Mar
19

Anatomy Of A Con Job




Posted at 3:26 by Gavin M.

As we know, opinion against the war in Iraq, and against President Bush, now stands at between 60 and 70 percent in America. If you’re a right-wing authoritarian follower, how do you continue to prop up the necessary belief that you represent a silent majority of downtrodden patriots, and that someday a real rain will come and wash the scum off the streets?

Luckily, there are people out there to do that thinking for you.


bailey.jpg
Above: Right-wing astroturfer Larry Bailey

Step One: Invent a phony threat — for instance, to the Vietnam War Memorial:

As a Vietnam veteran, and suffering through fox-hole combat, and knowing what the anti-war movement did to America and to my morale of me and the morale other troops during the Vietnam era, the thought of elements of those same vile and vicious people attempting to resurrect their venom and use the Vietnam Memorial Wall as a proxy was intolerable. My view was it must be challenged, and in short it cannot happen.

The current anti-war movement is no different than the Vietnam era group, in fact many current participants are the same people who were involved in the 60s and 70s. They lie, deceive, distort, damage, desecrate, spit on our military, curse, hurl insults, and dishonor not only historical sites but hallowed ground if given the opportunity.

Step Two: Create a fake-nonpartisan campaign to ‘protect’ the memorial from the vile and vicious spitters-on and desecrators-of, who are converging on DC in a mammoth hippie tidal wave:

eagles7.jpg

Our Mission Statement

1. Gathering of Eagles is non-partisan. While each member has his or her own political beliefs, our common love and respect for America and her heroes is what brings us together.

Actually, they’re about as non-partisan as this. Note the Vets For The Truth address through which contributions are funneled:

Please send checks or money orders to:
Vets for the Truth
ATTN: Gathering of Eagles
PO Box 291
Chocowinity, NC 27817

And note, as well, the enthusiastic pre-publicity from commentators such as Michelle Malkin:

SAYING ‘NO!’ TO CINDY
A ‘GATHERING OF EAGLES’ TO MARCH FOR AMERICA

How many times have you sat in front of the TV over the last four years, watching anti-war activists march on Washington, chase the ROTC off your local college campus, vandalize war memorials, insult the troops and wreak havoc under the surrender banner?

How many times have you thought to yourself: What can I do?

As your planning continues, begin referring to all supporters as ‘veterans’ regardless of whether they’ve ever served in the military. This makes it look like it’s a rally of non-partisan veterans — which is altogether much better, and much more likely to be taken seriously by the media, than a rally of Republican zealots frightened that the zeitgeist is escaping them.

Also be sure to stir up the Freeper beehive, because a Freeper will fall for anything if you slap a flag on it — let alone a flag, an eagle, and the word, ‘troops.’

Serious Media Inquiries:
Kristinn Taylor

093420-189012.jpg
Above: Taylor, national spokesman of Free Republic

Join forces with other phony-nonpartisan groups:

colorsdontrunwebbanners.jpg
Above: The inimitable Move America Forward Foundation

At last the day arrives. Have a bunch of people stand around heckling war protesters for a few hours:

smatteringofkleagles.jpg

goex018.jpg

americanxidol006.jpg

goex010.jpg

goex0099.jpg

Step Three: Declare victory! The Vietnam Memorial was saved!

A pure, grass-roots effort, the Gathering of Eagles’ volunteers matched the massive Soros-funded anti-war machine sign for sign, chant for chant, and marcher for marcher. The contrast was most stark right before the entrance to the Memorial Bridge, where Eagles gathered with a field of American flags–while anti-Bush, 9/11 conspiracy nuts wrapped themselves in a figurative blanket of yellow “Out of Iraq” placards. Several of the vets shouted, “Yellow! How appropriate!” in between spirited chants of “U.S.A! U.S.A!” While the classless Cindy Sheehan ranted profanely, the Eagles raised their voices in polite, but roaring disapproval and raised their American flags in answer to the ANSWER socialists’ Che banners and peace pennants.

America was strengthened:

When history is written, March 17th, 2007 will at long last eclipse March 17, 1967, as the day when soldiers in faraway Iraq and Afghanistan knew for certain, no matter what real time saw them doing, love and respect await their safe return. The day when it was proven to a watching world that Washington war memorials stand for what they always stood for, time immemorial, the day when the graves of fallen American soldiers the world were warmer.

Never again will America’s brave warriors and their cause be abandoned and the people our country has pledged to liberate be left to perish at the hands of tyrants. Those days are most definitely over.

Whilst enjoying the afterglow, make up a jaw-dropping unofficial attendance figure, for instance that 30,000 heroes stood up for America against the dirty-hippie communist menace — of whom there wasn’t really a mammoth tidal wave after all, which also equals a victory.

What an outstanding day! The Eagles soared!

You should be very proud of your fellow veterans, families, and supporters. There’s so much to tell, and we encourage you to post your experiences in the the comments.

In the meantime, two items of business: 1) we have a gallery open for you to upload your digital photos to the website. That way you can share your photos with others. See the tab in the top right corner of the site. 2) the first unofficial estimate of the Eagle turn-out today…

30,000!

That figure may be adjusted upward as more figure are tallied during the week. Fox News reported today that the anti-war protesters had significantly less than they expected. However, they are erroneously reporting that the Eagles were there in “equal numbers�. The truth is that we outnumbered them by at least three to one!

Go farther! Here Michelle Malkin claims without any evidence that it’s an official number (emphasis added):

Blogburst: Gathering of Eagles–30,000 strong
By Michelle Malkin

***Update: Kit at Gathering of Eagles reports on the National Park Service estimate of the GoE turnout: 30,000 strong. The silent majority no more.***

Here’s Brent Bozell’s Newsbusters:

Gathering of Eagles (GoE): An Indicator of Old Media Decline

Gathering of Eagles’ web site reports that they were told by the National Park Service that their GoE estimate is ….. is …..

30,000

GoE’s site is also saying that the protester counts being reported elsewhere were 5,000 to 10,000 (the Times reported “thousands” and WaPo said “several thousand,” but both papers acknowledged that the protester turnout was much lower than at a similar event in January).

Remember not to check the original source: Citing AmericaPundit who cites FreedomWarrior who cites someone else citing three other people who cite what Michelle Malkin says about what the GoE site says, is what they mean by ‘the self-correcting blogosphere.’ If it weren’t true, someone would have said so.

Anyone who is not a dirty hippie should be thrilled by the turnout. I figured a few thousand people would show up, not 30,000. This is an estimate from the National Park Service, not from the GoE organization.It’s a testament of rational people trying to take the country back. The sad part is that most of the press was given to the psychotic, immoral moonbats there protesting the war.

Also, if other published figures contradict the 30,000-heroes one, don’t forget to keep up a constant drone of indignant complaint about the biased liberal MSM, because they super-lie about everything with gigantic crazy lies, just for the sake of dragging America down. Malkin updates:

***Update March 18, 2007 1:30am: The NYTimes lies…***

timesquote3.jpg

Pure bullcrap. Yup, the journalistic standard-bearers of the NYTimes relied on “several veterans of the antiwar movement” to give them crowd estimates of the Gathering of Eagles. It’s the domestic equivalent of MSMers relying on dubious Iraqi stringers to provide them with war coverage while they sit in their comfy Green Zone offices in D.C. and Manhattan.

 

Don’t believe the MSM — either their lying by entirely omitting any mention of the numbers of people attending the Gathering of Eagles, or their deliberate playing down of the numbers who did come. The Parks and Service people counted thirty thousand patriots gathered to protect the Wall.

 

So what else is new, except in this case their lies are more than usually blatant in favor of their personal agenda. The National Park Service’s first estimate of the turnout of Eagles is, wait for it: 30000.

Say guys, I heard some hippies are threatening to desecrate various locations in and around Baghdad. Why don’t the 30,000 of y’all surge on over?

…Hey wait, where did everybody go?

Update: No such Park Service, Parks Service, or Parks and Service estimate has appeared in any form, and no publicly available photo on the Web — although please correct us if we’re wrong — shows more than a couple of hundred pro-war demonstrators in any place at any time.

Update:

foxnewsgoe.jpg

267 Comments »

  1. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:39

    So what, are you upset that they could gather 30,000 people to support the war and our troops while the best the average libtard can do is summon up 30,000 cheeseburgers to go into his belly over the course of an afternoon while he reads Sadly, No! and chortles to himself?

  2. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:41

    30,000 people..

    …counting all the Gary Rupperts, miscellaneous sock puppets, and other imaginary friends,

  3. Jillian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:41

    All that’s missing is for them to gather in some nice beer hall to celebrate their victory over the liberals. Some comfy place where, over brauwnschweiger und a good lager, they can discuss more permanent ways to deal with this liberal menace in their midst. Some more final solution.

    I hate these fuckers.

  4. Moominpapa said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:42

    “my morale of me”

    That is to say, me, my morale, and I.

    I think it’s wonderful and very brave of Mr Bailey to write stuff after having his brain shot out in Vietnam.

  5. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:43

    I can’t believe they planned to deface the Vietnam Memorial. Wait a second, actually I can. There is no respect for the troops among the leftwingnuts.

    SICK.

  6. Lesley said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:44

    knowing what the anti-war movement did to America and to my morale of me and the morale other troops during the Vietnam era, the thought of elements of those same vile and vicious people attempting to resurrect their venom and use the Vietnam Memorial Wall as a proxy was intolerable

    that’s one fucked up sentence. he and bush must have taken the same grammar courses.

  7. Thers said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:44

    Please send checks or money orders to:
    Vets for the Truth
    ATTN: Gathering of Eagles

    A Gathering of Pigeons.

  8. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:44

    Michael Moore stated he was going to throw 30,000 pizzas at the Vietnam War Memorial, but he ate them before he got there.

    Photographic evidence of the event

  9. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 19, 2007 at 3:58

    Buttery topping with that prop corn?

  10. Hysterical Woman said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:03

    Goddammnit, the Vietnam War is over. We lost. Get over it.

  11. islmfaoscist said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:05

    What kind of moron could be stupid enough to fall for… oh, I see Annie is here.

  12. Djur said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:08

    Hysterical Woman: We lost? What were the conditions of victory? Killing all the Vietnamese?

  13. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:09

    Only liberals are allowed freedom of speech!!!!!!

    LOL.

  14. Dr. Squid said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:12

    We lost.

    What’s this we stuff? Conservatives lost it.

    Not like they’re Americans or anything.

  15. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:15

    “Not like they’re Americans or anything.”

    Are you saying Rambo is not an American?

    Not that this is something to joke about.

    Sweet Jesus you people are just horrible people.

  16. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:16

    You said it yourself, Miss Annie, only liberals are allowed freedom of speech. The reason is that to liberals they are the only true Americans. Typical hate-filled hypocrisy.

  17. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:17

    Don’t believe the MSM — either their lying by entirely omitting any mention of the numbers of people attending the Gathering of Eagles, or their deliberate playing down of the numbers who did come. The Parks and Service people counted thirty thousand patriots gathered to protect the Wall.

    They’re, Michelle, they’re. Not fucking fuckety fuckfuckfuckness of fucketackity fuckarnifuckness their. Jesus fucking Christ on a bicycle, learn to fucking use the correct fucking word once in a fucking while, won’t you?

  18. digamma said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:22

    This is quite a thread.

  19. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:28

    They’re, Michelle, they’re.

    Musta been Jesse.

  20. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:28

    They’re, Michelle, they’re. Not fucking fuckety fuckfuckfuckness of fucketackity fuckarnifuckness their. Jesus fucking Christ on a bicycle, learn to fucking use the correct fucking word once in a fucking while, won’t you?

    It’s Dymphna, Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian, it’s Dymphna. Not fucking fuckety fuckfuckfuckness of fucketackity fuckarnifuckness Michelle. Muhammad fucking Kirshna on a bicycle, learn to fucking read the correct fucking citation once in a fucking while, won’t you?

  21. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:28

    Only liberals are allowed freedom of speech!!!!!!
    LOL.

    You said it yourself, Miss Annie, only liberals are allowed freedom of speech. The reason is that to liberals they are the only true Americans. Typical hate-filled hypocrisy.

    And you two, since I’m descending into a foaming rant, are just about the living fucking end. Twee fucking purse-lipped fucking complaints about ‘freedom of speech’ when you’ve never been prevented from spouting whatever inane, ignorant, bigoted, fuckwad crap pops into your tiny fucking minds. Pompous fucking pontifications about ‘true Americans’ and snide, stupid, fucking right wing talking points repeated by fucking parrots a hundred thousand fucking times, yet you still think you’re saying something clever.

