Tuesday, November 13, 2007

It's the most wonderful time of the year

The air is crisp and kids are preparing their Christmas lists. That can only mean one thing: it's time for schools and other government offices to start hyperventillating over the fact that Christmas is a national holiday.

While I am sure we will get many great examples of government's (aka liberals) hatred of Christians this year let us revisit a conversation from Christmas past...

Board Discussion Regarding Christmas/Winter Break.

Ike Maness, Hillsboro Education Association President, asked the Board in April to reconsider the practice of naming the two week break in December and January Christmas Break. He believed it was exclusionary and insulting to non-Christian students.

Director Kathy Huntington also was disappointed that Ike Maness was not at the meeting
because she wanted to address his comment that if the practice of naming the break Christmas Break offends even one student, it should be changed.


Director John Peterson said the issue had absolutely nothing to do with religion to him. He
believes we have an American culture that has given names to seasons and to holidays, and was not interested in being “politically correct.”


Imagine the standard of "if it offends even one person" being applied to everything we do.

52 comments:

Anonymous said...

***Featured Product of the Day***

The CB2000 Total Cum Prevention System

"The CB2000is the one that really works. Available in clear, grey ( shown middle left ) or pink ( great for a little humiliation), the CB2000 comes with four rings for behind the balls ( 1.5", 1.875", 1.75" and 2" ID ), 5 spacers, one cock cage, 5 individually numbered plastic locks and one brass padlock with three keys ( all shown in the lower portion of the picture. The plastic construction means the CB2000 is light and can be worn for very long durations ( days or weeks ). It also means it can pass through metal detectors. This is great for locking up to prevent erections while on business travel. The cock can fully function as far as toileting goes. He will probably have to sit down and wipe after to avoid a mess, this further adds to the humiliation and control of having to wear it. The balls are left fully exposed so punishment can still be administered to the otherwise useless cock. The cage keeps the cock nicely out of the way for those who would like to knee or whip the now very vulnerable ball sack. If you are looking to totally prevent male cum, this is it!"

Anonymous said...

But what if I am offended at their being offended?

Anonymous said...

In Miglavia, we do not concern ourselves with a $1.9 trillion war in Iraq/Afghanistan. We do not talk about more than half a million dead Iraqi civilians, and hundreds of thousands more turned into refugees fleeing for their lives. We also do not acknowledge the more than 4,300 American soldiers whose lives have been wasted in this stupid, illegal war. We would rather not discuss more than 30,000 wounded American soldiers, thousands of whom are, in addition to their physical wounds, suffering from psychological scars from which they will never fully recover, and we certainly do not want to talk about how the American government treats them like shit once they return home.

We do not talk about those things.

Instead, here in Miglavia, we concern ourselves with a ridiculous conversation from a 3-year-old meeting of the Hillsboro School Board and we worry that this might forshadow a "war" being waged on Christmas.

Welcome to Miglavia. Please check your brain at the door, close your eyes, and keep to the right. The FAR right. Your hosts will be the Miglavian Sheeple.

R Huse said...

Actually in Miglavia we have concerned ourselves quite a bit with the civilian dead in Iraq, at least I have. I still have never gotten an answer. I will pose the question again:

Would the left, if they got what they want, an immediate pull out from Iraq, take a little more responsibility than they have in the past for the killing fields that will follow. Will they step up to the plate and say "yes, we called for an end to this war, and we take full responsibility now for the aftermath". You say Bush had no plan when he got us in? Fair enough, what is your plan when we leave?

We have been through this scenario before, in Cambodia. The Khmer Rouge weren't so bad we were told by the immediate withdrawal crowd. They were wrong, 2 million died, and somehow the crowd that was so eager to take credit for ending the war was no where to be found stepping up to that responsibility. The onus is on the "leave now" crowd, given their abysmal past performance.

My guess is we will see an equal dodging of responsibility in Iraq should this cabals efforts come to fruition. Suddenly their concern for Iraqi civilians will vaporize as quickly as did their concern for those in South East Asia. Partisanship paid for with the blood of millions.

So lets see your plan. You were the ones saying Bush was stupid, he had no plan. What will you do? Will you make up for Cambodia? The record is clear, the "leave now" crowd has a mighty tough road to hoe to make up for their past.

wallace dee said...

I always laugh when I see RHuse online these days. And no -- it's not the cock rings and ass spatulas, or whatever the hell they're called.

The reason I laugh is because I was online once, roaming Miglavia, and I noticed RHuse bellowing about how "the left" had said "nothing" when Clinton started dropping bombs in Yugoslavia. Notwithstanding the fact that for RHuse, anyone to the left of Joe "bombs away" Lieberman is "The Left," I called him on it. I rounded up a bunch of quotes from actual leftists who were pretty pissed off about Clinton's war crimes and did say something about it, quoted them by name, the date, etc. In other words: A comprehensive refutation of RHuse's lies and bullshit, complete with sources.

His reponse? There was no response. No mea culpa. No, "Gee, I didn't know that!" Not even an attempt to call and raise, demanding to know if I could name anyone else. (I could have.) Absolutely nothing. Didn't see him again until the next thread, spouting his mouth off about something else he knew little or nothing about.

So that's why I laugh out loud anytime I see RHuse huffing and puffing, trying to call out the libs on this or that. It doesn't matter what you say to him. It doesn't matter if your response is longer and more annotated than a doctoral dissertation. He can't handle it. He doesn't know how to deal with it. And, at least in the instance cited above, he's too much of a pussy to respond and admit he was wrong.

And RHuse, just so we understand each other: When I say that I'm laughing at you, I don't just mean that I'm writing that "I'm laughing at you." I'm actually laughing at you, sitting here. Laughing at your fool ass.

Tell you what, RHuse, stick to talking up that nifty CB2000 Total Cum Prevention System. At least it's something you presumably know something about. Or even better: Take off the one you're wearing now: It might release some pressure on your brain and allow you to think clearly.

P.S. Regarding your first statement: "Actually in Miglavia we have concerned ourselves quite a bit with the civilian dead in Iraq ..."

Bullshit.

Anonymous said...

I am waiting for Oregon to try to ban the Christmas holiday. I suppose they won't be able to fully do it because it is a Federal holiday, but they could treat it like Columbus Day is treated, I suppose. Luckily, too many people here would balk at having to work on Christmaas unless they took the day off as vacation or otherwise.

