cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
schnurrbart
Frequent Contributor

Re: Settle down, TIger

I am sure that you are the only one except maybe oilcan who didn't take that as the joke it was.  You rightwingers talk hatred and ridicule far more than any of the liberals do to you.  We liberals are talked about as being lost, ignorant, welfare moms etc etc.  Your heros, palin and beck et al, talk about putting people in the crosshairs and telling people to not retreat, reload!  Then you try to say this confused, mentally ill person is just a sicko and his political views had nothing to do with the shooting.  Well, I strongly disagree.  I think his illness would not let him associate talk like that with just talk and he took it seriously and decided that he could stop it with bullets.  Yes, he is sick and will probably be just like John Hinckley and be locked away as criminally insane.  But the violent talk going on now is what set him off.

Milligan Hay - Iowa d:^)
Veteran Advisor

Re: Alec Baldwin, 16 December 1998


@schnurrbart wrote:

I am sure that you are the only one except maybe oilcan who didn't take that as the joke it was.  You rightwingers talk hatred and ridicule far more than any of the liberals do to you.  We liberals are talked about as being lost, ignorant, welfare moms etc etc.  Your heros, palin and beck et al, talk about putting people in the crosshairs and telling people to not retreat, reload!  Then you try to say this confused, mentally ill person is just a sicko and his political views had nothing to do with the shooting.  Well, I strongly disagree.  I think his illness would not let him associate talk like that with just talk and he took it seriously and decided that he could stop it with bullets.  Yes, he is sick and will probably be just like John Hinckley and be locked away as criminally insane.  But the violent talk going on now is what set him off.


 

<script type="text/javascript">// GA_googleFillSlot("WND_COL-JF_C0100"); // </script> <script src="http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/ads?correlator=1294705331125&output=json_html&callback=GA_goo..."></script>



between the linesJoseph Farah



Alec Baldwin and Bill Clinton


Posted: December 16, 1998
1:00 am Eastern

By Joseph Farah
© 2010 WorldNetDaily.com

 

People are surprised that a supporter of President Clinton would suggest -- no, urge -- that House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde be stoned to death and his family killed.

That's what actor Alec Baldwin reportedly said on a recent airing of "Late Night with Conan O'Brien."

"If we were living in another country, what we, all of us together, would go down to Washington and stone Henry Hyde to death, stone him to death, stone him to death!" said Baldwin. "Then we would go to their house and we'd kill the family, kill the children."

People are shocked by the comment -- understandably so. But, as repulsive, inexcusable and hateful as it is, this comment is not really out of character with this administration or its defenders.

Remember James Carville? He's told us over and over again that "This is war." He also suggested that Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr should be knee-capped.

Some people laugh this stuff off, as Conan O'Brien's studio audience apparently did. But Hyde is not laughing.

"I heard about it, and I'm sickened by it," he said. No wonder. Hyde has been the recipient of a series of death threats ever since he became the point man in the effort to impeach Clinton. He is under constant armed guard. "You have someone like that, talking in those terms, about killing your family? To kill my family because you disagree with me? To laugh about that? There are people out there, sick people, who are just waiting for a push. Excuse me for not laughing. He wants my family stoned to death by a mob. Imagine if a Republican said such a thing. I don't find the humor in it."

But why should any of us really be surprised by such a verbal assault from an apologist for the Clinton administration? This White House's hallmark has been force, intimidation and threat. It fights dirty and it plays for keeps.

I would rather take my chances in mano a mano combat with Alec Baldwin than be put through the wringer of a politically motivated Internal Revenue Service audit. Isn't it ironic that not once during the impeachment hearings did anyone mention the fact that Paula Jones was audited within days of turning down a settlement offer from the White House? And she's hardly alone. Dozens of political enemies of the White House have been so victimized.

The Clintons have been shrouded by mysterious deaths before they ever moved into the White House. Since then, they've been surrounded a rash of "suicides," professional hits and unexplained terminations. The administration can chalk it all up to coincidence, but the Clintons also revel in the fact that they are feared on Capitol Hill because of the doubts about Vincent Foster, Ron Brown, Jerry Luther Parks, Kathy Ferguson, Bill Shelton and others who have met an untimely demise that proved politically convenient and expedient to Clinton.

Is it any wonder, then, that a defender of this administration would resort -- even in faux humor -- to death threats?

No, it isn't. It's impossible for an ordinary rational mind to comprehend the depravity to which one needs to descend to defend the indefensible. We witnessed that in the hearings last week. You can't exchange opinions with Maxine Waters. You can't have dialogue with Barney Frank -- at least not and stay dry. You can't have a meeting of the minds with a rabid, committed socialist such as John Conyers. And, likewise, it's too much to expect decency, civility and respect for the rule of law from a know-nothing dilettante like Alec Baldwin.

Some insight into his character, morality and priorities was offered in a column yesterday by John Kass of the Chicago Tribune.