    Jesus fucking Christ, people, wake up to yourselves, and wake up to the fact that your ignorant, selfish, God-Bless-America-The-Fucking-Land-Of-Fucking-Everyone-Else-Because-We’re-So-Fucking-Special opinions are seriously endangering the world more than just about everything else put together, so shut the fuck up and start learning about the fucking world before your stupid brain-fucked government wipes the whole fucking globe free of fucking life.

    Jesus fucking Christ on a pogo stick, and you can stick that little Miss Christian Legs schtick, too, you stupid slag, because it’s just not funny. You’re a sad fucking act, anniesack, and I wish you’d shut the fuck up and think about what freedom of speech really means, and how freedom and democracy don’t necessitate bombing the bejeesus out of foreigners to prove how big your fucking dick is, and if you had any idea what fucking democracy means and what your fucking country has done, you’d be down on your fucking knees begging your Christian god to forgive you every fucking day for the rest of your sad fucking life.

    How’s that for hate-filled liberal ranting, limpy?

  22. John said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:29

    I’d like to point out that the National Park Service stopped providing turnout estimates in 1996, after the brouhaha about the Million Man March.

  23. dylan said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:29

    I was there. There were probably a couple hundred right-wingers there — far larger than the usual wingnut turnout of 16… but thirty thousand?!? These people are a bit delusional. There were probably more soldiers in the anti-war march than in the pro-war contingent (which had to spread itself out in two single-file rows to make itself look big).

    Also, “polite, but roaring disapproval”? How exactly are signs like “Commie traitor bitch” and “Go to hell traitors” polite?

    And for the record, the Park Service officially stopped making crowd estimates after the Nation of Islam sued them about the Million Man March.

  24. Ripley said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:30

    Speaking of Move America Forward, check out Melanie Morgan’s response to the Walter Reed scandal.

    Blog Integrity

    Talk about supporting the troops… or whatever.

    Are you saying Rambo is not an American?

    Are you saying that Rambo’s a real person?

  25. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:31

    You guys are wrong. There WERE 30,000 pro-war protesters there. My source is … Shoelimpy. The REAL one this time.

    I’m not really sure why they are protesting. We already got a war. They should wait and protest when there is no war going on. I mean, when there IS a war going on, you can show your support by enlisting. Are conservatives really so dumb they can’t come up with that solution?

  26. J— said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:31

    Mark Noonan on the 30K (ellipses in the original):

    It is also impressive when you consider that these people mostly have jobs which require results…while the leftwing protesters are, well, employed in less challenging occupations (college professor, trust fund baby, etc). This was a splended effort – and shows that while the left has the loudest mouth, they don’t rule the roost, even with a Democratic Congress.

    We’ll see how this translates next year – I expect a long, bitter campaign which coud rack this nation as it hasn’t been since the election of 1860…but I also believe that at the end of the day, a majority will vote in favor of America.

    As always, his analysis is aquiline.

  27. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:31

    I feel strangely cleansed.

  28. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:32

    “How’s that for hate-filled liberal ranting, limpy?”

    On a scale from 1 to 10, 1 being the worst, 10 being the best, I would give it a 2.5. Why don’t you go back, get some practice, come back and try again later.

  29. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:36

    That was pretty bad, Qetesh. You can’t just say FUCK over and over. You need some content that isn’t jsut cussing.

    I give it a 2.

  30. MrWonderful said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:39

    1. Gavin: well done.

    2. “A coast to coast celebration of our freedoms.” How intelligent, how brilliant do you have to be, to realize that anyone protesting the war, or any war, is exercising “our freedoms” as much as the self-righteous cretins who hunker down to “protect” a memorial from an imaginary threat that never appears because it was made up from the start? That’s their pretend version of “serving,” of “being out there on the front line.” Just fucking take part in re-creations of the Battle of Shiloh, for fuck’s sake, if you’re so desperate to feel “strong” and “pure.” I’m talking to the Shoelimpys and Annienangels (assuming they’re real people) and any other “conservative” here who thinks this idiotic brain-dead demonstration of moron “patriotism” is what it thinks it is.

    Unless you really believe the lies, propaganda, and demagogic swill of people like Hannity and Coulter. Do you? Then you’re not only not as smart and “patriotic” as you think you are, you’re just a fucking chump, a sucker, and a ( your insult here ). All the worst people in the world depend on the Hannitys and Coulters of the world to lead you, the passionate but mindless masses, to support them. Which, with endless self-righteousness and zero intellectual inquiry, you do. You think that if you feel something really strongly then it must be true. Have you ever met any children? Have you ever seen them believe deeply in something that you know isn’t true? Fuck your “sincerity.” Fuck your “patriotic fervor.” You’re sincere, fervent idiots if all you think is necessary, admirable, and noble is to salute the flag and follow the (lying, criminal) President. You’re 30,000 chumps. Or however many there really were.

    I’m drunk and I still need a drink.

  31. MrWonderful said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:43

    Qetesh–

    Mon semblable! Mon frere!
    Tell it, brother.

  32. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:47

    Ah, I see annie and shoe have arrived here after a post-St. Patty’s day pub-crawl or perhaps the downing of several 40 oz. bottles of malt liquor at annie’s place.

    annie, you’re arguing with a cat.

    a magnificent cat, albeit, but you’re arguing with a cat.

  33. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:48

    I’m talking to the Shoelimpys and Annienangels (assuming they’re real people)

    They’re ONE real person.

  34. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:48

    I also believe that at the end of the day, a majority will vote in favor of America.

    Yeah, they did that in 2006 already.

  35. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:52

    I’m not arguing with anyone. I’m just amazed that liberals think they are the only ones who are allowed to exercise their free speech. Anyone else does it, they go nuts. But then they also scream bloody murder if one of their own fires a dirty mouth feminazi cuz all she can do is say fuck and trash Christians.

    It’s interesting. The jealously that eats you all up is interesting. And sad.

  36. RubDMC said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:53

    Wow, Michael Moore fat jokes with PhotoShopping, no less.

    I know when I’m out-witted.

  37. christian h. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 4:56

    Well, they also said there were “thousands of chemical munitions in Iraq” – as estimated by the National Park Service.

  38. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:00

    Are you saying Rambo is not an American? >/i>

    Oh, man, I really hate to break it to you……but, annie….he’s a fictional character played by a short Italian guy who married a 6′ tall ball-busting Swedish pervert, and whose life is controlled by his mother.

  39. islmfaoscist said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:02

    Help, I’m being oppressed by hippies!

  40. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:05

    Anyone else does it, they go nuts.

    Uh, actually, the people getting upset about execising free speech are the so-called counter protestors. They’re the ones with signs denouncing the marchers.

    The whole purpose of the “counter-protest” is to do exactly that – denounce people exercising free speech.

    Annie, you and shoelimpy should just go back to your fucking bachelorette flat, suck down another couple of bottles of malt liquor, and mutually amuse one another. Because you’re not making an impression here, ms. cankles.

  41. Scott de B. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:05

    I’m surprised no one has pointed out how this is an amazing turnaround. Now the right is all anxious to ‘protect’ the Vietnam Memorial. When the memorial was first constructed, the right uniformly said it was wrong, it was an insult to the troops, and it should never have been built. In fact, the venom was so strong that a figural monument had to be built near the Memorial (easy to miss, since few visit it). Now they are huge fans of the monument they felt was anti-American just a few short years ago.

  42. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:07

    Oh that is RICH.

    So liberals are so arrogant they think that the only free speech is theirs, and everyone else’s opinions are only pulled out of their asses to protest the liberals right to free speech!!!

    Wow. Doubleplusgood!!!

  43. MzNicky said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:08

    annie/shoelimpy? Say it’s not so!

    Sadly, No! — are you fucking kidding me? You mean there’s actually a blog left on the InternetsTubes that hasn’t banned this execreable act?

    Are you guys masochistic, or what?

    Is this, at long last, what might compel you to do so?

  44. Ms. Clio said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:08

    “It is also impressive when you consider that these people mostly have jobs which require results…while the leftwing protesters are, well, employed in less challenging occupations (college professor, trust fund baby, etc.”

    Or hog farmers from Iowa: http://tbogg.blogspot.com/2007/03/dwight-d.html

    Goddamn I hate these motherfucking lying cocksuckers with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns.

    To quote the Coultergeist itself: “They’re always saying, ‘we’re oppressed, we’re oppressed.’ So let’s do it — let’s oppress them.”

  45. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:10

    I’m not against free speech for pro-war protesters. I think they have every right to show how dumb they are, protesting how badly they want a war when we already got TWO for them to choose from when they enlist.

  46. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:10

    This is like the third time MzNitzy has come on here with the same routine.

    I am loved here. Fuck off.

  47. MrWonderful said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:12

    (takes deep breath)

    No, it’s not that “only liberals are allowed freedom of speech.”

    I don’t care what your opinion is. I just ask–in vain–that when you say things that present themselves as facts, that they not be obvious and objectively-provable lies. You have the right to say these lies (and not because I say so, but because of what we all agree on), but if they’re lies, then they pollute the discourse and serve the interests of..um…liars.

    If you say, “I think George W. Bush is a great man,” I’d think you were an idiot, but I probably wouldn’t argue the point. It’s your opinion and, as far as it goes, it doesn’t trespass on my part of the exchange.

    If you said, “I think George W. Bush is a great man because he’s made us safer,” I’d say, “You’re out of your tiny mind. He and his policies have created more terrorists than there were previously.” Because, you see, you’d be asserting a fact that purportedly is true for me, too, and that is not true.

    It’s not someone exercising their “freedom of speech” that is so offensive. Because if I disagree, who the fuck cares? It’s when their claims to objective truth are–objectively–based on fantasy, propaganda, wishful thinking, and–ugh. wait for it–”faith,” that it becomes disgusting and so worthy of the deepest, deepest contempt.

    Of course, what someone here should be saying to me at this point is, “Lies and catch-phrases and patriotic cliches are all they have left. Any self-respecting ‘conservative’ has quit the field and has been drinking him- and herself into oblivion since 2004. All that’s LEFT are the wingnuts. Who else can still look at Cheney without gagging? Who else can listen to Bush for thirty seconds without laughing?”

    Thanks. I needed that.

    Somebody stop me.

  48. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:13

    “You mean there’s actually a blog left on the InternetsTubes that hasn’t banned this execreable act?”

    Here once again we see the fascist censoring soul of the liberal body politic. You guys really do a great job of proving our point.

  49. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:15

    “All the LEFT are wingnuts”

    Fixed your typo.

  50. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:15

    It’s not so much caring about anybody else exercising their freedom of speech.

    It’s just that we’d like them to get their fucking facts straight. For once.

    You know, I read a threat to theDickeyville Grotto on the Internets last week from insane Rightwing Theofascists; however, their diabolical plans for defilement were thwarted because I drove there with a “Go Home Morans” sign. Me and several hundred like-minded Wisconsin patriots. Obviously, my efforts prevented the unthinkable from happening.

  51. Random Observer said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:17

    Reminds me of stories of the Minutemen by the border. They kept running stories about how thousands of people were camping out the border to protect America, it turns out there were something like 200.

    30,000 is obviously impossible to believe. It is pure invention.

    I think at this point the right wing would stoop to just making up events that didn’t happen at all. “Gosh, that was an amazing pro-war demonstration in Times Square yesterday, must have been a million people!! Don’t let the MSM tell you otherwise!!!”

    These people have absolutely no problem with outright lying. In their bizzaro-world liberals were threatening to destroy Washington but girzzled vets 30,000 strong swooped in for the rescue! Yay!

  52. Principal Blackman said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:18

    Mark Noonan on the 30K

    That’s all this wingnutfest needed to be completed. Fantastic.

    Great dissection of this whole idiocy, Gavin.

  53. christian h. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:18

    Help, I’m being oppressed by hippies!

    You might have suppressed the memory, but it’s actually flying hippies oppressing you. Especially in Buffalo.

