded were (almost without exception)brutalised by the local population in retaliation for the Red Army's looting.
RFS - does that mean then that there aren't any Iraq veterans wandering the streets homeless and bewildered ?
You missed the point terry, i am not denying that there are homeless ex-soldiers out there. What I am taking you to task over is the idea that Iraqi war veterans on the streets is down to capatalism and if you are using their plight to attack an ideology then you can use the same attack against socialism as I have pointed out.
Do you accept that socialism also causes suffering in ex-servicemen then?
Cllr Terry Kelly said...
RFS - There are already Iraq veterans wandering the streets of American cities homeless and bewildered - that's what capitalism is all about.
There are Iraq veterans walking the streets right now, getting no treatment for wounds, getting little or no compensation and being thrown out with nothing more than a thanks and bye.
That is the truth of ten years of Labour and a Labour leader, and they were the ones who sent them to war on a lie. You were saying about socialists?
Shotgun - you are making some sense at last ie the military exploits people and is corrupt and led by donkeys.
RFS - I agree that war leaves 'the poor bloody infantry' as victims everywhere but I think we are worse.
I live under capitalism and I don't buy the propaganda, our military system stinks and always has done. I'm not aware of this problem to any great extent in socialist countries but I'm sure you have.
What is happening in Iraq is 100 % down to capitalism, oil and who controls it.
"...I don't buy the propaganda... I'm not aware of this problem to any great extent in socialist countries but I'm sure you have."
Problem is that you buy selective propaganda Terry. You believe what socialist governments who control all information tell you. I would say that the fact you are more AWARE of the suffering of the soldier in this country speaks volumes for how much better life in general is in a free society. Do you think that those in Cuba have a clue as to how Castro treats his soldiers? Do you think those still living under the cult of Mao know what he did to the sick and wounded on the Long March?
The fact that people like you can draw attention to this problem means that something could be done about it. But where the government suppresses this awareness suffering has no hope of being addressed. Are you aware that South Africa is in the middle of an AIDS epidemic? Until a year ago the South Africans did not because the government refused to acknowledge the problem and suppressed all discussion of it. They only finally acknowledged the problem when it was too big to ignore.
RFS - As I said I don't buy the capitalist propaganda.
You clearly do, I don't.
So you are saying that you think life is better under Socialist rule? In say Cuba? North Korea? Zimbabwe? China?
Cllr Terry Kelly said...
Shotgun - you are making some sense at last ie the military exploits people and is corrupt and led by donkeys.
No, the Labour party are exploiting the soldiers for their own ends and the military just works under the budget constarints given to them by this Government, like the military hospitals scrapped recently.
Bad side step...but of course you don't agree with them because you are inside trying to effect change aren't you?
Shotgun - Were you too near loud bangs in military days ? haven't we done this ?
RFS March 20 - 2.51 pm some socialist countries are good and some less good - some capitalist countries are bad and some are worse than bad.
So you are saying that you think life is better under Socialist rule? In say Cuba? North Korea? Zimbabwe? China?
RFS - This reminds me of another post - do you not think you should take a wee break - believe me I know what it's like when someone breaks your brain and it's not pleasant.
Cllr Terry Kelly said...
Shotgun - Were you too near loud bangs in military days ? haven't we done this ?
No we haven't; I have. You have not yet answered a question put to you except to turn to obfuscation to avoid answering.
You misunderstand terry, I posted the same post a day apart because you did not answer the questions the first time. I thought I would give you another chance. How about a third?
So you are saying that you think life is better under Socialist rule? In say Cuba? North Korea? Zimbabwe? China?
RFS - As Burl Ives famously said
MENDACITY sir MENDACITY !
No Terry it is spelled TENACITY
So you are saying that you think life is better under Socialist rule? In say Cuba? North Korea? Zimbabwe? China?
RFS - I have answered that - but I suspect that you are about to go down that road again to try yet again for a result.
The salient word is better isn't it ? is it better to have a merc. and a yacht, or would you prefer to feed, house and educate the poor and needy, is that better ?
I of course would choose the latter and you the former, thats because you have arrived at the conclusion that the most important thing in the world is you.
You know the price of everything and the value of nothing, you're more to be pitied than despised.
So you are saying that you think life is better under Socialist rule? In say Cuba? North Korea? Zimbabwe? China?
RFS - See post from March 22 nd. 5.40 pm
It is a straight (or strait) yes or no kind of question that you have not answered.
So you are saying that you think life is better under Socialist rule? In say Cuba? North Korea? Zimbabwe? China?
RFS - You might like it to be a straight yes or no but that's because you're struggling,
( strait ? )
We have different values ( thank god ) and what you consider to be important is not my idea of important.
I could point out areas, towns, cities etc in America where people are living in 3rd world conditions and the streets are not safe, and places in Britain which are the same, so where does that get us ? Or have you nothing better to do ?
Yes or no terry. Would you rather live in Cuba than Paisley?
rfs - i've answered this.
No you have not (if you have then you would not mind repeating it, it is only a max of three letters now isnt it). Yes or No would you rather live in Cuba?
RFS - Done this.
Once again I am forced to wade into the waters,redpectfully, by the depth of RFS's knowledge of my homeland, and the level of pollution Terry boy has uttered by diving into the politics of America when he is, at best, an amateur in his own native Cuba, err Paisley.
At first when I was directed to this blog I was amazed at the quality of tolerance the Coucil had to let themselves be made buffoons out of by this sad little man who had nothing better to do than pretend to be a member to take the micky out of the Council. When it was made clear to me that he really was what he said he was, I realized he must have something on the individual members personally or they would surely arrange for the end of this political tomfoolery. It would be more funny if it did not make you cry to realize he is laughing all the way to the Council tax.
Councillor, you took a long walk off a short pier when you tried to attack Newt,Slick Willy, or the US Constitution.
Theso-called Labor (sic)Party has given birth to some oddities of its own. I would tell you to stick to what you know, but in all these comments I haven't seen your specialist category for Mastermind anywhere. Perhaps your category is more on the lines of the game Jeopardy. "I'll have short,dumpy politicians justifying their jobs for 100, Alex"
warning
A very immportant measage about an terroristic Attack.
کیر خر تو کس ننه هرکی سیده.
سنده ملت جهان تو کس ننه حافظان شریعت اسلام
کیر خوک تو کس ننه فاحشه = پاسدار یا بسیجی یا اطلاعاتی یا جاسوس اسلام یا سید یا حزب اللهی
گوه خوک تو ننه امام حسین شد امام حسن
سنده شیطان تو حلق محمد رسول الله قرآن شد.
خرطوم فیل تو کس ننه پیامبر اسلام.
الله اکبر
خامنه ای عنتر
مرگ بر دوست ولایت فقیه
درود بر آمریکا
Post a Comment