Sound ridiculous? It is, but I think it is possible here. I can hear it now, "we'll give you an extra floating holiday and you can take it on 12/25 if you want."

Someone is going to push that at some point. Watch and see.

Anonymous said...

Tis the season.... more pissing and moaning about the Godless liberal's "war on Christmas" and it isn't even Thanksgiving yet. You guys start whining about this imaginary "issue" of yours earlier and earlier. Next year, you'll probably unpack your whines the day after Halloween. How annoying. What will it take to make you happy? Replace every stop sign in America with a Baby Jesus figure holding a stop sign? Every man, woman and child has to wear Jesus, Mary and Joseph costumes for 30 days? What? This "Godless" liberal LOVES Christmas and focus on the "reason for the season," but I hate having to put up with another year of you whiny-assed pansies bawling like a bunch of idiots grasping at anything just to have an "issue.
"Waaaaahhhh....I need acknowledgement from Walmart clerks to reinforce my faith." You guys have done nothing but manage to turn Christmas into an annual piss and moan fest. Thanks. I'm sure Jesus appreciates it.

Eli Barnhardt

Not Anonymous said...

It's funny to me that liberals - who tend to be somewhat more critical of loosely regulated free-market capitalism - tend to get blasted with stealing christmas every year, when the move to replace "Christmas" with "Holidays" is as much or more of a corporate marketing strategy led by large retailers, as it is the result of secular-minded school administrators who were gullible enough to believe that the founding fathers actually meant what they said about the separation of church and state.

"The Holidays" has replaced "Christmas" largely for marketing purposes. That's why the Holidays start earlier and earlier each year: it's profitable. Pretty soon we'll be "celebrating" the holidays from Labor Day to Valentine's Day.

'Tis the season...already.

R Huse said...

Wow Wallace Dee - You certainly are a cranky little fellow.

So let me see if I got this right. You are all upset because you responded to a post of mine and I didn't respond back? Did you ever think at some point people get tired of a thread and move on? Did you ever think that maybe people don't respond to those whose main argument, as your is here, seems to be composed of inane dull insults?

On a positive note - I do have to say it is funny to picture you sitting there laughing at me. That picture, an little angry man laughing away maniacally as he types about his frustration that I didn't respond to him probably creates a very clear image of who you truly are in the mind of most readers. Its frankly a little creepy, but quite vivid and I am sure an accurate one.

In conclusion Wallace, thank you for the early morning ego boost. I didn't know the self validation of a response from me was so craved by you but it is quite flattering, if a little stalker like.

Cheers, and thank you again.

Anonymous said...

LOL, R Huse. If I didn't know any better, I could swear you were painting a little "self portrait" with your last post.

You must have your computer set to buzz to alert you when your arch nemisis, "Anonymous," posts another bitch slap to you, because, like a man possessed, you respond within minutes. Validation, indeed.

Sorry, but afer last week's "reveal," the collective visual we now all have of you is far, far funnier than your image of Wallace Dee: Yosemite Sam with a scary looking strap-on, jumping up and down having a toddler-style temper tantrum because "anonymous" is smarter than you. Nice try though.

-- Eli Barnhardt

Anonymous said...

R-Huse,

"Did you ever think that maybe people don't respond to those whose main argument, as your is here, seems to be composed of inane dull insults?"

This is actually not true. I believe Wallace Dee was taking you to task for consistently failing to respond to substantive points (and related empirical evidence) that seem to cast doubts on your argument. Sure, we all get tired of posts, and therefore, stop posting. But if you consistently post up to the point that your position is challenged empirically, and then go silent, one must wonder whether you are interested in a factual debate, or rather just hammering out some intellectual-sounding prose for shits-and-giggles.

Ironically, I find that your posts do little more than insult the positions of others, and with a dearth of evidence to support your own position.

When logic and evidence are brought to bear on a discussion, you seem to go silent. Here's another example: Last week when we were having some fun discussi your manufactures, you got your chaps twisted in a bunch, declaring us all bigots of the worst kind. A parallel was drawn between anti-homosexual/anti-(whatever-your-sexual-minority is) and Daniel's form of anti-illegal immigrant sentiment. It was asked: if we are such bigots for assuming you to be a sexual deviant because you peddle the CB2000, is Daniel not as big of a bigot for asserting that undocumented immigrants, are, by definition, child rapists and drug dealers? Your response? None?

The logic goes like this:

People who play with ass spatulas are perverts and child molesters.

R-Huse plays with ass spatulas.

Therefore, R-Huse must be a pervert and a child molester.

Also, illegal immigrants from Mexico are child rapists and drug dealers.

[Illegal immigrant A] is an illegal immigrant from mexico.

Therefore, he is a child rapist and drug dealer.

Daniel is probably worse in failing to respond to points of fact or logical questions. He's pure rhetoric.

R Huse said...

Gee Eli, thanks! I didn't know you followed me so closely. I think I might need to start a fan club.

Here are some answers to things you brought up.

I check the blog most mornings while having coffee before I start my day. I sometimes check again during lunch or in the evening. I respond to peoples posts because its fun. However I don't go all stalker and whiney when someone doesn't respond to mine. Responding to posts? Fun. Going whiney when someone doesn't respond back? Psycho.

I've always been pretty up front about why I post, I love tweaking you guys. I find that entertaining. Its especially funny because I still don't think any of you guys get my other motivation for it, which I alluded to a few posts back.

As for last weeks reveal - You are right on that one. It was pretty funny, all the ACLU members stammering on about how they aren't bigots

"Bbbbbbut some of my best friends are black" was all I am sure most could help but think.

Obviously you need a little catch up on this blog, it has been well known since pretty much my first post here who I am and what I do. That was hardly the first attack on me by the left for what I do or for my sexuality. It was simply the latest incarnation of the them showing their intolerance and vapidity. Step outside of the hive mind of the left, and they just cant keep their bigotry in check. Its astonishing.

OK - Off to fire up the machines and computers and start my day. Busy busy bee and lots of metal to machine. Thank you for responding to me and keeping this whole thing alive with your continuing support.