  54. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:19

    “I don’t care what your opinion is. I just ask–in vain–that when you say things that present themselves as facts, that they not be obvious and objectively-provable lies. You have the right to say these lies (and not because I say so, but because of what we all agree on), but if they’re lies, then they pollute the discourse and serve the interests of..um…liars. ”

    You do care what our opinion is, otherwise you wouldn’t have just paragraph after paragraph of nonsense blasting our opinion. When I post a fact, I make it known it is a fact. Most of the time I am just posting my opinion. However any rational reading of this entire thread, from the first word posted by Gavin to the last, shows that Liberals believe freedom of speech is only for themselves. You don’t have to believe it, but I mean it is all right here staring you in the face.

  55. J— said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:21

    Is this, at long last, what might compel you to do so?

    Oh, this is just one of many performance art pieces Annie Angel and Shoelimpy have put on in the Sadly, No! comments pavilion. The thing is, they know what is not permitted here and they won’t cross that line.

  56. Random Observer said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:22

    By the way I personally stranged to death three hippy teens today who were trying to take down an American flag outside of Star Market. It was pretty easy – they were too high to defend themselves.

    No, it really happened!

  57. christian h. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:25

    Random Observer is right – it was actually 30000 hippies strangled to death in a heroic explosion of violence. But the MSM won’t tell you about that, no sir. Why? Because they don’t like free speech, typical liberals that they are.

  58. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:25

    The fact that the Pie Twins have never been banned from this site indicate that they are, inpoint of fact, quite wrong about their assertion that liberals want to quash their dissent.

    In further dispute of their assertions, many here, myself included, have engaged them in dialogue only to be proven to be fools because they do not argue in good faith, but only to score points of minor contention, and not from any particular belief. It’s a forensics trick, not honest dialogue.

  59. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:25

    Um, I think there are some people on this thread who think that “free speech” means “agreeing with everything that conservatives say and never making fun of them or pointing out their hypocrisy or their logical fallacies.”

    I’m a little dubious on such an interpretation.

  60. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:27

    The only reason I’m not banned is because Brad R loves me in a way that is not threatening to my relationship with Shoelimpy.

  61. Mo's Bike Shop said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:29

    I feel strangely cleansed.

    That’s really something, coming from a cat.

    Are you guys masochistic, or what?

    What?

  62. Sonic said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:30

    On the invisible 30,000

    “A lie can run around the world before the truth can get it’s boots on.â€?

    Also not a nice bunch

    http://winterpatriot.blogspot.com/2007/03/peaceful-protesters-threatened-and.html

  63. Some Guy said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:31

    Wow. Anti-war peeps were gunna rally and deface the Vietnam Memorial, eh?
    Good thing the GoE showed up. Cause it’s not like the National Park Service or the DC Police could have stopped that.

    Did any of these guys bother to put up a link to their (Not they’re, nor there) NPS estimate report of 30,000?
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Gathering+of+Eagles%22%2C+attendance+estimate&btnG=Search
    Cause I can’t find it. Every one seems to be “hat tipping”, as the kewl kids say, the GoE website. Which doesn’t have a link. But, hey, they have no reason to lie.

    GoE seyz: “UPDATE (2354 local): Guess what? The gallery’s down. Guess why?”
    …Cause Lamont hacked your site? No, why?

    And always remember, shoeangle tends to get cranky when they play for to long. Much like when Uncle Johnny gets shitfaced every Thanksgiving, try not to let pay it to much attention and just let the alcohol-induced rage run it’s course in the corner.
    Hey, look! Pumpkin pie!

  64. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:33

    Actually, I don’t give a fuck what Shoelimpy or annie say. they’re idiots and don’t deserve the civility of a reasoned response.

    But it’s obvious that they’ve come here after smoking some crank and downiing some 40′s and visiting LGF and Hot Air, and are in the mood for a hysterical rant.

    Maybe they’ve gotten so whipped up with excitement that they’ve overindulged and they’ll degenerate into itheir own nternal fighting and shut up and leave us alone.

    Jesus.

    It’s like having horrible people living next door, who harangue you at block watch parties. Only it;s better because you really don;t have to read them.

  65. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:33

    Actually, Retarded Donut, I believe the interpretation being preferred among wingnut circles is:

    “Free speech is the ability to say any damn fool thing I WANT to believe, and not be contradicted by professors, liberals, dirty fucking hippies, or reality. or to have anybody ridicule me for the foolish things I say. I said GOOD DAY!”

  66. MrWonderful said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:33

    No, because you don’t present opinion as such. You present opinion, cant, slogans, talking points, bullshit, and made-up fantasy as “fact,” which they’re not. That’s my point.

    “Nonsense”? Fine.

    Gavin’s point is not that “wingnuts have no freedom of speech!” It’s that the claims made by these self-righteous cretins are ludicrous, both regarding the “threat” they pretend to be guarding against, and their numbers.

    Unless you’re so sensitive and thin-skinned that being challenged is the same as being told you can’t speak. Which you’re not. So Jesus on a Segway, defend the Eagles (in all their lunk-head pretense) if you want, but don’t whine that all the “fascist” liberals here are claiming they (or you) “can’t speak.”

    Or do, and continue to prove my point: that you can’t tell (and don’t want to tell) the difference between opinion and propaganda.

  67. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:34

    “engaged them in dialogue only to be proven to be fools”

    Then he cried and went home.

  68. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:36

    “But it’s obvious that they’ve come here after smoking some crank and downiing some 40’s and visiting LGF and Hot Air, and are in the mood for a hysterical rant. ”

    See how free speech is responded to by liberals? SHOUT IT DOWN!!!

    LOL.

  69. Sonic said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:36

    Also this is amzing doublethink over at hot air, as they complain that none of the media took any photos showing the 30,000

    “Was it that difficult to take a photo of thousands attendingthe GOE rally?”

    Pretty hard when they are not there buddy.

  70. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:38

    How did I present my opinion as fact? This is a political opinion blog, not a scientific community discussing the fundamental questions of life, the universe and everything. What is said here is opinion. Your opinion’s, my opinions, Brad and Gavin’s mamas’ opinions. That is the nature of bloggerdom. Otherwise everything you see on the blogosphere would be predicated with “In My Opinion” which would just be moronic because it is assumed.

  71. RubDMC said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:38

    “Now the right is all anxious to ‘protect’ the Vietnam Memorial. When the memorial was first constructed, the right uniformly said it was wrong, it was an insult to the troops, and it should never have been built.”

    Yes, indeedy. Thanks for pointing out that little bit of revisionist history, Scott.

    Maya Lin’s design, which was thankfully kept intact despite the many efforts of such warriors as Pat Buchanan and James Watt (remember him?) to subvert it, stands as one of the most eloquent and timeless statements on the true cost of war.

    It’s a fine fine example of how art can take us outside of ourselves. I, for one, am very thankful for her vision.

    Be sure to see the trailer to the 1995-Oscar winning documentary, Maya Lin: A Clear Strong Vision

    Perhaps the brave counter protesters have had a change of heart regarding the Wall’s symbolic power since it was first built?

    I kinda doubt it, since self-reflection and changing an opinion both require more frontal lobe function than most wingnuts generally have on board.

    I also suspect that 15,000-20,000 of those who were there today (according to Mark Noonan and other reliable sources) weren’t even born at the time of the controversy, or were too young to remember.

    All in all, facts are maleable things for these folks.

  72. MzNicky said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:39

    Allowing people to express their opinion is one thing. Indulging the Tourette-syndromish bleatings of proven psychopaths is something else. Perhaps they are kept around for site-hit purposes, or for incitements to generate additional comments (such as this one), or maybe it’s more in the way decadents in ancient times kept raving lunatics in cages and poked them occasionally with sticks for amusement purposes. That seems like what you’re doing. Whatever. I’m just surprised there’s a blog left that puts up with it, for any reason.

  73. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:39

    Mon frere!

    That would be ‘ma soeur’, cheri. Quetesh is Queen, not King.

    And LimpPaw, it’s true, we progressives just can’t do hate-filled ranting worth a damn. We’re too busy sipping chardonnay and discussing Proust. For real hate-filled ranting, you need an ignorant, war-mongering, Reichtard.

    By the way I personally stranged to death three hippy teens today

    Excuse me, Random, Sir or Ma’am, but just how do you strange a hippy? I thought they were pretty strange already…?

    And gang, it’s pretty clear that either Limp and Limpette don’t, really honestly don’t, understand what freedom of speech means, or they’re sniggering 14-year-olds in mamma’s basement, thinking they’re doing something outrageously funny.

    One thing I’ve got to ask, though, while I’m being Miss Crankypants, is this: Can someone please explain the pie thing? I’ve been trying to guess at what ignorant right-wing Christianists do with pie, to no avail. Or rather, to too much avail, and I’d like some of my guesses unconirmed.

  74. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:40

    Oh, annie. Shout it down?” You’re such a liar. You walked in here shouting. Here’s your first post in this thread:

    I can’t believe they planned to deface the Vietnam Memorial. Wait a second, actually I can. There is no respect for the troops among the leftwingnuts.

    SICK

    Has your free speech been censored? Hardly.

    You are free to post whatever idiotic shit you want. And you do. Endlessly.

  75. Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:41

    The only reason I’m not banned is because Brad R loves me in a way that is not threatening to my relationship with Shoelimpy.

    Actually, Annie, it has nothing to do with you at all. ‘Principle’ is a thing that you apply equally to everyone.

    You know, like Astroglide at a bachelor party.

  76. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:43

    “Limp and Limpette”

    Snicker!

    If I weren’t a dog person, I’d love you, Qetesh.

  77. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:44

    MzNicky, they’re allowed around here for intellectual honesty, if I interpret our hosts correctly.

    They believe that everyone, including the batshit goofy, have a right to post comments at a humor blog, within certain very liberal limits. Unless the PieTwins, as annoying and predictable as they are, cross those lines, they get to post here.

    Most everybody else around here has just learned to enjoy pie.

    (Qatesh: mikey is the keeper of the pie code. If you please him, he will avail to you a piece of code that reduces the bleatings of the Goofy Two to simple expressions of fondness for pie)

  78. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:48

    Gavin is jealous of Brad’s love for me.

  79. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:49

    The pie code is actually freely available at userscripts.org.

  80. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:49

    Now, see, there’s a perfect example of lunacy.

  81. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:50

    whoops. I meant annie;s post. Not Bubba’s

  82. Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:50

    The only reason I’m not banned is because Brad R loves me in a way that is not threatening to my relationship with Shoelimpy.

    I should also add I’m not really sure how to ban someone from this blog. That is my next task after figuring out how to put the ‘Preview’ button back.

  83. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:51

    Thanks, RB. mikey was the only one I knew who had the address for sure.

    So, qetesh, you don’t have to deal with mikey if you don’t want. Pie all around!

  84. MzNicky said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:52

    Ironic, isn’t it?, that those two show up in spades at a thread titled “Anatomy of a Con Job.”

  85. MrWonderful said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:53

    You’re right that blogs are nothing if not a place for exchanging opinions, and that no one has to introduce an opinion by identifying it as such.

    However, it’s disingenuous, if not stupid, to defend that by saying “This is a political opinion blog, not a scientific community discussing the fundamental questions of life (etc.),” as though the only appropriate place for discussing facts is a “scientific community.” But never mind. It’s hyperbole and maybe you don’t mean it literally.

    But just as every opinion can’t be prefaced with “this is my opinion,” neither can every statement of fact be billboarded, “this is a fact.”

    And when you say “However any rational reading of this entire thread, from the first word posted by Gavin to the last, shows that Liberals believe freedom of speech is only for themselves,” that’s just ludicrous. Go back and read Gavin’s post.

    All of it expresses (deserved) mockery of the GOE. Nowhere does it say or imply, “They have no right to do this.”

    You do see that, right? That to criticize something is not the same as forbidding it or claiming it has no right to exist?

    Everyone (with two exceptions) agrees with the mockery of it. No one has said or implied, “They have no right to do this.” or “They have no right to express support for the war.”

    But rather than (via opinion) express support for what they did, you and AA just play the same old Victimized Wingnut card of “liberals won’t let us express ourselves.” “Liberals are fascists who only want freedom of expression for themselves.” Next you’ll be calling us “the elite.”

    This is what the worst Republicans on earth do: Newt, DeLay, Cheney, other professional liars (and, of course, their paid cheerleaders on Fox). They never address the issue; they only attack the critic with assertions they pretend are “facts.”

    It’s beyond stupid. Well, no, it’s not beyond stupid. It’s exactly co-existent with stupid. What’s beyond stupid is me, for going on like this.

