News-Record.com

Another thing arrogant liberal elites will do in a situation like this is portray the good guy, the Pope, as the bad guy, meanwhile excusing the actual bad guy, violent Muslims who kill a nun, burn churches, and issue death threats.

As a Catholic, I'm not too thrilled with the Pope bending over backwards with multiple "regrets" in an attempt to appease violent bullies. One explanation of his statement would be sufficient along with upgrading the Popemobile to withstand IEDs.

This situation was summed up beautifully in a politcal cartoon. A Muslim was painting a protest sign that read "Death to all those who say Islam is violent".

As I understand it, the pope was simply quoting a 14th century Christian leader when he spoke the truth about the pedophile Mohamed. Seems they were wise to this 'religion of peace' way back when.

Roberts is simply parroting what the left wants to hear.

It is in vogue with the liberals to admonish anyone who speaks the truth about the radical Muslims nowadays as they are the enemy of Bush ... and 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'.

I posted this light hearted humorous email from a buddy in one of yesterday's LTEs, but it fits better here. Everyone have a good day, I'm leaving for Charlotte to see the Panthers Saints game. DD, maybe you can find my identity at the game. Hint: I'll be with my wife.

Subject: Illegal Immigration Flood
From: Manitoba Herald, Manitoba, CANADA

The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The actions of President Bush are prompting an exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, and agree with Bill O'Reilly.

Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night.

"I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota. The producer was cold, exhausted and
hungry. "He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. When I said I didn't have any, he left. Didn't even get a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?"

In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences,but the liberals scaled them. So he tried installing speakers that blare Rush Limbaugh across the fields. "Not real effective," he said. "The liberals still got through, and Rush annoyed the cows so much they wouldn't give milk."

Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border, pack them into Volvo station wagons, drive them across the border and leave them to fend for themselves. "A lot of these people are not prepared for rugged conditions," an Ontario border patrolman said. "I found one carload without a drop of drinking water.

"They did have a nice little Napa Valley Cabernet, though."

When liberals are caught, they're sent back across the border, often wailing loudly that they fear retribution from conservatives. Rumors have been circulating about the Bush administration establishing re-education camps in which liberals will be forced to drink domestic beer and watch NASCAR races.

In recent days, liberals have turned to sometimes-ingenious ways of crossing the border. Some have taken to posing as senior citizens on bus trips to buy cheap Canadian prescription drugs. After catching a half-dozen young vegans disguised in powdered wigs, Canadian immigration authorities began stopping buses and quizzing the supposed senior-citizen passengers on Perry Como and Rosemary Clooney hits to prove they were alive in the '50s. "If they can't identify the accordion player on The Lawrence Welk Show, we get suspicious about their age," an official said.

Canadian citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are creating an organic broccoli shortage and renting all the good Susan Sarandon movies. "I feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them," an Ottawa resident said. "How many art history majors does one country need?"

In an effort to ease tensions between the United States and Canada, Vice President Dick Cheney met with the Canadian ambassador and pledged that the administration would take steps to reassure liberals, a source close to Cheney said. We're going to have some Peter, Paul & Mary concerts. We'll give tax breaks for the construction of more Starbucks and Birkenstock stores. And we might even put some endangered species on
postage stamps.

"The President is determined to reach out," he said.

Dan - in case you're not still following this earlier thread:

http://blog.news-record.com/staff/letters/archives/2006/09/only_one_party.html#comments

I followed your link to Mohamed Atta al-Sayed.

I'm sure I speak for Carol when I say he's one of the bad guys - but funny, there is no mention of the work IRAQ in that link - 'cept "there was no factual basis behind the report that Mr. Atta met an Iraqi diplomat."

No-one is doubting the few thousand original al Qaeda members as 100% sworn enemies of American Policy .. what we're asking is what the heck are we doing in Iraq. Who are the enemies there that are not New Converts?