Fame ..... I gonna live for ever

Im gonna learn how to fly

High

I feel it coming together
People will see me and cry

Fame

Im gonna live forever
Baby remember my name

Remember
Remember
Remember

Wallace Dee said...

Thanks to Eli and Anon 8:21. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Just to clarify: The post from way back where I responded to your totally inaccurate and dishonest statement, intended to smear your political opponents and presented with the same degree of pomposity and self-assuredness as your ridiculous 7:10 a.m. post this morning, was not comprised of "inane dull insults." It was not even an expression of opinion. It was a recitation of FACTS. Facts which blew your arrogant ass out of the water. A better man, a principled man, would have acknowledged his error. You didn't. You became "tired." Poor boy! After the first direct response to your own comment made in a thread whose explicit purpose is discussion, you became "tired" and "moved on."

Your response this morning, including the transparently ridiculous "stalking" remark, says more about you than I ever could.

Again, good comments from folks about the alleged "war" on Christmas. My theory is that someone at FOXNews corporate dreamed it up to boost ratings. One can be sure they'll do it again this year. Why? Because their "sheeple" responded. Imagine sad little Daniel Miglavs, sitting at his computer furiously clicking his way through Hillsboro School Board minutes to find the smoking gun from 2004. As one poster on this blog frequently points out, you really do need to get a hobby, Mr. Miglavs.

Anonymous said...

LOL Huse, that was quick. Are you sure you're the tweaker and not the tweekie? Me thinks thou doth protesteth to much.

Anonymous said...

The cheesy "Fame" song? ROTFLMAO. How lame. I'm beginning to understand RHuse. I think he was picked on as an adolescent. Big time.

the bullshit police said...

Sorry RHuse. Someone who makes a living building "tools for controlling people" (slave collars, mouth gags, "dungeon furniture," etc.) pretty much gives up the right to call others "creepy." You can do better than that.

Then again, maybe you can't.

Stevie said...

R Huse, you state:

“Would the left, if they got what they want, an immediate pull out from Iraq, take a little more responsibility than they have in the past for the killing fields that will follow. Will they step up to the plate and say "yes, we called for an end to this war, and we take full responsibility now for the aftermath". You say Bush had no plan when he got us in? Fair enough, what is your plan when we leave?”

First, I see you wasted no time in repeating the “immediate” pullout myth. Would you care to name any leading Democratic member of Congress who is calling for an “immediate” pullout, and provide the exact quote where they’ve said this? The fact of the matter is that very few politicians (and no mainstream ones) in Congress have called for an “immediate” pullout. This is just a convenient straw man for the political right. And unfortunately, you’re not called on it nearly enough.

Second, I find it nothing less than comical that people like you – having ignored people like me who said invading Iraq was going to be a bad idea way back before we even invaded – are now asking people like me, “Well, what’s you plan?!?” Since you appear to have a faulty memory, let’s digress: Back in 2003, many people like me, being familiar with history (and in particular the way three other superpowers had unsuccessfully attempted to occupy the Mid-east) said that invading Iraq was likely to be a disaster, because the only thing Middle-easterners hate more than their own dictators, are outside occupying forces. We warned you that Iraq was going to be a quagmire, with no good solution and no good way out. And it wasn’t just the political left who warned you. The conservatives over at the CATO Institute (who, unlike Republicans, still actually believe in their core conservative principles) also warned that Iraq was likely to be a disaster. And you didn’t listen to them, either.

And yet, now that the Left and the people of CATO have been proven correct with regard to Iraq (a circumstance that pisses you right-wingers off to no end), you’re now asking us to provide you with a good answer to the current problem…when we told you over four years ago that there would not be a good answer to this problem down the road!!! What kind of messed-up, tortured logic are you using to proclaim that we owe you a good answer to a problem that we warned you over four years ago there wouldn’t be a good answer to?!? You didn’t listen four years ago, and now that the plan you supported has failed miserably by almost all objective measures, you’re now trying to deflect blame by saying that if other people acknowledge your own screw-up, those people therefore have a duty to attempt to correct your screw-up. Sorry R Huse…the world doesn’t work that way. Oh…unless you’re a personal responsibility dodging right-winger.

The dirty little secret about Iraq is that there is no good solution. We can’t force Iraqis to establish a democracy, nor can we force competing religious factions (who have effectively been at war with each other for thousands of years) to suddenly get along. Iraq either wants peace bad enough, or they don’t. We have given them MORE than enough time to decide their own fates, and if they don’t want to stand up for themselves, explain to all of us how that is America’s problem, and why even one more American life should be lost because of it?

As for the fallout of us leaving, how convenient for you to once again attempt to shift blame. To the extent there is a humanitarian crisis in Iraq after we leave (notwithstanding the fact that this issue can be effectively addressed at the international level to avoid it happening in the first place), that would be just another in a long line of unintended consequences brought to us by the Bush Administration and the incompetent people therein. Maybe if people like you actually thought about such things PRIOR to invading the country, you wouldn’t have to go around now looking for someone else to blame for the unintended consequence of actions YOU fully supported.

And if you want to argue that we HAVE to stay there, fine…explain to us how you intend to pay for it, and tell us when you’re going to run down to the recruitment center to enlist. Because in case you didn’t notice, we learned just yesterday that the full cost of the Iraq war is verging on something like $1.5 TRILLION. This is in comparison to the Bush Administration’s estimates that the war would cost $50-60 billion. R Huse, when you mess up projections and miscalculate THAT badly in the corporate world, you get fired. But when the Bush Adminsitration does it, well…the excuses flow like cheap wine from people like you who talk a good game about personal responsibility, but who don’t seem to actually practice it themselves.

And to that end, the right-wing in this country, far more than the Left, should be calling for Bush’s head on a platter. Especially given the great amount of damage Bush has done to conservative politics. When Bush came into office, right-wingers were talking about “permanent majorities”, and acting as if they had finally triumphed, once and for all, over those wascally “liberals”. Fast forward to today, and what do you have? After seven years of Bush, the GOP has been thoroughly discredited in the areas of foreign policy and fiscal responsibility. And on the domestic front, the GOP has shown us that they LOVE big government…just as long as they’re in charge of it. (Bush has grown government more than any other president before him. And by a wide margin, to boot.)