    Who’s for Scrabble?

  86. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:54

    Shoelimpy’s love for me is something you liberals can’t understand, even if he does steal my credit cards.

  87. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:55

    Who’s for Scrabble?

    I am studying the issue and my office will release a statement within the week.

  88. Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:56

    Shoelimpy pretending to be Gavin M. said,

    I should also add I’m not really sure how to ban someone from this blog. That is my next task after figuring out how to put the ‘Preview’ button back.

    Right, Shoelimpy. I don’t know how to ban you. I certainly couldn’t just nip into the spam filter and stick your IP in there, or anything like that. Jeesh.

    The pie code is actually freely available at userscripts.org.

    It is! Here’s the URL!

  89. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:56

    Now that has GOT to be a counterfeit annieangel post!

  90. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:57

    You know, talking to annie and … annie about free speech reminds me of the time I had to tell my 6-year-old niece repeatedly that the little plastic lizard in the toy section at the grocery store did NOT want to come home with us.

    I mean, all his friends were there in the grocery store, right?

    Well, my niece just kept saying that he didn’t like the other little plastic animals.

    Which is a lot like talking to annie and … annie.

    (Sorry for trying to put a stop to your free speech, annie, by making fun of you a little. I’ll try to be more politically correct next time. But, really, if you don’t like being ridiculed, you should be less ridiculous.)

  91. Gavlimpy said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:57

    Saying there were 30,000 people at the Gathering of Eagles is a statement of fact, it is easily quantifiable and the truth can easily be determined.

    Stating that liberals are disingenuous in their claims to believing in “freedom of speech” is not an easily quantifiable fact. It is an opinion I have come to after having many dealings with liberals, however since it deals as its subject a matter of belief, itself a subjective concept, statements made on that matter are of course ones of opinion, that is why we have the word opinion in our language else everything would have to fall into categories of fact or fiction.

  92. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:58

    I never once said liberals don’t *allow* different opinion, but as I learned tonight, all non-liberal opinion is in reality pulled out of the asses of non-liberals in order to try to either violate the free speech of liberals or to shout it down.

    I love it. It’s truely fucking beautiful. Please continue.

  93. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 5:59

    oops.

    I think Limpy just forgot which sockpuppet he was wearing.

    Oh what a give-away!

  94. Worse Spelling Than Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:02

    Notice how in my post made at 5:56, I made a perfect example of how we liberals like to play the free speech game. On the one hand we say that we allow conservatives like Shoe and Annie to post, then in the same breath encourage our readers to filter out the words of those nasty conservatives using specially made scripts. This is called having your pie and eating it to. We get to stand up for free speech while at the same time deny free speech.

  95. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:02

    the sockpuppet’s on the other foot now.

  96. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:02

    Momentarily returning to the topic du jour, has anyone cast a weary eye over the MSM’s offerings on the subject? I’d be tickled pinker than you can imagine to find at least one that said something along the lines of:

    Today in Washington, several dozen fat bearded men in army fatigues berated anti-war protesters at the Vietnam monument. When asked what the hell they were doing, one replied, in thick Ozark, that “We’s purtectin’ the Mon-yewment from them goddam hippie turr’rists!”

    No-one in our Washington bureau was able to translate this into Human.

    Speaking of backwoods accents, has anyone else seen Pass The Ammo? Best line in a film ever, bar none, spoken by a bit part character no less. The fact that the rest of the film’s pretty good (young Bill Paxton as holdup guy/hero, Tim Curry in excellent form as a televangelist) is just the icing on the cake.

    I mean, how can you not love a film which has a bar scene with a bunch of yokels leaning on the bar, eyes fixed on the telly, one saying in slow amazement “They’re gonna butt-fuck the preacher on TV!”

    That, my friends, is real comedy gold.

  97. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:03

    This is called having your pie and eating it to. We get to stand up for free speech while at the same time deny free speech.

    Free speech means they get to say it. It doesn’t mean I have to listen.

  98. MzNicky said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:05

    Note how annie”angel” tries to keep you guys going with passive-aggressive misrepresentations and then the goading “please continue.” Knowing passionate free-speechers will feel compelled to respond to her idiotic cattle-prodding. But yes, do please, continue.

  99. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:08

    Scrabble! I love to make the tiles jump across the board by hooking them with my claws. And I lurve having a wee nap right in the middle of the board, if things get too exciting.

    Scrabble – count me in!

  100. EdsAppliance said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:10

    I would trade free speech for free pie.

  101. Herr Doktor Bimler said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:10

    … while the left has the loudest mouth, they don’t rule the roost, even with a Democratic Congress.

    Great literary collaborations of Mark Noonan:
    #1. Mark Noonan and Edmund Hillary: “No Platitude for Error” (1961).
    #2. Mark Noonan and Henry Miller: “Quiet Days in Cliche” (1956).

  102. MrWonderful said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:10

    Oh, a CAT.

    I thought you were just some guy who was all “look at me, I know how to shave.”

    You know. From Abyssinia.

    Please accept my humblest, etc.

  103. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:13

    Tell MzNitzy to stop copying me.

  104. Lame Imitation of Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:13

    “Free speech means they get to say it. It doesn’t mean I have to listen.”

    Exactly! Brilliant observation. Justification of hypocrisy is fun, isn’t it?

  105. Prudence Goodwife said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:17

    “Then She cried and went home.”

    There, I fixed your typo.

    Eat a bowl of cock.

  106. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:20

    “Eat a bowl of cock.”

    Liberal free speech. Such insight, such depth, such a big load of nothing wrapped in filth.

  107. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:21

    http://www.soupsong.com/rcockale.html

  108. Ann Althouse said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:22

    I have a feeling that there is going to be another photoshopped controversy.

    The NY Times and the AP are going to erase bout 29,500 Beagles to prop up there story of a couple hundred patriots standing up to the hippies.

  109. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:23

    It’s also interesting that the “liberal” women on this site either flirt with the men, or pick on a woman so that they can feel they’ve earned respect from men on this board.

    I’m almost choking on the sexism.

  110. Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:23

    Shlimp, I wish to call your attention to something. When I see this comment (in which you pretend to be me), there’s a word that doesn’t appear when you look at it in your browser.

    Gavin M. said,
    March 19, 2007 at 6:02 · Edit

    It’s right up there. Do you see it?

  111. Doesn't Effectively Parody Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:26

    See, Shlimp? It’s right here.

    Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:23 · Edit

    Can you see it or are you blind?

  112. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:28

    This is getting funnier.

  113. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:28

    “Eat a bowl of cock.�

    Oh, dear! Someone offended a conservative! Can’t have that!

    Let’s all try to be more respectful of annie’s “feelings.” (And annie’s “feelings” as well.)

    We should all be more politically correct. We all know how conservatives are about political correctness. When it suits them.

  114. Dr BLT said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:30

    As U2 said, I Still Haven’t Found what I’m Looking For. I’m looking for a politician with their own…

    Personal Jesus
    Dr BLT cover of Depeche Mode classic
    http://www.drblt.net/music/PJ.mp3

  115. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:30

    Gavin’s mad! He’s maaaaaaaaaaaad, maaaaaaaad I say!

  116. Prudence Goodwife said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:30

    “Eat a bowl of cock.�

    “Liberal free speech. Such insight, such depth, such a big load of nothing wrapped in filth.”
    Wow annieangel responded to little ole’ me!

    Like shooting fish in a barrel.

  117. Artist Formerly Known As Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:31

    See Shlimp, its like this. It is your free speech to say what you want. It is my free speech to edit your free speech because I am kind of like God in that way.

    You better stop your namestealing ways. My readers aren’t smart enough to spot a namestealer when they see one, so I have to spend lots of time trying to point out the namestealers to them, which I don’t like. I mean, I could just be sitting back and enjoying a V8 right now, but I can’t because I’ve got morans reading my blog thinking that I’m you and you’re me and that somehow Ann Althouse is involved in all of this and I’m tired of it. Keep it up and I will enter your name into Akismet and then we’ll see how well you’re able to post, buddy!

  118. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:31

    I’m almost choking…

    Can you try a little harder? Go all the way.

  119. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:33

    Just how much pie adds up to the other 29000 Eggos?

  120. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:33

    the “liberal� women on this site either flirt with the men, or pick on a woman so that they can feel they’ve earned respect from men on this board.

    By “pick on a woman” do you mean YOU? Hahahahahahahha!

  121. MrWonderful said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:34

    “Funnier”? Oh really?

    All someone has to do around here is post something under someone else’s name, and all of a sudden you liberals jump all over it and try to abridge his (or her) free speech. Typical fascist hypocritical fascistic hypocrisy of a fascisto-hypocritical nature.

    So, you know–shut up and stuff.

    (Is there any relation between “Abyssinia” and “the Abyss”? I mean there has to be. Was Abyssinia an abyss-like (or abysmal) place? Someone here please know this.)

  122. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:34

    I’m almost choking on the sexism.

    Is it OK if I ask for SPECIFIC examples? Like, saying, “They’re all over the place,” doesn’t count.

    I’m not doing this to be mean. I’d just like to know what you’re talking about.

    (Or maybe I’m being unfair by asking for details and examples. I mean, in my experience, conservatives get really upset when you ask them to support their arguments. They seem to think they don’t have to support their arguments because Michal Moore is fat.)

  123. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:38

    G, men need to stop treating women as if there is something inherently wrong with their gender. I mean being a woman should not be used as an insult. Yet the “oh so high and mighty” liberals seem to see no problem with countless insults at women who speak their mind simply on the basis that they are women. Or, in many cases, they will attempt to deny their femininity because they seem to have an underlying belief that women are unequal to men and thus in order to respond to them they must first turn them into a man, if in their own minds. I mean liberals do it to Ann Coulter, they do it to Michelle Malkin, they do it to Miss Annie. It is wrong.

  124. Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:38

    …but I can’t because I’ve got morans reading my blog thinking that I’m you and you’re me and that…

    Two things, really. One is the spelling and grammar. The other, infinitely more important thing is that you’re not even parodying me well!

    I mean really — how hard could it be?

  125. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:40

    People better stop stealing my lines and copying me! I mean, REALLY!

  126. Clearly Not The Real Gavin M.â„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:40

    I have decided to change my name to The Real Gavin M.â„¢, to avoid confusion between myself and the namestealer. Anything not posted by The Real Gavin M.â„¢ is not the real Gavin M. It’s that simple.

  127. Also Not The Real Gavin M.â„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:42

    Look at the namestealer above. He seems to think that the issues of spelling and grammar, as well as the poor parody, make it easy for the readers of this blog to tell myself from the namestealer. If that were true, why oh why would I spend so much time making sure my readers are aware of who is the namestealer and who is me? It defies all common sense.

  128. Gavin M's Evil Twin said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:45

    Look at the namestealer above. He seems to think that the issues of spelling and grammar, as well as the poor parody, make it hard for the readers of this blog to tell myself from the namestealer. If that were false why oh why would I not spend so much time making sure my readers are not aware of who is the namestealer and who is not me? It defies all common sense.

  129. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:48

    G, men need to stop treating women as if there is something inherently wrong with their gender.

    I agree. Show me an example of this on this board.

    As long as we’re talking about men and women, why the fuck are you using her credit cards and pretending with false gallantry to defend her right to blurt drunken blather here? I mean People better stop stealing my lines and copying me! I mean, REALLY!

    Really. indeed. What are you doing, pouring her her next shot?

  130. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:48

    Okay, I give. I’m a big fraud, and ShoeLimpy is really me. We’re both the same person. Ya got us, okay? Are you happy now? You’ll never hear from me/us again.

  131. MrWonderful said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:49

    As Karl Malden says in On the Waterfront:

    “I’m just a potato-eater…”

    so can someone tell me if this:

    “Yet the “oh so high and mightyâ€? liberals seem to see no problem with countless insults at women who speak their mind simply on the basis that they are women.”

    is satirical faux-Limpy, or sincere and real?

    I think real, because it shows tinges of the authentic, hard-to-counterfeit wingnut syntax, combining the straining-for-eloquence of “countless” with the bonehead wrongness of “mind” (as opp. to “minds”) and the ESL misuse of “on the basis that.”

    It IS like shooting fish in a barrel. But somebody has to shoot them.

  132. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:50

    Now come on Gavin, time to show if you are a hypocrite or not cuz that was obviously not me.

  133. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:50

    You’ll never hear from me/us again.

    Is this for real? I’d be happy.