At this point we must stay for a while - you're so good at decrying "cut and run" (which no one os calling for, btw) ... Are you in support of sending more troups in - as the Generals have been asking for, as I've never read you advocate, and as Willy Kristol has FINALLY come out for?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/11/AR2006091100879.html

... and as much as I despise Kristol - he was a key reason we got into this mess .. he's correct on this - we need more boots. But to follow that urging, the Prez would have to admit he & rummy were "wrong" - so it at least won't happen until after the November moid Term elections, since the Prez' insists things are going so well.

How much longer are you gonna let these people muck it up before you do more than parrot your pal Hannity .. who has the hots for your wife, btw.

P.S. - that last part was just to incite a response.

Here's my Kristol Ball:

- There will be nothing but continuted BS from the Whitehouse.
- The Repubulicans will do very well in the Nov' Elections - not a run-away, a little ground lost - but much better than many expect.
- Things will continue to deteroriate in Iraq.
- There will be another 9-11 style attack on US soil, not from al Qaeda (cause they're pretty much a has-been at this point), but from one of the Copy Cat Gangs, ala Madrid & London.
- Those last two will combine - and there will be a call for more military intervention. The last one will again swell the ranks with new recruits. The ongoing lack of military hardware will make harder to deploy them, but we'll never hear of that detail.
- It will get much uglier before it gets better.
- The Repubulicans will say "we told you this was a real threat - you better not vote for liberals, 'cause all they want to do is cut and run.

I swear the more I type the more 1984'ish it gets - one party rule in the time of neverending war.

JDR,
Dan and neoCON cannot even look at things that run contrary to their concreted positions. That is really what separates those types from free thinkers and/or liberals. Can't wait to hear them defending the Republican leadership for supporting the abhorrent sexual behavior of Congressman Foley of Florida. Let's see how fast they blame the Page and Democrats for the Republican leadership's inability to act morally. If it weren't so sad, it would be laughable.

Until the Pope begins elevating women to leadership positions within the church---ie. The Priesthood, and acknowledges the widespread pedophillia problem within the ranks of the church, he will remain an outdated living icon of a once powerful religion. He is NO closer to God than any human walking the earth today, but he is the leader of a worldwide real estate conglomerate called the Catholic church.

Dan,
You should listen to JDR sometime as it will do you good. You don't have to agree, but take a breath and digest WHAT he's saying. The White House is going to do a reversal after the mid terms by telling us all how things are NOT going well in Iraq. Hopefully, Congress will be changing control so that we don't have to see the President get his EVERY whim. But it's not about being Democrat or Republican----it is about being an American. If you'd get off the FOXNews teat and listen to NPR or the BBC, you might see things are not always the way Brit Hume & Hannity tell you they are. As you've noted, I watch FOXNews, but I also listen to NPR. I listen to Rush Limbaugh, but I also watch Keith Olbermann's Countdown. Most conservatives cannot watch anything that might threaten their myopic view of the world, therefore keeping them tethered to the Roger Ailes IV drip. Start thinking outside your little microcosm and see that the world is a very large place. Put yourself in someone else's shoes the next time you count your own blessings. One of the folks who posts regularly on here, refers to ANYTHING contrary to his opinion as "straight from the Democratic playbook" or "scripted by the DNC". WHY? Obviously because the person cannot debate the substance of the issues. Dan, you wouldn't listen to me if Jesus told you to, but please, for your own growth, read and watch things that run counter to your (some would say brainwashed) heretofore held opinions.
Godspeed!

JDR & DD, you guys are so stuck on your talking points that you parrot each other and go into Iraq. One and the same except JDR can find more websites and DD can insult better. Other than that, one in the same.

Any LTE: bring up Iraq even if it has nothing to do with the subject. This one boys happens to deal with the Pope and his comments on Islam from someone who died 600 years ago, not Iraq.

Try to stay on subject and make it more interesting. DD even brings up Foley!! Do the Pope and Foley know each other?

DD has always been predictable, you are gettin the same way JDR. Alas.