But I digress. In essence R Huse, and with regard to Iraq, people like YOU pushed Humpty Dumpty off the wall, and now that you don’t know how to put him back together again, you’re doing what I expect right-wingers to do…you’re shirking personal responsibility, and looking for someone else to blame. Classic.

(It’s also interesting how, now that it’s convenient, you’re entertaining Vietnam analogies. All I’ve heard from the political right the past few years is how the situation in Iraq is nothing like Vietnam. Go figure.)

Anonymous said...

I think the only honest answer about the "impending crisis in the event that we leave" is "tough shit". That's the bed we made, and what will happen, will happen.

But what WILL happen? My sense is this: In the four years we have occupied the country, an unknown number of innocent civilian Iraqis have been killed, by us, by foreign-terrorists, and by home-grown death squads. Basic energy services are unreliable. Unemployment has skyrocketed. The country has largely been emptied of its moderate, educated middle-class either through their slaughter or flight to neighboring countries, Europe, and the United States.

What is left to protect, I ask?

Anonymous said...

I should add to the list of events that have occurred during our tenure in Iraq is the ethnic redistribution of neighborhoods, especially in Baghdad. There are, today, few if any mixed Sunni-Shia neighborhoods in Baghdad. Much of the "cleansing" we fear that would result from our departure, has largely already happened, as I understand it.

One would think that if a process toward a democratic society were underway, it would be associated with a tendency toward increased ethnic mixing. The opposite has occurred.

Anonymous said...

we could re-name it martin luther or cheaser chaves or any minority name. I think that would be ok

Stevie said...

Anon 11:34, you raise a good point. To contemplate what type of humanitarian disaster might happen if we leave Iraq, is to ignore the very real humanitarian disaster that has already occurred as a direct and proximate result of the Bush Administration’s actions in destabilizing the region.

In particular, you touched upon a key point that is often ignored in the mainstream media, and is COMPLETELY ignored in right-wing media. That being the fact that over 1,000,000 Iraqis have simply fled the country entirely, and that those who have fled have mostly been the ones who could afford to leave…i.e., your doctors, lawyers, businessmen and other professionals. In other words, the community and economic leaders needed to establish some lasting semblance of order and normality in Iraq.

And just a few weeks ago, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction issued a report stating that overall progress in Iraq was still woefully lacking. (Of course, this was just six weeks after the Bush Administration came out with its own report that – surprise, surprise – was much more upbeat than the sober, non-partisan Inspector General report).

Remind me again why the Bush Administration should be trusted? Oh, that’s right…they shouldn’t.

Anonymous said...

Visual:

The stage curtains are drawn. A gaggle of Miglavians and Oaf-ers can barely contain thier excitement in their hushed whispers. Suddenly, a spotlight slices through the darkness. All eyes fix on the state. The curtains part.

A lone figure occupies the state. His head is bowed. His arms outstretched. Music begins to play and the lone figure raises his head. It's RHuse. He's adorned in full dungeon sex regalia.... he begins to dance that familiar 80s choreography....FAME! I'm gonna live forever!

LOL, LOL, LOL....ROTFLMAO, PMPs! Thanks for adding hilarity to yet another day, Rupert. A Category 5 sado-masochist on the outside, a cheesy wannabe on the inside. Wow, the duality.

Anonymous Hieronymous

R Huse said...

Stevie:

Oh my God, a substantive response with low personal attack level. How astonishing!

Ok - Lets rock.

"First, I see you wasted no time in repeating the “immediate” pullout myth. "

Yep, you're right, no one has said immediate pull out. I do think those who want to pull out want to do so in things like one year time spans though. That to me seems precipitous, but that's a judgment call as to what would be a quick or a slow pull out.

"Second, I find it nothing less than comical that people like you – having ignored people like me who said invading Iraq was going to be a bad idea "

Well, lets be fair on that one. Yes, there were people who said it would be a bad idea, there were also people who said before Desert Storm that our Military was totally unsuited to the battle and were facing the worlds fourth largest army and it would be a blood bath for us. Those might not have been the same exact people, but the point is, given any war there will always be a crowd that doesn't want to go in, they will sometimes be proven right, that doesn't mean they are always right.

"Since you appear to have a faulty memory, let’s digress: Back in 2003, many people like me, being familiar with history (and in particular the way three other superpowers had unsuccessfully attempted to occupy the Mid-east)

Gee, thanks for the unnecessary insult.

I actually have a very good memory. I remember people like you also saying, with quite a bit of historical justification, that Afghanistan is impossible to occupy given the historical attempts, most recently by the Soviets. Well, that one went reasonably successfully. So, the point is, history gives one a record with which to project how not to do something, not that something is impossible to do.

"We warned you that Iraq was going to be a quagmire, with no good solution and no good way out."

Ah, yeah, but then again you also said that before Desert Storm, so, who knows. Besides, as I have said in the past, if Iraq is a quagmire, then WW2 certainly is as well, remember, we have had a presence there for how many years after the fact?

"And yet, now that the Left and the people of CATO have been proven correct with regard to Iraq (a circumstance that pisses you right-wingers off to no end), "

Yes, but lets face it, you were wrong on Afghanistan, wrong about Desert Storm, and wrong about the Surge, which does seem to have had some effect. Sure, you were right in some regards, Iraq wasn't a cake walk, but lets also remember, Bush said quite clearly at the outset this was not going to be quick or easy, it would take years.

"you’re now trying to deflect blame by saying that if other people acknowledge your own screw-up, those people therefore have a duty to attempt to correct your screw-up. "

No, you didn't read. I said if you are wanting to change the strategy from Bush's "stay the course" to your own "Lets begin withdrawal" you have a responsibility to accept the aftermath of that change in direction just as you are asking the right to accept the responsibility for the current course of things.

"We have given them MORE than enough time to decide their own fates, and if they don’t want to stand up for themselves, explain to all of us how that is America’s problem, and why even one more American life should be lost because of it?"

I totally agree with you. The Iraqis are not stepping up to the plate and frankly I think it is pretty lousy of them. The answer to your question though is two fold, we have an interest in establishing a democracy in Iraq, and we also have an interest in preventing a religious genocide, which most, myself included, seem to think might happen if we left now.

"you wouldn’t have to go around now looking for someone else to blame for the unintended consequence of actions YOU fully supported."