  134. Gavin M.'s Other Evil Twin said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:50

    Look at the namestealer above. He seems to think that the issues of proper spelling and grammar, as well as the amazingly excellent parody, make it hard for the readers of this blog to tell myself from the namestealer. If that were the case why oh why would I not spend so much time making sure my readers are not aware of who is the namestealer and who is not me? It defies all uncommon sense.

  135. Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:52

    I think real, because it shows tinges of the authentic, hard-to-counterfeit wingnut syntax, combining the straining-for-eloquence of “countless� with the bonehead wrongness of “mind� (as opp. to “minds�) and the ESL misuse of “on the basis that.�

    Yeah, that’s the grammar right there. The interesting thing is that they don’t seem to be able to drop those mannerisms: It’s as though they’re hard-wired.

    For instance, what kind of inner pretzel-logic would someone have to be accustomed to in order to use this many negatives in a sentence without getting dizzy?

    If that were the case why oh why would I not spend so much time making sure my readers are not aware of who is the namestealer and who is not me?

  136. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:52

    OK. Goodnight. I’ve had surgery recently, and I think I need to go to sleep.

    I’d like a vicodin and vodka cocktail, please. With pearl onions.

  137. truthlover said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:53

    The best part was that in several published reports by the MSM, many of the Rolling Thunder crowd, who apparently fell for the canard that the anti-war demonstrators were going to deface the Vietnam war memorial, were interviewed stating that they don’t support the surge and don’t support the war in Iraq, they just support the troops and veterans and wanted to defend the memorial.

    Other reports I read – from both the MSM and the Indymedia crowd – said that the counter-demonstrators attacked protestors who accidentally ended up on their side of the police barricade. One woman and her family had their signs destroyed, were spit on and yelled at, and had to be removed by police escort. There was also a lovely AP photo of a woman looking like she was about to spit, but surely overcome by pro-war hysteria.

    If this is the best they can muster, well……

  138. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:54

    Oh, a CAT.
    I thought you were just some guy who was all “look at me, I know how to shave.�
    You know. From Abyssinia.
    Please accept my humblest, etc.

    Humblest accepted, Mr Wonderful. The shaving episode happened last week, after a particularly noxious blog posting on this very site. Made me so ill my fur was twitching, so…

  139. John Bolton®©³² said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:58

    Get A Brain, Morans!

  140. Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 6:58

    OK. Goodnight. I’ve had surgery recently, and I think I need to go to sleep.

    Take care, G!

  141. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:00

    Hypocrite. :)

  142. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:02

    Take care, G!

    A clever parodist would take note of this sentence structure and study it closely in order to deliver maximum yucks.

  143. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:03

    No, sorry. I meant to say, I’M a hypocrite. Good night, G. Sorry ShoeLiimpy, I mean me, is so jealous of you.

  144. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:04

    I AM SHOELIMPY!

  145. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:05

    You’ll never hear from me again. I promise, cuz you all are so hypocritical and mean. By the way, be sure to click on my name to see my real picture. Not that any of you deserve it.

  146. Not Remotely Like Gavin M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:06

    By the way, I’m hosting a Sadly, No! grammar seminar next week. Come on out, the cost is only $20 a head. Not only will you learn something, but you will be supporting the cause of Sadly, No! We will also be serving dinner for an extra $15.

  147. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:07

    (Is there any relation between “Abyssinia� and “the Abyss�? I mean there has to be. Was Abyssinia an abyss-like (or abysmal) place? Someone here please know this.)

    Sadly, no! The name Abyssinia was used for Ethiopia . If I may be allowed a short quote:

    Ethiopians and Eritreans, especially Semitic-speaking ones, collectively refer to themselves as Habesha or Abesha, though others reject these names on the basis that they refer only to certain ethnicities.[36] The Arabic form of this term (Al-Habesh) is the etymological basis of “Abyssinia,” the former name of Ethiopia in English and other European languages.[37]

  148. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:09

    If you look up hypocrisy in Webster’s, you will notice that definition #3 is: Liberalism.

  149. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:11

    Wow, that’s some tongue you got there, Miss Anal. Can you lick the end of your own nose?

  150. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:12

    If you look up shithead in the Webster’s, you will notice that definition #1 is: Shoelimpyâ„¢. Clickk on my name if you don’t believe it, retards.

  151. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:12

    This thread totally proves my point that free speech to a liberal means THEIR speech only.

    Gavin, you’re officially uncool in every way that really counts. You’ve got your sycophants, though. For a while. After that, it’s just loneliness and going bald. Maybe a beer belly if you can hold down enough beer.

    But nothing of importance.

    REPENT.

  152. Kathleen said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:12

    sweet post Gavin. Nice work.

  153. Gavin M. - EDITED FOR YOUR APPROVAL said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:14

    That stings, Annie.

  154. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:15

    This thread totally proves my point that freedom of speech is provided to even twats like me by Sadly, No! I’m also uncool because I have a beer belly and I’m balding. I would REPENT except I don’t believe in that shit anyway.

  155. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:15

    It surprises me, Miss Annie, how well Sadly No proves each and every point we make about the faults of liberalism. The saddest part of all is that they are unable to see it for themselves.

  156. Service Temporarily Unavailable said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:17

    I totally pwned this thread.

  157. shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:18

    This thread totally proves, annie, that, like you, of course!!!!, I’m balding and have a beer belly and that liberals know what they’re talking about, while you and I, actually we’re the same sad fuck as everyone knows, are just sitting around in a disgusting basement apartment throwing burnt-down cigarette butts at the ratty furniture.

  158. the_millionaire_lebowski said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:18

    I totally pwned this thread.

    haha

  159. Gavon M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:19

    I’m hurt.

  160. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:19

    It doesn’t surprise me. It’s their only outlet for all the pent up jealousy they hold in their empty and shrivelled little hearts.

    I pray for them, but they are like a den of demon jakcals.

    These are the last days, Shoe. Feel blessed to be living in this glorious time.

  161. Gaven M. said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:20

    I do feel blessed, Miss Annie. It is thankful to have such a Rock in these dark days.

  162. shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:22

    annie: give it up, you psychotic bitch. Even I can’t stand your bullshit anymore. I’m done.

  163. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:23

    Service Temporarily Unavailable said,
    March 19, 2007 at 7:17

    I totally pwned this thread.

    Indeed you did. Bastard.

  164. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:24

    The world is a den of iniquity, Miss Annie. Liberals only try to make it even more so.

  165. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:24

    So, where are those examples, annie?

    Not just for the sexism. For ANYTHING that you’ve claimed.

    Tell us EXACTLY how you were deprived of free speech. Be exact.

    And try not to look foolish.

    (The biggest enemy of conservatism is examples.)

  166. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:26

    (The biggest enemy of conservatism is examples.)

    Not quite, Retarded: the biggest enemy of conservatism is reality. It just doesn’t measure up to their febrile wet dreams.

  167. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:26

    I had lies posted by a namestealer which Gavin the edit button hypocrite is too blind to see..

    I was called a bitch and a twat.

    Can you read?

  168. mikey said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:26

    Umm, I had something to say here,. but I forgot what it was. Anyone for pie?

    mikey

  169. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:27

    This thread has done a good job of showing us the anatomy of a con job. That con job is liberalism.

  170. shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:29

    annie: are you saying you’re NOT a bitch and a twat? That would be news to me.

  171. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:29

    Hi, mikey. How do you like my new look? I call it Denim Iniquity.

  172. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:31

    shoe: You mean you don’t love me anymore? Oh my GOD! Why hast thou forsaken me?

    You fucking asshole. Keep in mind, I know all about you, shithead.

  173. shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:32

    annie: For God’s sake, would you leave me ALONE? Can’t you take NO for an answer already?

    Man, my head hurts.

  174. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:33

    Martika is sooooo mad that mdhatter likes me best. She can’t handle that she flirted her hardest and it didn’t work. Now she’s pissed. :)

  175. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:35

    Envy abounds here at Sadly, No! Miss Annie.

  176. themann1086 said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:37

    I thought conservatives hated the Vietnam War Memorial because of its design? I’m confused….

  177. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:39

    Um, you were called a (expleted) and a (expleted) and that’s sexism?

    THIS is what you were talking about?

    Are all conservatives whiny little politically correct cry babies, or just you?

  178. shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:41

    annie: I wonder if we keep hijacking threads and turning them to ourselves often enough, will S,N ever ban us, like everyone else has? I don’t think so! They love us here!!!!!1111!!!! we pump up their site hits so much they don’t dare get rid of us!!!111!!

    Everyone, click on my name! Look at me!!11!! look at me!!!11!!!!

  179. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:42

    Night Gavin. Try to get some rest.

    Tell Brad I said “hi.”

  180. annieangel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:43

    shoe: Are you kidding? We MAKE this blog! Without us, they’re nothing but a bunch of frat-boy wannabes with nothing else to do!!!11!! THAT’s why they won’t ban us — they never will!!! They’re NOTHING without us!!!

  181. Shoelimpyâ„¢ said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:43

    The point is not the use of expletives, Donut, it is the use of expletives specifically designed to denigrate women. One who uses aspects of gender as an insult but claims to believe in equal rights for men and women are hypocrites, as well as disgusting misogynist pigs.

    But now its time to say good night. So, good night everyone.

  182. Retarded Donut said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:50

    So it’s not just annie that’s a whiny little politically correct cry baby.

    It’s also annie.

    Thanks for clearing that up.

  183. mikey said,

    March 19, 2007 at 7:51

    And if you can’t get enough of the fun and hijinx, come visit us at http://www.pie.com!!!

    mikey

  184. Bat Guano said,

    March 19, 2007 at 8:31

    Can you smell the failure? All they do is play counterpoint to all the things that they claim they are not. After a cursory search and quick visual scan of the most of the links above, it was pathetically obvious that there were not any photos of the teeming masses of “eagles” available (their photo gallery is down at the moment, right).

  185. Miguel said,

    March 19, 2007 at 8:40

    Another excellent entry in Sadly No!

    Keep up the good work guys (and ban those attention craving clowns from the site, it makes it hard to read the other usually funny comments on the threads).

    Miguel.

  186. cokane said,

    March 19, 2007 at 8:46

    “You mean there’s actually a blog left on the InternetsTubes that hasn’t banned this execreable act?�

    Here once again we see the fascist censoring soul of the liberal body politic. You guys really do a great job of proving our point.

    ————-

    this is a pretty childish act. 12 year olds argue this point once on the internet and then learn that the constitution doensn’t protect a private organization kicking you out of their discussion.

    “freedom of speech” is about government censorship. You are likely a moron who just got started on the internet. Annie too — the evidence is her red text on a red background website, looks like something from a teenage tripod member in the mid-90′s.

    But yeah, keep pretending like you have anything intelligent worth saying. It’s amusing to watch someone so inept.

  187. a different brad said,

    March 19, 2007 at 9:20

    Once again, I apologize for earlier errors in judgment.
    And again, jebus liked putting things up his ass.
    Like fire extinguishers.

  188. Devil DOC said,

    March 19, 2007 at 9:51

    Ahhh ,

    The Eagles did a gr8 job , even if its one of your conspiracy theories. Standing up for America against you Idol Worshiping Sheehan and Fonda Worshipers.

    I see crazy Jane didn’t show up guess it was to cold for her saggy ass nipples. But I digress. It was gr8 to out number your group. It was gr8 Listening to that idiot on your side with the microphone not having a clue or an agenda to talk about.

    Here is a clue you come for a war protest stick to it, don’t go off on some tangent about imperialism, racism and any other “ ism “ or of topic agenda. Your DJ was pretty good to notice when your speakers were getting off track. Crank the music for 10 minutes gather some sort of thoughts and then come to the microphone and talk more about nothing that has to do with the war.

    I ask nothing of you but to leave if you don’t like it, like mom and dads house when you’re old enough, you don’t have to stay and put up with the rules. Just get out and leave. Preferably to some secular society that appreciates the little stupid opinions you provide and a place that you can fit into easily I hear they take baths rarely in France.

    So there is a plus… make a list of the things you love and hate about America and Seriously if the negative is more than your positive then I would suggest you do something drastic like a life changing move to another country. I mean isn’t your life always about being positive and having good Karma and stuff. Protesting and dreaming up conspiracy theories only adds to ones negativity.