Oh well, at least I got to see the Panthers eek out a win today.

Dan .. I don't disagree, but consider this.

Were it not for Iraq, whatever the Pope said would probably have been a non-event.

and ps .. I moved that as a continuation of another related thread - where you were questioning my ability to know whom the enemy was.

btw - here's the [just released] suicide video for the agreed enemy

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2382919,00.html

and the story behind the story.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2382788,00.html

JDR, glad we agree on an enemy. For most on the left Bush is the greater enemy than militant Islam hands down.

Are you trying to tell me that there was no violence in the Islamic world worth a Pope speaking about prior to the US invasion of Iraq? If so, I'm offering you the same swamp land that StevieD was considering.

What the Pope said is true. Whether he should have said it or not is debatable if one wants to avoid trouble. Frankly I wish more people would call a spade a spade. Not only the PC police, but fear of one's life prevent the truth from being spoken.

Just try to avoid DD tactics and stay somewhat on the subject matter. The topic is the Pope's comments on Islam and DD brings up the sexual yearings of a sick congressman from Florida. Any relevance between the two?

Reminds me of the guy who continually shoots a shotgun into the air for months at a time and hopes at some point a duck will fall from the sky.

Panthers won, saw it, not too pretty, but a win is a win. Staying in Charlotte for business a few days, will chat with you soon.

sexual yearnings

"Are you trying to tell me that there was no violence in the Islamic world worth a Pope speaking about prior to the US invasion of Iraq?"

No ... I'm saying - without proof - that if we had stayed on task, getting Osama and agressively eliminating Radical Fundamental Islamists, few would have heard or less would have gotten so upset about the Pope speaking the truth.

I'll add - also without proof - that if we had stayed on task, getting Osama and agressively eliminating Radical Fundamental Islamists, we'd be a lot further down the road ... maybe even "done".

Are you trying to tell me that the original Whitehouse plan was to have a war that drug on into 2004 election, let alone the 2006 midterm and 2008 general elections? We both know that answer.

.. and that's really all I ever say on this topic:

Going into Iraq was a side-track from the important job: aggressively eliminating Radical Fundamental Islamists, and it has cause incredible and long term problems - so why should we support the folks that - more than allowed it - deliberately forced it?

If your car needed a radiator repair, and halfway through the job the shop decided to rebuild the transmission - would you take you car back there again?

... so now your sitting in the rental car, and Hannity keeps repeating "If your Radiator needs repaired, make sure you get your automatic transmission rebuilt while it's in the shop."

NPR is airing a story about the mechanics of automobiles, explaining the total lack of conected function between the radiator and the transmission.

O'Really states, just his opinion, that the radiator provides cooling for the transmission.

CNN does a special on the rare automobile that does have a separate oil radiator for the transmission, noting the cars most of us drive do not have this special part.

Hannity says ... but most cars SHOULD have this special part.

The Pope and says - long ago, most repair shops didn't know a radiator from a transmission.

Osama's followers are part of the Union of Automobile Mechanics, and get upset at the Pope.

Dan,
I am still rolling in the floor over your attempted use of humor to make a point!! The shooting of the gun in the air reminds me of your REAL hero who keeps saying the same things, expecting a different result!

Love how you play Mr. Sanctimonious and then when the arrow points at you, it is a different story.
Love how you disparage the Quakers, but defend the religion that covers up pedophillia and relegates women to second class citizens.

Love how you attack, then retreat only to demonize me because you have no comeback.

Love how you try to use me as your "excuse" for not being able to answer the questions from JDR.

Dan, you are just a victim, plain and simple. It is not your fault. It is the liberal left, JDR, me and others who are to blame for your inability to put together a cogent argument.