Who the hell is blaming you? People have raked Bush over the coals endlessly for failing to have a post invasion plan. If you want to change direction, you don't think its fair we ask what your plan is? How the hell is that blaming you for anything?

"To the extent there is a humanitarian crisis in Iraq after we leave (notwithstanding the fact that this issue can be effectively addressed at the international level to avoid it happening in the first place)"

Well, they weren't very effective before. How many times did the UN resolve that Iraq needed to comply with the terms of their surrender? How much bribe money was involved in the UN oil for food program? Why did Anan have to resign again? Sure we didn't find WMD's, but who knew we would find that the reason all those European leaders were against the invasion was it was going to screw up their cush little bribe deal with Saddam.

"Because in case you didn’t notice, we learned just yesterday that the full cost of the Iraq war is verging on something like $1.5 TRILLION. This is in comparison to the Bush Administration’s estimates that the war would cost $50-60 billion. R Huse, when you mess up projections and miscalculate THAT badly in the corporate world, you get fired. "

You sure you want to stick with that? Because I have a little old thing called Medicare and Social Security and WW2 Id like to talk to you about. Besides, I think even ABC reported that 1.5 trillion figure was probably a little more than biased.

"YOU pushed Humpty Dumpty off the wall, and now that you don’t know how to put him back together again, you’re doing what I expect right-wingers to do…you’re shirking personal responsibility, and looking for someone else to blame."

Not quite, we are the ones urging we stay there and finish the job. You are the ones who want to withdraw and from what I can tell, do not have much of a plan other than "the international community". Had that "international community" done their job and enforced the Desert Storm surrender, rather than taking Oil for Food bribes, we might not be there in the first place. That's why I have little faith in them.

"All I’ve heard from the political right the past few years is how the situation in Iraq is nothing like Vietnam."

Really? I sure haven't, not in regard to the consequences of withdrawal from Iraq. I feel like a fair amount of the right seems to agree that if we leave Iraq we will have another Cambodia/Vietnam situation. That's really strange, I wonder why our perceptions are so different on that one?

R Huse said...

And now for the rest of my little minions here on the page, and their busy busy work keeping me the talk of the town here..

Anon 9.21 - Quick? So you are saying if one responds quickly that makes them the tweekee? Lets see, I responded to Eli about an hour after his post. You responded to me 20 minutes after mine. Sorry dude, couldnt resist, you sort of set yourself up for that one. but I am sure glad the Fame song got to ya enough that you wrote me two posts! Thanks for the boost!

At any rate all you guys seem to be able to talk about is me and as I have said before, thats all I really need to accomplish for my purposes here. Im not protesting Anon, Im encouraging.

Fame

Remember
Remember

But wait - Theres more!

Wallace, get over the fact that I didnt see or respond to some post of yours from way back. I guess you posted a list of names, big woop. That will never change the facts of what Clinton did and the general pass he got from the left on it. Get over it.

Anon 8.21 - I consistantly dont ever respond to substantive points that undermine an argument I have made? Cite me an example of that? Dont make it some response weeks after the fact though. I might not respond to all, but if there is a back and forth, I generally do.

BS Police - Gee, sorry your problem with what others do in their bedroom makes you think they dont have the right to call others creepy. I make things people want, that bugs you, ok. If nothing else though, I do appreciate your honesty. Lets face it though, with that little bit of bigotry, you have pretty much put yourself in the corner on raising that little charge against anyone else.

Anon 3.14 Cheesy wannabe? Wannabe what? Famous? Hey baby, you're the ones who put me there, because all you can do is talk about me. Thats fame, and I have you, in part, thank for it!

I love you guys, you make it all about me and that drive me mad with power. MAD! I tell you, BwaHaHaHaHA!!!!!!!!

Lets go for another record on this one, I think it was 150 responses on the last go round, I love it. Go TEAM!

Fame ..... I gonna live for ever

Im gonna learn how to fly

High

I feel it coming together
People will see me and cry

Fame

Im gonna live forever
Baby remember my name

Remember
Remember
Remember

Anonymous said...

R-Huse --

"Anon 8.21 - I consistantly dont ever respond to substantive points that undermine an argument I have made? Cite me an example of that?"

I did...in that post.

Anon 8:21

wallace dee said...

That will never change the facts of what Clinton did and the general pass he got from the left on it. Get over it ...

Sorry RHuse: Repeating lies do not make them true. Your claim, in fact, is not a fact. I will not waste my time proving the point all over again. My point in posting today was not to bemoan the fact that you didn't respond to a substantive argument a month ago, but to point out that there is no point, none whatsoever, in responding to questions like the one you posted at 8:02. You're literally impossible to argue with: You either walk away like a pussy when you lose, or you deny facts that a junior high school student could check. If you told a man he could not bench press 200 pounds, and then the man bench pressed 200 pounds in front of your very eyes, with weights you supplied yourself, I don't think we can rule out the possibility that you would DENY that he had actually done it. It's "make-your-own-reality" argumentation, Miglavian-style.

Huse, you're an arrogant ignoramus. I'm done with you. My only hope today is that I save others the time and trouble of responding to your fucking fool ass. Or taking you the least bit seriously.

P.S. Steve, I congratulate you for giving it your best shot. It's a pretty decent response. Unfortunately, it's about as productive as trying to carry on a conversation with a turd.

R Huse said...

Whew, what a day. You know I was thinking some about an hour ago while one of the machines was threading away that maybe I should share a little bit of my life with you, my fans. I hope its ok to call you my fans. What else do you call people who are so obsessed with another persons life as you folks are with mine? Anyway, I spent a couple of hours at the end of the day making a new shower road for my bathroom. Isn't that crazy? Hey, what can you do, I love a really nice shower rod and boy did this one come out sweet.

Now, on to the fan base.

Fan 8.21

Ok, I see the part you were talking about. I had addressed the "Daniel said this or that" thing in a previous thread. I answered it in that thread. Whoever I was in the discussion with simply could not read, I said a statement was bigoted, not that Daniel was. When I cut and pasted the original post of mine, in which they claimed I had said something that I clearly hadn't well, their goose was pretty much cooked. I simply don't get into discussions with someone who lies about what I said, and then tries to twist it and say one thing means the same as the other, which it clearly didn't in that instance, as I explained at the time. Check and mate at that point as far as I am concerned.