    By the way if I see another one of you dragging the flag upside down on rubbing against the road again I will gladly get you started on your bathing by tossing you off the bridge into the Potomac.

    Not a Biker

    A proud VET.

    GOD
    Country
    Family

    In that order, in a positive way, with intelligence.

  189. a different brad said,

    March 19, 2007 at 10:04

    Well, thanks for your service, Devil DOC, even if you’re being a dick about it.
    But, well, frankly, you write like a neo-nazi. Lots of words but very little coherence. Start with picking a single rule of capitalization. Then try reading some of your sentences out loud. You should notice something isn’t workin.

  190. moonbiter said,

    March 19, 2007 at 10:12

    How can anyone use drawings and photos of stern-faced eagles in their logo and still think they will be taken seriously at this point?

  191. owlbear1 said,

    March 19, 2007 at 11:03

    “…make a list of the things you love and hate about America and Seriously if the negative is more than your positive then I would suggest you do something drastic like a life changing move to another country.

    Already on that zipperhead. 2008 should see the last of the criminals thrown out. Much easier than 62% of the population moving.

    In that order, in a positive way, with intelligence.

    Now that was fucking funny!

  192. owlbear1 said,

    March 19, 2007 at 11:04

    I am kinda of curious there DD, how much money did GOE sucker out of you?

  193. Moxie said,

    March 19, 2007 at 11:12

    A proud VET

    Of which army, Herr Devil DOC?

    I think you guys got a little confused about the directions to the event. THIS is the military shrine you were supposed to be protecting from desecration:

    site

  194. Moxie said,

    March 19, 2007 at 11:14

    Hope that worked. You guys should really look into one of those “preview button” thingies.

  195. Jillian said,

    March 19, 2007 at 11:15

    Gee, I hear that in France, the standard work week is only 35 hours. But despite this, their per capita worker output is about the same as ours.

    Which means, for the maths-challenged amongst us, that French workers are actually substantially more productive than we are, and have chosen to reward themselves for their productivity by taking more time to have a life than we get.

    They also have state-funded health care, which is something that every industrialized nation in the world manages to provide its citizens. Except for one. Anybody want to guess which one it is?

    Yeah….I can’t imagine why anyone would want to work a shorter work week, get the same paycheck, and not have to worry about being bankrupted by a catastrophic illness. What kind of loser country would that be?

  196. MT Pete said,

    March 19, 2007 at 13:11

    I’m glad to see that there are still some brave conservative souls who are willing to give their all to defend our freedom to have our personal opinions published on somebody else’s web page. It would be a terrible waste if these proud conservative soldiers actually put themselves in harm’s way by, like, enlisting or something, because then who would yell at liberal bloggers who say stuff about things?

    Seriously, though, just something to remember: “freedom of speech” does not mean “everybody has to listen to you.”

    If people find your particular speech to be annoying, boring, or riddled with so many obvious untruths that the mind boggles, that does not constitute a violation of your rights.

    If people choose to tell you that your speech is annoying, boring, or riddled with so many obvious untruths that the mind boggles, that does not constitute a violation of your rights.

    If people choose to stop listening to you because your speech is annoying, boring, or riddled with so many obvious untruths that the mind boggles, that does not constitute a violation of your rights.

    If people choose to walk away while you are talking, or choose to remove you from their home, from their private property, or from their private web page because your speech is annoying, boring, or riddled with so many obvious untruths that the mind boggles, that does not constitute a violation of your rights.

    You have the right to freely speak your mind. Everybody else has the right to point and laugh at you. God Bless America.

  197. Random Observer said,

    March 19, 2007 at 13:15

    Is the Devil DOC post real or a joke? Seriously I can’t tell.

    The thing I find funny about conservatives these days is they make their arguments so childishly and poorly, I feel like I could do a much better job even though I would be totally faking it.

    “Dur dur dur – you guys smell and love Jane Fonda!” Ok…convincing! Seriously that’s your compelling argument?

    Why not just post “I’m a fucking idiot” and be done with it?

    So focused on symbols – the flag, the memorials. What about actual lives, like the lives of vets at Walter Reed? Or the lives of soldiers being killed and maimed by IEDs because their humvees have shitty floors with no armor?

    I’m not a fan of flag desecration but a flag is a piece of colored cloth at the end of the day. A true “GOD” supporter would realize that the bible warns against the worship of graven images. Some stereotypical hippie dragging around a flag is bad but it doesn’t actually hurt anybody – meanwhile you have soldiers lying in pools of urine, dying due to a lack of supplies, the medically unfit being forced back into action.

    All these supposed fucking patriots don’t give a rats ass about those people, they are too busy protecting the flag and some monuments. It’s a piece of fabric, get over it. Focus your energy on something that actually matters instead of beating your chest about throwing some emo teens into a river you fucking dolt.

    I’d gladly pay 5% more in taxes if it meant we wouldn’t send people with spinal problems into combat and tell them to “only wear your helmet for an hour at a time.” Meanwhile these supposed troops supporters are for fighting on the cheap.

    “Support the troops” is an empty motto and nothing more.

    You organize a whole bunch of people, get media attention – to protect a fucking monument! You should be ashamed. Christ talk about misplaced priorities. Soldiers are dying needlessly but the monuments were safe for a day – good work champ. You did your country proud.

  198. John Bolton®©³² said,

    March 19, 2007 at 13:59

    Good Grief, 197 comments on a half day old post can only mean one thing.

    LimpAnnie is flinging pie over here, so it doesn’t have to fling pie over there.

  199. atheist said,

    March 19, 2007 at 14:04

    Interesting. I think that that “Go to hell traitors, you dishonor our dead on hallowed ground” banner was at the march on January 27th, too.

    Seriously, I was there and I was listening to Sean Penn, Jane Fonda, Maxine Waters, and some other people speak and I remember a small group of freepers trying (unsuccessfully) to drown them out. The small group of freepers had that exact banner. I wonder if the freepers bring it to all counter-protesting type things.

  200. Ken said,

    March 19, 2007 at 14:09

    I’d like to point out that the National Park Service stopped providing turnout estimates in 1996, after the brouhaha about the Million Man March.

    Could you point out why they started ?
    Did they misread the poster and think it was going to be a Million Marmit March ? Were there camping permits to be considered ? Why no estimates from the Fisheries Department for marches in Washington ?

  201. FewClothes Johnson said,

    March 19, 2007 at 14:42

    Are these the same patriots who initially hated the wall, some, in part, because Maya Lin was of Asian ancestry?

  202. Marmoset said,

    March 19, 2007 at 15:24

    Yeah, these are the same guys. Remember when conservatives declared the wall a national shame and a blight? Said it celebrated defeat because it was like a giant grave?

    Their memories are so selective.

  203. Michael said,

    March 19, 2007 at 15:46

    I’m sorry…..but are Shoelimpy and Annieangel parodies?

  204. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 16:00

    As I recall, they hated the Vietnam memorial becasue it reminded them – in a forcible, stately and undeniable manner- of all they wished to paper over. The thousands upon thousands of dead young men, dead for no good reason.

    In my opinion, any new military action should be announced while standing in front of the wall, so the assholes who think fighting wars for their vanity is a good idea can try to justify it while those lines of mute names stare coldly down on them.

  205. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 16:02

    I like pie for breakfast, too.

  206. billy pilgrim said,

    March 19, 2007 at 16:02

    I’m sorry…..but are Shoelimpy and Annieangel parodies?

    Yes.

    They don’t realize it, they think they are meta-referential 21st century electronic performance artists straight out of a William Gibson novel, but…

    Yes, they are parodies.

  207. g said,

    March 19, 2007 at 16:03

    you Idol Worshiping Sheehan and Fonda Worshipers.

    Isn’t that like the Department of Redundancy Department?

  208. DUDACKATTACK!!! said,

    March 19, 2007 at 16:28

    I was passing through DC and asked some of the folks headed to the memorial if I there was at the Flock of Seagulls reunion, the name seemed appropriate, y’know? The attendees didn’t take that question too well.

    By the way. the gathering was barely a flock -about 1,000 or so, 29,000 less than wingnut estimates. Maybe someone should ask these twits if they are using Lancet’s count methodology.

  209. Doodle Bean said,

    March 19, 2007 at 16:29

    If we all ignore the non-angelic one and her flaccid friend, they will go away. Let’s try!

  210. spencer said,

    March 19, 2007 at 17:22

    Hmmmm. Over the last few weeks, some of the comment threads here have been feeling more and more like those on fuckedcompany.com from about six or seven years ago.

    Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing, as long as no one starts posting “I’ve the smelly butt,” of course.

  211. kingubu said,

    March 19, 2007 at 17:38

    Eh, I say let them have their little Smattering of Eggos. Let ‘em cling with both hands to their make-believe heroism in the face of a ginned-up threat. Let ‘em jerk one another off with triumphant fish stories about the vast army of Cheeto-stained Davids whose superior patriotism rendered them invisible to every camera. Let ‘em go to bed every night believing that calling war protesters “traitors” and brandishing 40-year-old Jane Fonda jokes serves any purpose besides making them look like parodies of a caricature. They only hasten their own irrelevance, really.

  212. spencer said,

    March 19, 2007 at 17:39

    I see crazy Jane didn’t show up guess it was to cold for her saggy ass nipples.

    Jane Fonda has ass nipples? Wow. Who knew?

  213. aw said,

    March 19, 2007 at 17:47

    All those who invaded Iraq were engaged in a war crime. The war crime of waging aggressive war and invading a small country on the basis of brazen lies.

    According to US judges waging of aggressive war is the ultimate war crime with all other war crimes (650K+) just in Iraq alone.

    Consequently all those who participate in such a war crime are also war criminals. Thus they are not brave soldiers but rather war criminals. In Vietnam many of the boys fragged their gungo ho officers. These aggresive red necks are welcome to go to Iraq and show their bravery in doing war crimes.

    AW

  214. Marita said,

    March 19, 2007 at 20:40

    Consequently all those who participate in such a war crime are also war criminals. Thus they are not brave soldiers but rather war criminals.

    Ummm… so the massive clusterfuck in Iraq is somehow the soldiers’ fault as well? Nice leap in logic there, sport.

    I’ve been against the Iraq war from the start, but I wouldn’t dream of faulting the vast majority of soldiers who are over there trying to do the right thing and serve their country. They’re not culpable for corruption and bad judgement at the top levels of leadership. And they certainly aren’t fucking war criminals.

    Grrrrrrr…

  215. mikey said,

    March 19, 2007 at 20:56

    Consequently all those who participate in such a war crime are also war criminals.

    This is not only stupid but counterproductive too. Who’s going to arrest half a million troops, dickhead? The ICC? Look, I believe there have been war crimes committed. But you put kids on the ground, for the most part they are going to try to do their jobs and get home alive, along with their friends. That ain’t a war crime, that’s war. Right war, wrong war, you can’t tell the difference under fire.

    In Vietnam many of the boys fragged their gungo ho officers

    Not many, a few. And not for the reasons you suggest. If the idiot El Tee or Cap’n was getting the kids shot to pieces for his own advancement or out of sheer incompetence, and nobody would rotate him back to a desk job, then somebody would help the cause. But most fraggings were racial, not combat related. Maybe you should spend some time talking to people who were there, youngster. You might learn a thing or two about life, death and war…

    mikey

  216. prozacula said,

    March 19, 2007 at 21:06

    you may not have known this, aw, but the Nuremburg trials focussed on the leaders who were responsible for the war crimes, not the soldiers.

    you must be young and/or naive.

    the people who signed up for the army did so out of either fiscal necessity, or they truly believed they were going to serve their country. when they signed up, they agreed to follow every order given to them under threat of incarceration. it is almost impossible for them to not follow orders. when they went into iraq, they were merely doing as they were told by those responsible: namely, the current administration.

    to in any way attack the soldiers for this debacle is not only extremely stupid and asinine, but completely counterproductive to any goal you may have. words and ideas like yours only give idiots on the right ammo to go after us, focussing on idiots like you, while giving REAL arguments the brush-off.

    so, do us all a favor, and rethink your idiotic ideas, and/or fuck off.