Demon Deacon,

I think you underestimate Republicans with your comments regarding their reactions to Foley in Florida. Most people who lean to the right, including myself, find Foley's actions to be downright despicable. In the future, you will see, that his replacement in the election will lose. Not because of lost democrat voters but because of lost Republican voters. Heck, if he lied to a grand jury about it, I'd even vote to impeach him. But it wouldn't matter. Because, even a disgusting manipulator like Foley has the good sense or shame to resign after he was exposed. Contrast that to Bill Clinton who would probably draw the highest democrat voter turn out in years if he was able to run for President in '08.

And that, my friend, says a lot about your party and you.

Here's a relevant link to a similar situation 20 years ago:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/02/greenfield.foley/index.html

"Contrast that to Bill Clinton"

To imply that these two situations are congruous is stretching a bit, don't you think?

"To imply that these two situations are congruous is stretching a bit, don't you think?"

http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/editorial/documents/02919063.htm

Check this link out. It basically states that it has been pretty much known that Foley was gay for a LONG time. Given the history in this link, these charges against him aren't nearly that explosive.

I don't think it's that much of a stretch to link the two together and I'm betting I'm not the only one.

Clinton was/is a womanizer. He had a record of it that was pretty easy to track. He messed around in a consensual relationship with an intern and got caught. Because he's a politician, his indiscretion exploded across the country. Although consensual, there's all those elements of sexual harrassment to consider. However, it wasn't Monica who wanted to make a big deal of it. She just wanted it to go away.

A lot of the same with Foley. His emails to pages seemed consensual and kind of in line with his reputation. Finally, he's caught red-handed like Clinton, and now subject to as much embarrassment as possible.

Sure, Clinton actually had sex with Monica and Foley has only been found guilty of emails, but the two situations don't seem that far from each other in my opinion.

Both exhibited unprofessional conduct for their office and deserve the political fall-out they receive.

What is really ironic to me, Denz, is that Foley actually voted to impeach Clinton.

I know this is really long but I think it is just too informative about Foley to leave as a link. Sorry for those interested in continuing another discussion as to why Rosemary Roberts sucks. As you can see, the editorial is a little dated, but very poignant.

Being gay in the GOP
Congressman Mark Foley: A model of political hypocrisy and personal cowardice

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN Mark Foley of Florida thinks it’s "revolting and unforgivable" that people are openly speculating that he is gay. Revolting? Unforgivable? Is Foley serious? What’s revolting about being thought gay? What’s unforgivable about asking the question?

The five-term congressman should familiarize himself with the cool-straight-guy response to such speculation: thank the questioner for the flattery but then own up to heterosexual misdeeds like bad haircuts and mismatched clothing. Did Foley miss Ben Affleck’s elegant handling of persistent gay rumors? "I’m not stylish enough to be gay," Affleck said. "I have trouble trying to pick out which shoes go with which pants."

But then, that would only work if the 48-year-old congressman were heterosexual. Which he is not. Foley is gay. It’s one of those open secrets that’s more open than secret. It first came up during his initial run for Congress in 1994. A right-wing opponent in the GOP primary sent out a mailing saying that Foley was gay. Foley answered the accusation — and in this context, it was an accusation — by telling the media: "I like women."

Two years later, after Foley voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the Advocate outed him along with another closeted lawmaker, Congressman Jim Kolbe, who’d voted in favor of the anti-gay measure. Of Foley, Advocate reporter J. Jennings Moss wrote: "In interviews for this story, several people close to the 41-year-old from West Palm Beach described him as a gay man, although one also said he dated women." The magazine also spoke with former Navy lieutenant Tracy Thorne, who came out on national television during the gays-in-the-military debate. Thorne knew Foley because Thorne’s father was one of Foley’s staunchest supporters, dating back to Foley’s time in the Florida state legislature. Thorne matter-of-factly told the Advocate: "Mark Foley has spent his entire life in the closet."

Kolbe came out after being interviewed by the Advocate. But Foley declared the topic of his sexuality off-limits to the magazine and the public: "Frankly, I don’t think what kind of personal relationships I have in my private life is of any relevance to anyone else."