Basically I will suffer fools for a certain period of time, but not endlessly.

Fan Wallace Dee

>Sorry RHuse: Repeating lies do not make them true. Your claim, in fact, is not a fact.

You are saying its a lie that Clinton used up half the cruise missile inventory to deflect from Monica? Oh come on, that's a little silly don't you think? I mean it became a standard Jay Leno joke while it was going on. Are you like the only one in America that didn't get that? I mean let's face it Cokie Roberts on "This Week" sure felt the whole Bosnia invasion seemed a hell of a lot like the "Wag the Dog" movie that came out at the same time.

Oh wait, wait, then there was this one - Remember Clinton initiating a cruise missile attack right before Ramadan so as to not offend the Muslims by bombing during Ramadan so he could put off the impeachment vote? Yah Haaaaaaa. I mean even Dan Rather couldn't keep a straight face over that one. Ask a high school kid about that on your walk home because seeing the Clinton supporters defend that one at the time was a hoot!

>My point in posting today was not to bemoan the fact that you didn't respond to a substantive argument a month ago

Could have fooled me. Why did you keep coming back to your silly "I posted a list thing" then? Oh well, God knows what that was all about.

>You either walk away like a pussy when you lose, or you deny facts that a junior high school student could check.

Bye bye, see me waving at you walking away?

Bye bye, guess that makes you a what? Hmm, what did you say before?

Unh huh >clap< say it >clap< Yeah you know what Im talking about >clap< Let's git down on it

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

Hey next time baby

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

lets try and approch it a little more from the positive side ok?

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

I want to send love out to all my fans

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

Wherever they may be

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

Especially alll you ladies and gents on the left coast

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

Yeah, you know who Im talking to

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

This is R Huse, signing out for now.

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

But I'll be back again, you know it babe.

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

To hug ya

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

And kiss ya

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

And show ya how I love ya

>Bye bye Wallace bye bye.<

Whoooo Hooooooo...... The PARTY is ON! Work is over and now its time to rock the house!

Fame ..... I'm gonna live for ever

Im gonna learn how to fly

High

I feel it coming together
People will see me and cry

Fame

Im gonna live forever
Baby remember my name

Remember
Remember
Remember

Anonymous said...

R-Huse -

What in the fuck are you talking about?!?

That's the longest piece of absolute nothing I have ever read. You must be super intellectual, because I have no idea what the fuck you're trying to say.

Kudos!

wallace dee said...

I dare not address the following comment to RHuse, lest he feel obliged to sing me another song, but I would like to point out to others the little stunt he just pulled. It's a standard Miglavian ploy: Change the subject, but act like you haven't.

This whole thing started when RHuse charged that "the left" had said "nothing" when Clinton bombed Yugoslavia.

I pointed out that this was, in fact, completely untrue.

So RHuse, Miglavian that he is, lobbed that one out again tonight, referring to: ".. the facts of what Clinton did and the general pass he got from the left on it."

I pointed out -- again -- that this was a lie. So look at his response:

You are saying its a lie that Clinton used up half the cruise missile inventory to deflect from Monica? Oh come on, that's a little silly don't you think?

No, Mr. Huse. That is NOT what I am saying.

If Mr. Huse had taken the time to actually read some of the comments by nationally known figures of the left that I referred him to the first time around, he would have known that that is exactly what many on the left DID say: That Clinton had resorted to creating a foreign policy crisis (and, in this leftist's view, committing a war crime) in order to distract from the Lewinsky scandal. Which is what he denied again even today: " ... the general pass he [Clinton] got from the left."

Once again, the futility of talking to RHuse is illustrated by ... RHuse.

Anonymous said...

RHuse has lost it. He must have been "toilet training" all day. Poor guy.

Anonymous said...

WHAT WE ARE SEEING HERE IS A. COMPLETE. MENTAL. BREAKDOWN. MR. HUSE, ARE YOU READY FOR YOUR CLOSE-UP?

Ferd Schnerkele said...

r huse said lets also remember, Bush said quite clearly at the outset this was not going to be quick or easy, it would take years.

I'd like to see a citation of that, since his Vice President and his Secretary of Defense were both saying it was going to be over quickly:

It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." Donald Rumsfeld on Feb. 7, 2003.

I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . . . I think it will go relatively quickly, . . . (in) weeks rather than months. Dick Cheney on Meet the Press, March 16, 2003 (I apologize for the non-full quotation--I looked for it on line, and could only find this version).

The Bush Administration sold this war as a quick and easy operation.

r huse also said I actually have a very good memory. I remember people like you also saying, with quite a bit of historical justification, that Afghanistan is impossible to occupy given the historical attempts, most recently by the Soviets. Well, that one went reasonably successfully.

That might have been true if we hadn't spread ourselves too thin there by committing so much of our military resources to Iraq.

Perhaps you haven't been following the news from there lately--things are getting worse, and the Taliban is making a comeback.

Anonymous said...

R-Huse's assertion,

"I actually have a very good memory. I remember people like you also saying, with quite a bit of historical justification, that Afghanistan is impossible to occupy given the historical attempts, most recently by the Soviets. Well, that one went reasonably successfully."

is a non-starter. Did we really ever OCCUPY the country? Was our ground-force there not relatively small?

Anonymous said...

RHuse is "tired." He has "moved on."

R Huse said...

Wallace? Is that you? I thought you were walking away? Well welcome back baby! How ya been? Oh, are you doing the insult me in third person thing as a face saver?

>This whole thing started when RHuse charged that "the left" had said "nothing" when Clinton bombed Yugoslavia.

No it didn't, it started when I posted that I didn't think the left would accept the aftermath of a pullout in Iraq should they get the pullout they desire. Your the one who brought it back to this weird thing you have that I didn't respond to some post of yours. Anyway, on to your assertion above:

>RHuse charged that "the left" had said "nothing" when Clinton bombed Yugoslavia


Oh my God, would you give it up. I hate it when people argue a point by being ridiculously obtuse. I said he had used up half our cruise missile inventory with bombings to deflect from impeachment. We used mostly "dumb bombs" in Kosovo. The cruise missiles were used in Iraq, Afghanistan and unless I miss my guess, the Aspirin factory in Sudan. Good Lord, I was not talking solely about Kosovo I was talking about all of Clintons bombing runs and you know it.