  217. Jean Arf said,

    March 19, 2007 at 21:09

    30,000! WOWWEE!!! Just think of how superduper the SURGE would be if they’d go enlist instead! Of course, the Vietnam Memorial would be smashed to smithereens by Dirty Fucking Hippies, but small price to pay…

  218. Dan Someone said,

    March 19, 2007 at 21:19

    As a man probably in my 40′s who occasionally has a small child in his arms, this passage from the Winter Patriot report got to me:

    And there also was a man probably in his 40’s, who held an “Impeach Bushâ€? sign, and a small child in his arms. Like us, he had obviously entered in on the wrong side of things. But those of the pro war group quickly surrounded him and began screaming at him obscenities and to get out. The man (and child) tried to move and several rushed in and began pushing and pulling at them, trying to rip the sign out of his arms and telling him he was not allowed to leave their area with it. At which point the man started yelling back at them. This caused the women to yell about taking his child from him and the men proceeded to move in, like nothing less than a pack of wolves, grabbing him and pushing and shoving him. It was more than obvious that they wished to gang beat him. The men had little regard for the child and they would not let him leave. Thankfully, a police officer rushed in solo … what a brave thing to do. He yelled at the Rolling Thunder people to clear a path and got the man, the child and the rest of us out of there. Ignorance and violence is a scary thing.

    That’s some commitment to American values and principles right there — threaten a man and a small child with violence because he dares to disagree with you. Can you imagine the headlines if things had gone really bad? How would Malkin and the Freepers justify that?

  219. mikey said,

    March 19, 2007 at 21:24

    How would Malkin and the Freepers justify that?

    It is nothing short of a measure of their sickness to know that they would, even if we cannot imagine how they would…

    mikey

  220. MCH said,

    March 19, 2007 at 21:28

    30,000 Eagles? Impossible. Their crowd wasn’t all that big. They couldn’t even form a single-file line a quarter as long as us libs did during the march.

  221. MCH said,

    March 19, 2007 at 21:31

    That is, our line being 20 people across….

  222. Innocent Bystander said,

    March 19, 2007 at 21:40

    Well, the Right is consistent anyway. They are no better at estimating crowds than they were about WMD, the Iraqi’s greeting us with flowers, and the cost of this quagmire.

    Since we know they have historically had a 10-1 porta-potty to pro-warrior ratio….were there 300,000 porta-potties up there? Seems that would be a good count methodology.

  223. Lawnguylander said,

    March 19, 2007 at 21:57

    Jane Fonda has ass nipples? Wow. Who knew?

    30,000 in fact. I counted them. Each one saggier than the last. I also counted 30,000 jihadis at Roosevelt Field yesterday.

  224. MCH said,

    March 19, 2007 at 22:07

    Ophthalmologist: How many fingers am I holding up?

    Wingnut: 30,000!

  225. K. Ron Silkwood said,

    March 19, 2007 at 22:47

    SN! has again gotten on the winguts’ nerves. Good.

  226. Grouchy’s Liberaltopiaâ„¢ » Con Artists said,

    March 19, 2007 at 23:22

    [...] Anatomy Of A Con Job [...]

  227. Unfortunately said,

    March 19, 2007 at 23:36

    Facts are facts and no amount of wingnut bullshit will change a single one of them.

    The hypothetical question of whether or not anyone can or will arrest half a million war criminals has no bearing on the fact that they are all guilty of the most egregious war crimes — not to mention egregious crimes against humanity — as are all those who continue to support this unprovoked and unforgiveable obscenity.

    Not a single one of them — from the twice-unelected chimp-usurper, through the demented fools who attacked the peace marchers on Saturday, all the way down to the lowest of the despicable assholes who’ve been posting on this thread — are worthy of kissing Ehran Watada’s ass.

    May they burn in hell forever!

  228. Doodle Bean said,

    March 19, 2007 at 23:46

    Another victim of assault by the gathering of chickenhawks:

    But war protester Susanne Shine of Boone, N.C., found herself in a crowd of counterdemonstrators, and came out in tears, with her sign in shreds. “They ripped up my peace sign,” she said, after police escorted her, her husband and two adult daughters from the group. “It was really pretty scary for me.”

    I imagine that any of us would find it scary. Sadly, none of the ‘patriots’ forcibly stifling the free speech of their fellow citizens was arrested, apparently.

    Thankfully, some metrosexual was pepper sprayed and five dirty rotten hippies were arrested for trying to get to the Metro (the subway system in D.C.). So, that makes us all safer!

  229. Marita said,

    March 19, 2007 at 23:54

    Not a single one of them — from the twice-unelected chimp-usurper, through the demented fools who attacked the peace marchers on Saturday, all the way down to the lowest of the despicable assholes who’ve been posting on this thread — are worthy of kissing Ehran Watada’s ass.

    Quick survey:

    Who here thinks mal de mer has been drinking again, and who thinks that this poster is an entirely new jackass?

    I eagerly await people’s thoughts on this.

  230. Ivana Moore-Enmooore said,

    March 19, 2007 at 23:59

    Darling!

    How appropriate for the defenders of our war profits to have signs which are red, white, blue and green! Those are the colors of Billionaires For Bush, don’t you know?

    And green is my very favorite color since it’s the color of money, darling!!

    Toodles!

  231. Screamin' Demon said,

    March 20, 2007 at 0:02

    he’s a fictional character played by a short Italian guy who married a 6′ tall ball-busting Swedish pervert

    She is not a Swedish pervert, damn you!

    She’s a Danish pervert :)

  232. Jillian said,

    March 20, 2007 at 0:04

    I’d put my money on “new jackass”.

    I have a number of hypotheses about the way the world works and how we function within it. They range from things like “people are very bad at formal logic” to things like “people have an innate tendency to be swayed by any argument that has a really big number in it”.

    My most depressing hypothesis is “people consistently underestimate the number of jackasses in the world”.

    Although to be fair, I do get some small joy from this thought. Any day that passes where I hear from less than a dozen people whose comments leave me completely gobsmacked from their stupidity is a good day.

    Some days, I think that I don’t drink enough.

  233. Urban Sombrero said,

    March 20, 2007 at 0:48

    Operation Yellow Elephant calls on all those enlistment age “Eagles” shown in the photos to enlist right now! Only chicken hawk Eagles obviously rooting for the enemy would not want to enlist. Unless their hypocrites.

    http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/2005/07/operation-yellow-elephant-overview.html

  234. Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said,

    March 20, 2007 at 1:46

    Random Observer, eloquently put. These people do indeed seem more concerned about graven images than about humans (I’d have said ‘their fellow humans’, but for the obvious doubt).

    Flags, monuments, the undeniable greatness of the US of A: all these things are mute, passive, unchanging emblems of a fantasy world these headcases wish they lived in. “America: love it or leave it” says a lot, but it says more about them than they realise. It’s not, as they imagine, defending the ‘land of the free, home of the brave’ they think they believe in. It’s not showing they’re proud ‘Murrkins defending their homeland against traitors.

    It’s like a 4-year-old kicking all the other kids out of the sandpit because he wants it a certain way, and they’re in his way. It’s that 4-year-old refusing to play nice with the other children. It’s that 4-year-old stealing another kid’s shovel and whacking them over the head with it until they go away. It’s that 4-year-old then loudly complaining that his fantasy sandpit world needs to have people in it, and they’ve all gone.

    I keep saying it: people who bleat so loudly about freedom and democracy and rice pudding often know bugger-all about freedom and democracy, and really want nothing at all to do with them.

    I’d really like to slap some sense into a lot of people. They certainly seem to be immune to logic or facts or compassion or common humanity. Or perhaps I should say uncommon humanity.

  235. Karl Rove II said,

    March 20, 2007 at 1:57

    “By the way if I see another one of you dragging the flag upside down on rubbing against the road again I will gladly get you started on your bathing by tossing you off the bridge into the Potomac. ”

    Intertube Tough Guy #128472

    Let me guess, you threaten your cat the same way…

  236. jurassicpork said,

    March 20, 2007 at 2:11

    Excellent push-back, Gavin. Personally, I thought the march itself was a miserable failure (Aravosis and Joe Sudbay of ABlog didn’t even bother showing up and they love right down the fucking street from the Pentagon) from the gitgo. I mean, can you honestly say that you think it would bring home the troops or end the war a second sooner? Plus the weather conspired to turn the buses around. Why the fuck can’t we ever do this shit when, you know, the cherry blossoms are in bloom?

    But the wingnuts who were there were an even more miserable failure. These pricks are always, ALWAYS outnumbered, just as they were outnumbered during the last march on the WH, just as they were at Camp Casey, just they always will be.

    And now I have another wonderfully fair and balanced Fox screengrab to add to my collection.

    Now, here’s my contribution to the anti-war effort. Play the song “Teenage Wasteland” in your head while perusing this new photo essay until I can do it right and make it into a video.

  237. a cranny mint said,

    March 20, 2007 at 3:56

    Sorry to be picky but the title of the song is “Baba O’Riley”. The Who is one of my favorite bands. I forked over the money for Vfest to see them.

  238. Sum Human said,

    March 20, 2007 at 4:34

    Time to stop whinning and get busy! Why is it only leftist sites get hacked? Is it only about money, because the White House pays people to troll the internet, and we have to rely on dedication to TRUTH!

    Fucking shut that shit down, already!

  239. OZinWisconsin said,

    March 20, 2007 at 5:20

    Yo Billy Pilgrim!!!

    Ahh the times I have passed that execrable pile of rocks in Dickeyville known as the “Grotto”. Now I know that I should have driven my Hummer gloriouly back and forth and flattened that sorry spectacle. Next time through. I’m from La Crosse.

    And hello MzNicky and IvanaMore Enmore. Stalwarts in the Jesus General’s Army. Good evening.

  240. GoatBoy said,

    March 20, 2007 at 8:34

    or maybe it’s more in the way decadents in ancient times kept raving lunatics in cages and poked them occasionally with sticks for amusement purposes.

    It’s just like that.

    I had 120 pints of Guinness Saturday night. Eagles counted the empties for me.

  241. Alien Observer said,

    March 20, 2007 at 13:53

    Wow, all kidding aside, these guys suck at propaganda. Even the TV-watching, Walmart shopping, modified starch-gulping tunnel heads must be rolling their eyes by now.

    Saying something, even repeating it, doesn’t make it true – but then again, it doesn’t have to be true, does it? Usually better if there are no nasty facts to get in the way. They can be verified.

  242. owlbear1 said,

    March 20, 2007 at 14:03

    It doesn’t need to be “Proven” 30,000 of them attended.

    All it takes is Faith.

    Even the ones who were actually there will begin to “Believe” 30,000 of them were there.

  243. Rowland said,

    March 20, 2007 at 14:14

    Any war that starts with a lie has to have liars to maintain it.

  244. Rowland said,

    March 20, 2007 at 14:20

    Peace advocates and War Protestors set up 3000 graves in a field to honor the fallen and to show the cost of war. Eagles drive their four-wheelers through it, and destroy it.

    Who is the more patriotic?

  245. KevinNYC said,

    March 20, 2007 at 15:47

    Looking for evidence about the protest, I came across this AP video on Yahoo news.
    http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/news?ch=68276&cl=2134835&lang=en

    Nothing definitive, but interesting. I ZZ Top looking biker guys who apparently believed the threat to the Monument, make the most interesting comment I think.

  246. KevinNYC said,

    March 20, 2007 at 15:53

    That should be

    The ZZ top looking….

  247. KevinNYC said,

    March 20, 2007 at 16:13

    http://blondesense.blogspot.com/2007/03/few-thoughts.html

  248. Rabid said,

    March 20, 2007 at 18:28

    The funny thing about all this. Does it matter at all? It would seem to me that, in an age of constant protest on-line and in various other media, that a show of force in the street isn’t going to mean much to anyone.

    40 years ago, people didn’t have easy access to self-created media, so a street protest was the best way to get attention. And that was an era of broadcast; this isn’t.

    Who cares if 30-thousand people or 3-thousand people show up for either demonstration? People have made up their minds about the war regardless. And the American people are pretty much against it, no matter who comes out with a sign. And if the likes of Michelle Malkin are reduced to grasping on to THIS counter-demonstration to prove their point, well that’s just pathetic.

    Think about it: the anti-abortion freak show comes out in huge numbers every year: hasn’t resulted in an anti-abortion amendment. You can say that they’ve been savvy in their public appeals to change the discourse about abortion, but it’s probably not a result of their Roe-V-Wade day march through DC.

    But as for these people: I’m talking to the Shoelimpys and Annienangels (assuming they’re real people)

    I assume their real people too, and if you get them in the same room, you’d probably be pretty close to a full set of teeth.