More recently, the question of Foley’s sexuality has been raised in his campaign for the Senate seat currently held by Democrat Bob Graham. Many political observers think Foley, who is popular with voters and campaign contributors alike, has an excellent chance to win the Democratic seat. His only weakness? Notwithstanding his vote in favor of DOMA, Foley is one of the most pro-gay Republicans in Congress. He has a long, consistent record of supporting gay issues like domestic-partnership benefits, anti-discrimination legislation, and AIDS funding. His office maintains a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. GOP strategists worry that this will make Foley vulnerable in the primary — so much so, in fact, that White House strategist Karl Rove tried to convince US housing secretary Mel Martinez to run for the seat.

Three weeks ago, New Times columnist Bob Norman described all the talk about Foley’s pro-gay voting record without mention of Foley’s homosexuality as the "giant, pink elephant in the room." He wrote: "Foley, the nine-year conservative Republican U.S. representative out of Lake Worth, is gay. That is no revelation to political and media types. Everyone knows it, though no newspaper outside the gay press has ever really touched the issue."

Shortly after Norman’s column appeared, the Washington Blade, a Washington, DC–based paper that covers gay issues, followed up the story. Sensing the beginnings of a media frenzy, Foley called a press conference last week to address the rumors. "I believe everyone’s talking about it," Foley said, according to the Miami Herald. "This is a proactive attempt to talk with you all relative to the chatter that’s going on behind the scenes."

That’s when Foley said the speculation about his sexuality was "revolting and unforgivable." Here’s what’s revolting and unforgivable: Mark Foley’s calculated political decision to refuse to discuss his homosexuality in order to better present himself to the hateful right-wingers who dominate GOP politics. Here’s what’s revolting and unforgivable: Mark Foley’s silence about his homosexuality even as US Senator Rick Santorum, the third-ranking senator in the GOP, has compared homosexuality to incest and bestiality. Here’s what’s revolting and unforgivable: Mark Foley’s description of speculation about his sexuality as "revolting and unforgivable" in order to make himself palatable to voters from the only state in the nation that bans gay and lesbian people like Mark Foley from adopting children.

Throughout his career, Foley has straddled the public-figure/private-life line. When the Advocate came calling in 1996, Foley said, "I know one thing for certain: when I travel around the district every weekend, the people who attend my town meetings and stop me on the street corner certainly are a lot more concerned with issues like how I voted on welfare reform or whether or not Medicare is going to be there when they need it — not the details of whom I choose to have a relationship with."

He took a similar line with reporters during his bizarre press conference last week: "Zero in on my track record and my ability to do the job I am seeking to do."

Foley’s desire to see politicians judged by their job performance was noticeably absent in 1998, though, when he voted in favor of two of the four articles of impeachment brought against then-president Bill Clinton. Foley’s desire to see private lives kept private is noticeably absent today as he strongly backs Attorney General John Ashcroft’s assault on civil liberties and freedoms under the guise of fighting terrorism.

Foley told reporters last week, "My mother and father raised me and the rest of my family to believe that there are certain things we shouldn’t discuss in public. Some of you may believe that it’s old-fashioned, but I believe those are good ideals to live by." So it’s "good ideals" to deny the basic dignity of your life by refusing to talk about your family? It’s "good ideals" to encourage people to think you are something that you are not?

If the Foley flap continues, some will say that he should come out in order to be a role model to younger gay men and lesbians. Please. Foley is no role model, unless he’s modeling political hypocrisy and personal cowardice. Others will say that the decision to come out is a personal one and Foley shouldn’t be forced into doing something he’s clearly not ready to do. Right. Foley is comfortable enough with his homosexuality to be out to every political insider in Florida even as he remains "closeted" with the public. Why he thinks he can still play this game with the public and get away with it is a mystery.

There is nothing shameful in being gay or lesbian. That Mark Foley thinks there is, and that he can exploit this by bullying reporters who ask him legitimate questions about his sexuality, is revolting. And unforgivable.