>that I referred him to the first time around, he would have known that that is exactly what many on the left DID say

This is silly, and Im getting real bored of it. The left simply did not respond with anywhere near the same intensity. Going on about your list, or talking about me in third person aint gonna change. You know it, I know it, and anyone with any sense knows it. Were there any "No one died when ..." bumper stickers that the left had on their cars? Were the Democrats in congress doing anything substantive to stop Clinton? No, of course they weren't.

You are going to have to come up with something way more substantive than continually referring to some list you posted and being obtuse about Clintons bombing runs to get anywhere on this one.

Here's a hint Wallace, try and argue your point initially without being insulting. I generally try to not be the first to start with the personal invective. You on the other hand, jumped right to it here, and thus you show the power of your argument and your silly little list and whining that I didn't read it.


Ferd

>I'd like to see a citation of that, (Bush saying the war would be long)

Sure, here you go:

"Americans are asking: How will we fight and win this war? We will direct every resource at our command -- every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war -- to the disruption and to the defeat of the global terror network.
This war will not be like the war against Iraq a decade ago, with a decisive liberation of territory and a swift conclusion. It will not look like the air war above Kosovo two years ago, where no ground troops were used and not a single American was lost in combat.

Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. "

President George Bush, Address to Joint Session of Congress and the American People, Sept, 2001

Here is the link - http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html

>Afghanistan - Perhaps you haven't been following the news from there lately--things are getting worse, and the Taliban is making a comeback.

Hey, I didn't say it was perfect in Afghanistan, but we seem to be doing way better there than anyone, myself included, thought at the outset given the history of other nations trying to do any sort of military operation in that country.

Look, the left was right and the right was wrong on the ease of the Iraq war endevour. They left was were wrong on Afghanistan, just as they were wrong on Desert Storm and the right was right. I don't see a big deal with that. You guys have to be right on everything? Come on, that's a little silly don't you think?

R Huse said...

>is a non-starter. Did we really ever OCCUPY the country? Was our ground-force there not relatively small?

No

"Lt. Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, the Joint Staff's Director of Operations, gave the size of the current U.S. presence in Afghanistan during testimony Wednesday before the House Armed Services Committee.

His revelation that there are close to 18,000 U.S. troops involved in Operation Enduring Freedom appeared to surprise some members of the committee - including Rep. John Spratt, a Democrat from South Carolina - who had presumed a considerably smaller presence.

"We have a huge ongoing mission" in Afghanistan, Spratt said. "Yet we've only got 12,000 troops there. . Are we slighting and undersizing, under-resourcing the mission in Afghanistan because of the demands on the mission in Iraq?"

"In point of fact, right at the moment we have about 17,900 U.S. troops in Afghanistan," Schwartz replied. "And that number is adequate for the mission." "

Stars and Stripes, July 09, 2004

I suppose "occupy" is a relative term. To me if you have sufficient force to invade a country, depose the government, install a provisional one and then hold and supervise elections, you occupy that country. Your mileage may vary, but I think the term is perfectly applicable and definitly not a "non starter".

R Huse said...

Sorry, the above was for Anon 1.54

Anonymous said...

Forget it Wallace. It's Miglavia.

Anonymous said...

Rupert said:

Lets go for another record on this one, I think it was 150 responses on the last go round, I love it. Go TEAM!

I respond:

Don't let your ego get ahead of you Rupert. 150 responses does not mean 150 "fans." It just means that a few of us (the usual suspects) had a hell of a good laugh at your expense, and often.

R Huse said...

Um, that's pretty much what I said there. I just need responses from you, my base, for my ends here. Getting to show the unparalleled bigotry of the left, as one of you seemed to catch on to, was a bonus

At any rate, you followed me from there to here, so you sir, are one of the more loyal fans. I thank you!

Maybe I should start some sort of honor roll for the more true blue believers like you out there?

RHuse - The Record Holder

Ok - That's it for now - Rush is starting now so I gotta go listen so I know what to think. That's a freebee for ya! Talk amongst yourselves.

Anonymous said...

the unparalleled bigotry of the left

You mean the left that fought the right's Jim Crow laws in the South that kept African-Americans as second class citizens?

Or maybe the left that has fought for equal rights for those people who happen to be gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered?

Maybe you mean the left that works to have all people treated like human beings, and doesn't classify some people as "illegal"?

Perhaps what you really mean to say is that the lack of bigotry on the left is unparalleled, since there seems to be so much of it on the right.

Anonymous said...

For R-Huse, a person's making fun of anal probes is a form of bigotry to which Daniel's blanket statements suggesting that illegal immigrants are culturally inferior, drug dealing, child rapists cannot hold a candle. Go figure.

Anonymous said...

shouldn't R-Huse's blog be title Commentary from the Orifice, rather than Prcipice?

R Huse said...

Anon 12.34

Sorry, you need to re read my post, I was clearly referring to the unparalleled bigotry of the left as shown on the comments on this blog directed by the left at sexual minorities.

>You mean the left that fought the right's Jim Crow laws in the South that kept African-Americans as second class citizens?

Well, frankly I think that's a good thing. But then again, the left, particularly the Democratic party had a duty to do so, since they instituted most of these policies in the first place. Sorry,, my family is from the South so we think it particularly mirthful when Democrats pull a stunt like, oh, say trying to get the confederate flag removed from the SC capitol building.

"Hey, if you Democrats don't like it, why did you put it there in the first place? Yaaaaahhhh, Haaaaa!"

>Or maybe the left that has fought for equal rights for those people who happen to be gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered?

Wooo, baby, if you believe that one then you really do need to catch up. As one who falls into one of these groups I can tell you, the left, particularly on the comments on this blog has a long way to go on this one.

>Maybe you mean the left that works to have all people treated like human beings, and doesn't classify some people as "illegal"?

Great, you should join us on the right then, we work for much the same thing. If you break the law, you should get treated the same as any other criminal, not as a potential voting block.

>Perhaps what you really mean to say is that the lack of bigotry on the left is unparalleled, since there seems to be so much of it on the right.