    Sorry couldn’t resist. The target is large and sitting right there in front of me.

  249. Arturo Toscaninny said,

    March 20, 2007 at 19:01

    C’mon…LimpDicky and Annie PornLegs aren’t for real, are they? I’m unfamiliar with their shtick, so I donned my hip-waders and went over to their sites…They’re performance art, a sort of cut-rate Jesus’ General (without the wit), right?

  250. Gloria Throckmorton said,

    March 20, 2007 at 20:30

    Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian said, (March 19, 2007 at 5:39)
    Can someone please explain the pie thing?

    Righteous Bubba explained that to me on another thread a week ago:

    AntiTroll for SadlyNo

    Stop the trolls – written by ImJohnGalt

    This Antitroll script allows you to filter out comments by people at SadlyNo! who are so self-absorbed that to read their posts means you’ve crossed the event-horizon and can never reclaim your soul.

    “I like pie. I also like this script, because pie is far more interesting than most of the drivel that one would otherwise see.”

    Thanks so much for throwing this together for the Sadlynauts!

    …mmm, pie…

  251. Gloria Throckmorton said,

    March 20, 2007 at 20:39

    No. 73: Pie Explained:

    AntiTroll for SadlyNo

    Stop the trolls – written by ImJohnGalt
    This Antitroll script allows you to filter out comments by people at SadlyNo! who are so self-absorbed that to read their posts means you’ve crossed the event-horizon and can never reclaim your soul.

    I like pie. I also like this script, because pie is far more interesting than most of the drivel that one would otherwise see.

    Thanks so much for throwing this together for the Sadlynauts!

    …mmm, pie…

    Courtesy of Righteous Bubba on a different thread from a week ago.

  252. Yesguy said,

    March 21, 2007 at 1:09

    It’s my understanding that the National Parks Service no longer provides crowd-size estimates, ever since the firestorm it created when it said the Million Man March actually drew quite a lot less than a million. So it would appear Malkin fabricated the number, and the source, out of whole cloth.

  253. annieangel said,

    March 21, 2007 at 4:28

    I love the fact I’m so in your domes that someone made this script.

    You can’t handle the truth, you can’t handle listening to the opinions of others because you hate free speech so much you censor out the things which shake your ridiculous world view.

    It makes me know I’m right. It makes me proud, and it makes me know that I am walking the straight path to Heaven, and I’m walking it so well that none of you heathen demon spawn can even look at it without feeling Satan pulling your soul straight to Hell.

    Praise Jesus.

  254. STH said,

    March 21, 2007 at 4:38

    http://www.le.ac.uk/arthistory/seedcorn/faq-sds.html

    “Pope Gregory the Great (d. 604) described Seven Deadly Sins in his Moralia in Job.

    1. Pride
    2. Envy
    3. Anger
    4. Avarice
    5. Sadness
    6. Gluttony
    7. Lust”

    You’re pretty close to a perfect score there, Pie Twit.

  255. annieangel said,

    March 21, 2007 at 7:08

    Fuck the Pope. Papists will all burn in Hell.

  256. Randwolfe said,

    March 21, 2007 at 10:38

    Qetesh the Shaved Abyssinian:

    You said it brother. I wish more so-called Americans would go into a fucking rage, get off of their asses, and actually act on their beliefs, rather than blathering non-sensical crap about who is, or is not, a patriot.

    The witnesses at the rally that I heard from repeated the same thing over and over. The pro-war dupes were rude, threatening, and violent in more than one instance. They were there merely as bodies, theatrically placed in double rows; a shallow attempt to intimidate anyone outside their little belief shield.

    But nobody is buying that old crap anymore. Nothing to see here, move on. The world is leaving the failed experiment in neo-con world and social domination behind. Bushism is a deeply flawed ideal and will go down in history as the worst form of leadership to be spawned at anytime in history. Worse than Nero, worse than Napolean, and yes, worse than Hitler. For Dear Christ’s sake, Bush’s family, specifically Prescott Bush, was involved in illegally funding the nazis. That is the kind of blue blooded, inbred and inept poppet running our nation. Completely tainted and corrupt to the core, without remorse or any sense of responsibility for the terror his gang has wrought upon the world.

  257. Kilo said,

    March 21, 2007 at 13:01

    Okay SadlyNoers, let’s put your cookbook to the test…

    Whilst enjoying the afterglow, make up a jaw-dropping unofficial attendance figure, for instance that 30,000 heroes stood up for America

    What are you a pussy ?
    30000… pffft. Try half a million

    …claims without any evidence that it’s an official number…

    Check.

    Remember not to check the original source: Citing AmericaPundit who cites FreedomWarrior who cites someone else citing three other people who cite what Michelle Malkin says about what the GoE site says

    Check.

    Also, if other published figures contradict the 30,000-heroes one, don’t forget to keep up a constant drone of indignant complaint about the biased liberal MSM, because they super-lie about everything with gigantic crazy lies, just for the sake of dragging America down. Malkin updates:

    Over 20 times the crowd estimate published in the press, which you cite then state you have no reason to disbelieve…Check

    Update: No such Park Service, Parks Service, or Parks and Service estimate has appeared in any form, and no publicly available photo on the Web — although please correct us if we’re wrong — shows more than a couple of hundred pro-war demonstrators in any place at any time.

    Fuck the parks service. Not even the NASA team working on LSD-ethanol hybrid fuel taste testing saw 500,000 people there or one-twentieth of that.

    GoE pwned by Democrats.com in the propoganda battle.

  258. Redleg said,

    March 21, 2007 at 22:37

    Shoelimpy,
    Damn- are you really dumb or do you play a dummy on blogs? Perhaps those “30,000″ pro-war clowns could have really helped the cause by shedding some pounds and enlisting into the Army or Marines. I hear Baghdad is quite nice this time of year. So before you question the manhood or patriotism of us lefties, perhaps you should first ask yourself if you have the cajones to put your ass on the line.

  259. Anti-war Protestors Burn American Flag « Blogs 4 Brownback said,

    March 22, 2007 at 8:59

    [...] 5: Far-left “comedy” website mocks the 30,000 strong Gathering of Eagles: here, here and here.  Have they any shame?  Sadly, no.  Beware of the comment sections.  The [...]

  260. SSG said,

    March 31, 2007 at 5:06

    This is exactly why I joined the military. I started to see through the liberal muck and seen how demoralizing it was to troops and their families and friends. I used to be strongly liberal and wanted nothing more than peace, love and granola bars. Sometimes people have to leave their own comfort zone to stand for something bigger than their own beliefs. Now set down those burgers and dorito’s. Liberals, stop hitting that weed, get off those Rx drugs that you feel you need because you need to be happier and come back to reality.

  261. Devil DOC said,

    April 2, 2007 at 10:09

    MR Random Observer pointed out…

    I may have been angry…. 20 or 30 posts ago … and gone off the edge a bit to much. I may have lowered into the pit of name calling, and calling people dirty and to take a bath and so on.

    Look I expect nothing but the best for those injured, god sake I used to be a medic. Sure I tend to rant and forget punctuation, I also loose coherency sometimes because it is all coming to a head.

    But I will say these words. Someone said something about the flag and me protecting it , like I said god is first and country is second and so on. You can talk about invading another country preemptively and so on. But I ask you did Bill Clinton have permission for Bosnia? —-NO —- Look it up.

    Another point, Almost 60,000 died during Viet Nam, over how many years? Now go back even further to WW2 and go count the gold stars on the wall at the WW2 Memorial each gold star represents if I am not mistaken 1000 people that died per star.
    A war that has lasted for 4 yrs and has 3000 + dead is regretful but that is nothing in terms of previous wars. The protestors focus is narrow and you do not look at this tactically. We are fighting a non uniformed enemy (bad guys are hard to identify).
    Other nations want nothing but defeat for the USA, why because it serves the agenda they have
    Iranian, Shia domination of the region.

    Do not be mistaken it is not the Iraqis that are there shooting at us so much as it is the insurgency from Al Queda an Iranian and Syrian backed groups. Just like Hezbollah was a proxy for Syria and Iran last summer in Lebanon.

    Like it or not, America needs to honor what was started and finish it properly but not a dated time schedule, not cut and run, and most importantly not at the hands of stupid congressmen and senators that want you to do more with less and play games with funding that the troops need to finish the job. When this war started the term armchair generals was born on all the news stations. All prior service commentators on the networks answering questions or making decisions from the chair they sit in and not being on the ground.

    Congress does the same thing now and worse, at least the commentators had prior service. Vietnam was a war fought with stipulations set by a DEMOCRAT congress and look what we got our hands tied in the war. Then we got political scandal from Nixon and a withdrawal because we had no support at home or in congress.

    Most polls want us to win, then let us do our job, political games is not the answer. Having a military is for 2 purposes the first is a deterrent and the second is destruction of the enemy and wining. We leave now unfinished, we will be back at a higher cost of lives and in far worse conditions and on a much grander scale. Ask yourself do you want to be drafted since you oppose it so much? How about your kids?

    Nothing is simple even with the technology we have. The world expects a Gulf War 1 scenario, quick and over with, 341 casualties on the US side in 42 days of combat.

    This isn’t Burger King your way rite away, no pickles. This is a war of beliefs, of we are infidels, we are swine’s and so on. This is not a GOVT conspiracy theory. You saw them planes fly into that building as much as I did.

    Look up the jihad sites read the hatred they spread, look up the history of the middle east for the past 40 yrs. Look up the land set aside by the League of Nations (now the UN) for Israel. Learn about how the day they acquired the land that they had 6 nations attack them at once in the 40s. Hell, England wont teach the holocaust because it politicly incorrect for the Muslims that live and go to school there.

    And Iran denies it and just wants the Israelis destruction. Sure we need oil and they need our money so they can live like Saddam did and oppress the people they have and live on the high horse. Living politically correct is incorrect. Sometimes you need to call it the way it is.

    Yes, I was there that day to protect the wall like so many others there, from the protesters that wished to do harm to it with hammer and chisels and paint balloons.

    You have the freedom to protest because others protect the very freedoms you exercise but do not defend in an honorable way yourselves. You think about the bills sent up to the house and passed to make us bend to the will of a political party that wishes us the USA to run like Viet Nam, you think the soldiers have mental war trauma now.

    How will they feel when they come back like the brothers before them and the job not finished because of politics and arm chair general congressmen and senators?

    Honor, Courage, Committment…. core values of the Miltary imposed on us by congress, I ask you where is their Honor, Courage, Committment?

  262. Danielle Martin said,

    May 14, 2007 at 7:31

    Liberals seem to be the only ones allowed freedom of speech. Whenever the right wingers excercise it -i.e. racist slurs – they’re slapped in the face by the media. Liberals allow what they want to hear. They’re allowed to say whatever the hell they feel like saying. The Conservatives put up with it. I know I do. But when the liberals hear something thats slightly offensive to them they scream bloody murder.

  263. Danielle Martin said,

    May 14, 2007 at 7:32

    let me add to the last i dont support the racist slurs that was the first thing i could think of that the right wingers say with any regularity…

  264. Danielle Martin said,

    May 14, 2007 at 7:42

    other than something to the extent of “we do it for the morality of the country! and god and blah blah blah”

  265. ed said,

    December 19, 2007 at 16:04

    This is an old thread but I just have to comment on the hilariously redundant sign that a woman is holding in one of the pictures:

    “Anti-War Activism emboldens GLOBAL COMMUNISM and ISLAMIC IMPERIALISM”

    Watch out America, for here come the advance legions of Laos!…And North Korea, and Vietnam, and perhaps Cuba! But definitely not China.

  266. Tea-Party Hearts Soar in Oregon For Another ‘Gathering of Eagles’ | SPH - Small penis humiliation said,

    July 28, 2012 at 20:00

    [...] remember the “Gathering of Eagles.” These were the pre-Tea Party Cro-Magnons who organized back in 2008 to create a right-wing counter-protest intended to “protect” the Vietnam Veterans [...]

  267. Tea-Party Hearts Soar in Oregon For Another ‘Gathering of Eagles’ | FavStocks said,

    July 29, 2012 at 9:20

    [...] remember the “Gathering of Eagles.” These were the pre-Tea Party Cro-Magnons who organized back in 2008 to create a right-wing counter-protest intended to “protect” the Vietnam Veterans [...]

Leave a Comment

  • Things of Interest

  • Meta Goodness

  • Clunkers

  • httpbl_stats()