Nitpicker,
Here's what former REPUBLICAN Congressman Joe Scarborough had to say about Mark Foley and the GOP:

Where was the Republican leadership over the past year? They knew of Mark’s inappropriate e-mails to a former page but never informed Democratic leaders so they could warn those pages they had brought to Washington.

How could the Speaker of the House not remember being told by the Chairman of the Republican Congressional Committee that Foley had been confronted with his inappropriate emails to a male intern? Does this happen so often in Congress that it was no big deal to Denny Hastert?

Why did Republicans allow Mark Foley to continue as chairman of the Committee on Missing and Exploited Children?

Why did they let him lead the charge on their bill to stop the exploitation of minors on the Internet?

And who was hiding these explosive instant messages over the past year?

Someone buried these IM’s despite the fact they allegedly showed a congressman trying to meet up to have sex with a teenage boy. The fact this person held on to them until one month before the election makes it obvious that the intent was to inflict maximum damage on Mark Foley and the Republican Party.

Why did this person (or people) withhold criminal evidence from the FBI?

Should they also be arrested for obstructing a federal investigation and preventing congressional leaders from taking steps to protect other high school pages?

Regarding political maneuvering, I would suggest that Democrats remember Napoleon’s advice that one should never interfere when your enemy is destroying himself. Dems should keep quiet so not to open themselves up to charges of hypocrisy. After all, their party did little when one of their colleagues had a homosexual affair with a 17 year old intern—engaging in sex with the teen in his Georgetown apartment and then taking him to Portugal to carry on the illicit affair. The disgraced representative remained in Congress for another decade and was never stripped of anything other than his clothes by the teenage boy.

Maybe we will find out that Mark Foley also had sex with teenage boys.

But for now, Foley’s e-mails and IM’s are disgusting enough. And even though there is enough sleaze to fill buckets on both sides of the political aisle, it is the Republican Party of Foley, Abramoff, Cunningham, Ney and DeLay that will be on the ballot next month. That is bad news for Mark Foley’s party and bad news for the President, who can ill afford to lose the House or Senate this fall.

GOTTA LOVE IT WHEN A REPUBLICAN WILL BREAK RANKS AND CALL A SPADE A SPADE! Something most of the Bush "apologists" who post here would NEVER think to do.

DD, get your head out of your arse please. The LTE is about the Pope, and you switch to Foley. Why? Probably to find any reason to bash Republicans. Do they know each other? What does Foley have to do with statements from a pope about Islam? Can you provide a "cogent" answer?

That is one of your tactics, bait and switch. I can see through it.

If you want to talk about Foley, write a LTE and we will comment on it. As for what the guy did it was despicable and I'm glad he resigned even if a D gets his seat. As for what certain priests did in the Catholic Church molesting boys that's despicable too and they should be excommunicated and thrown in jail. BTW child molestation by church leaders isn't exclusive to Catholicism and it doesn't represent an entire faith, just as terrorists do not represent the entire Muslim faith. Can't have it both ways.

Sorry DD, I'm not a victim and don't subscribe to the victim mentality that is so prevalent on the left. It is you who cannot bring up a cogent argument, hence you have to bring up Foley in a LTE about the Pope and Islam.

DD,

I'm sure any allegations about who knew what will be hashed out ad nauseum in the weeks to come. This issue will not die until election day and then, I'm guessing, we won't hear much more about it. Cause, quite frankly, there are a bunch of scumbags in politics and they tend to protect their own (even after crucifying each other for political position).

Just look at the black congressman who had money taped inside his freezer. Heard much about that lately?

Hastert wouldn't let the feds in that guys office, and he was a Dem! Guess he was afraid they might find he had given him some cash! I wish we could make examples of them all beginning today!
I do love the fact that Foley voted to impeach President Clinton because he lied about getting hummed by an unattractive young woman.

"THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT IS NEITHER" certainly holds true in most cases.