Nope, I would say that the sum total of bigotry directed at sexual minorities here, coming virtually exclusively from the left as far as I can tell, far outweighs in number the occasional "wetback" comment I see from the right here.

Anon 1.05

>For R-Huse, a person's making fun of anal probes is a form of bigotry

Nope, for me a person implying sexual minorities are probably pedophiles as well is bigotry. The left does a some of that here, thus showing their true colors. A person who thinks they are entitled to insult sexual minorities simply because of that status is a bigot as well as far as I am concerned. Its pretty much the same as yelling "hey wetback" or "hey fag". The left does a huge amount of that here as well. Don't get me wrong, there is bigotry from the right here as well, just simply not nearly in the same volume as from the left.

Anonymous said...

R-Huse - I guess we'll rehash this again. I really don't care if you like to have sex with Frankenstein. I don't think any of the other lefties here do either. Speaking personally, I'm only making fun of you because you seem to be such an asshole (and besides, talking about the tools on your website is good for some laughs and far more entertaining than the typical fare on danny's political musings).

Is this the mature, proper and upright course of action? Of course not. But come on, the standard for this blog is not high.

Politically, I'm liberal. In actual life, I'm quite vanilla, as you put it. I realize that my poking fun of your life style and inability to understand why someone would want to have sex involving, among other things, piss gags, anal protscopes, ass speculums and electric catheters, stems from a good degree of prejudice. I'll certainly own up to that.

But there's the harboring of prejudice and then there's also acting on that prejudice. You seem unwilling to admit that the more liberal of our two major parties is also the more tolerant towards alternative sexual lifestyles, in its actions. Specifically, one party consistently acts to continuing allowing the law to discriminate against you by forbidding state-recognized homosexual marriage, and its the same party that you seem to align yourself with.

If you can't recognize this plain fact, then you are either blind, or doing so out of a stubborness likely tied to your anger at those of us who are merely getting a few childish laughs out of your occupation, but who could really care less if you desired to marry Frankenstein, adopt children together, and send them to my child's public school. More power to you. I'm at least secure enough with my own sexuality to not be threatened by that.

R Huse said...

Anon 3.10

Um, if you were secure in your own sexuality you wouldn't be making fun of others. But I will give you some props for owning up to your own inability to understand what some people do in their bedrooms stems from prejudice as you say.. Maybe there is hope yet.

As far as whatever party aligns itself with homosexual marriage, give me a break. I frankly am against any state recognition of any marriage at all. I am married by the way. I have no idea why the state is involved in it and nothing would please me more than they state getting out of my marriage. The dirty little secret to most straight people is homosexual marriage is something of a made up issue. It is one of those things that was created to rally the base. The vast majority of homosexuals I know, including myself, most would count me as at least half gay, have no interest in gay marriage. They know that it is being held out as a sop and they know what is really in the hearts of most politicians who wrap themselves up in the issue, its about trying to suck up and get their vote.

Look, if you really want to be seen as genuine you need to act on it. Start treating people with some respect. Don't expect to get a pass on the bigotry issue when you are by your own admission prejudiced against how some people lead their private lives. Try to think a little about how incredibly offensive it would be to assume all Jews, Blacks or Women are either Democrats or they must have some problem. The same applies to sexual minorities. Just like not all Blacks can dance, and not all Women can sew nor all Jews really great in school, no all sexual minorities have the same monolithic political view you seem to think.

You might also stop assuming that all gay people have their sexuality as their voting imperative. For example Democrats are consistently anti small business. A huge percentage of gay people are self employed. Do you think its just maybe possible we vote on other issues than gay marriage? Its not like every queer is sitting around listening to show tunes, or going to lavish musicals, and thinking of nothing but gay marriage you know.

>or doing so out of a stubborness likely tied to your anger at those of us who are merely getting a few childish laughs out of your occupation

Well, I have been a Republican for about 16 years, that's before Al Gore invented the internet so I doubt its from the silly jokes. Frankly I got tired of the libertarians after they nominated Stern so that's when I switched. Ill tell you what though, why don't you go to San Francisco or my home town, NYC, and try running up and down the streets yelling "Hey faggot", after that, try yelling "hey Nigger", after that go to a NOW meeting and introduce yourself "How are all you whores doing out there?" after all that, then try convincing these people that your party is the one composed of people who really have their best interests at heart.

By the way, in the future, you might want to try arguing your point with a little less of the "you're an asshole" stuff as well. That would also be a good first step.

Anonymous said...

Does Rupert's wife know he is an asshole?

Ferd Schnerkele said...

r huse wrote:

President George Bush, Address to Joint Session of Congress and the American People, Sept, 2001

I asked for a citation of Bush saying the Iraq war would last a long time. The citation you gave was about the so-called War on Terrorism.

Do you have a citation of Bush, in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, saying that our troops would be there a long time?

R Huse said...

OK, you were asking for a citation of something I wasn't contending.

Here is the quote from me

"Yes, but lets face it, you were wrong on Afghanistan, wrong about Desert Storm, and wrong about the Surge, which does seem to have had some effect. Sure, you were right in some regards, Iraq wasn't a cake walk, but lets also remember, Bush said quite clearly at the outset this was not going to be quick or easy, it would take years."

It was not my contention that Bush had said effectively

"We are going into Iraq and we are going to be there for years"

Of course he never said anything of the kind.

What he did say, and has been very consistent about was that the war on terror, which would involve actions like the ones we took in Iraq, would take years. That's what I was speaking about as the general thrust of my reply there was about the war on terror, not solely about Iraq. Sorry if that was unclear.

R Huse said...

Anon 7.56

Does your mommy know you are up past bedtime?

Anonymous said...

Rupert's sexual proclivities have little to do with sexuality but quite a lot to do with mentality. What Rupert peddles doesn't even resemble sex or sexuality, it looks more like objectification and degradation of women to me (if they are willing) and/or torture (if they're unwilling). Rupert seems to have little concern that he is very likely a purveyor of instruments of torture to "sexual" predators preying on women and children. Week after week we hear new cases of those who have simply "vanished." He prefers to blithely ignore this disturbing reality in exchange for money.

Anonymous said...

Une fois de plus un magnifiqսe article : j'en discuterɑi
dans la semaine aveϲ mes potes

ʜere is my page; jeune bombasse