Last August, Kass writes, Baldwin threw a Hollywood fund-raiser for Clinton. But he almost called it off at the last minute. Why? He learned that the White House organizers were preparing foie gras.

An angry Baldwin called up the Democratic National Committee bigwigs demanding that this outrage be stopped. You see, to make foie gras, geese are force-fed to enlarge their livers. The Baldwins are animal rights wackos. Making geese eat too much is bad. Stoning politicians you disagree with and advocating the killing of their families is good. Get it? Any questions?

It all makes sense in a peculiar, twisted kind of way, doesn't it?

 

dagwud
Senior Contributor

Re: Response to Tim Pawlenty "Stealing Public Employee Pensions"

Don said, 

I don't answer your question because I don't think they are worthy of response. Why is that? Because generally you want to start your premise with stipulations that I cannot agree with.

 

So, I choose not to waste my energy in trying to convince you of anything. Why? Because you have already determined than I am a hypocrite and you have repeatedly expressed that. Why I talk to you at all is a wonder.

 

You are greatly troubled by a contrary opinion and you cannot abide someone thinking differently than you. Thus the hostility makes it a bit difficult to rise from my weary state and once again try to explain myself.

 

Thus the answer is that you can ask anything you want but you may not get an answer. And if you do, you may not like it

 

I hope I've made it plain. You are not alone. There are others I rarely read and some I never respond to. You aren't quite to the level yet but you are headed there.

I am not alone for recognizing your repeated hypocritical views and stances here Don.  If my pointing out your hypocritcal stand on something represents hostility towards you then you sure appear to be awfully thinned skin for one that loves to dish it out.  To be honest you respond to me all the time and often for no other reason but just to get a barb in even if I have said nothing controversial or  that should upset you as when I recently said I believed we would be better off if we did away with the two party system and have everyone be an Independent and vote based on the merit of a proposal as opposed to being forced to vote the party line.

So once again you are dishonest and hypocritical as you will quite often engage me in conversation when you feel the need to complain or attack me.  You just don't like it when questions are poised to you that will make it hard for you to squirm around the truth so you instead make up excuses why you choose not to answer. 

Since I have been posting here there are numerous issues that I have been swayed on and now at look at in a different light and in some case I have changed my mind completely.  I love to hear contrary opinion and good debate even if it is one that I don't agree with.  That is why I will watch MSNBC at times or Air America while it was still on the air.  In reality if there is one here that is "greatly troubled by a contrary opinion and you cannot abide someone thinking differently than you" it is the one looking back at you in the mirror every morning.  The more I learn about you and more I talk to people from you home town the more that fact becomes quite clear.   

 

kraft-t
Senior Advisor

Re: Response to Tim Pawlenty "Stealing Public Employee Pensions"

Oh that's it. I'm scared to death of you and your brilliant mind. I cannot debate with Dag because he is just a champion debater. I best pull my horns in and quietly leave the scene!

 

Have you ever tried to discuss with ollie? Then you know what I am up against. I have never called you a hypocrite, not once. I don't pretend to be an independent. I'm a democrat. Why should I ever make your argument for you? To talk about a teacher that cannot be fired because he is a union member. Then you finally admit that the evidence wasn't enough to get him arrested or charged. Which means you had him pronounced guilty before you had compelling evidence. This is just one example where you stipulated that some democrat is guilty when you don't even have the facvts. Just so,meone elses version of the "facts".

 

You expect me to agree with nonsense and then call me hypocritical if I don't. You claim that you wouldn't be afraid to call me a hypocrite to my face because you are some tough little nut. BUT THEN you don't even have the courage to use your real name. My god! I need to fear a pipsqueek like you?

 

Now your talking to me about people downgrading me in my home town. OOOOO That is apowerful argument. Scares me spitless. Sorry nameless coward! I am not afraid of you ands I certainly don't respect you. NOTE: I have not yet called you a hypocrite. Not yet..

tomtoolbag
Veteran Advisor

Re: Response to Tim Pawlenty "Stealing Public Employee Pensions"

  I like that where ever you got the UAW info, that it implies that those people make almost as much in bene's as wages, when GM hadn't even paid the majority of pensions and that's where their debt came from. I'll dig up an article that analyzed the actual wages and call a couple of friends that retired from GM in Wisconsin, and I know some people that work at Chrysler also, and find out from the source what they make total.

 

  You must not know it but I chose to become a union (signatory) contractor for the simple fact that an opportunity came my way and I had to act fast in terms of employees. As I had a lot of experience with union construction labor from former positions of job super/project manager, I chose that route because of the circumstances at the time and haven't regretted it one bit.

 

  The whole teacher hype is just that. Out of roughly 16 different public school districts nearby, strangely there hasn't been one of those lawsuits for $219,500, and practically all of them have at least a 12 month probationary period, some have an 18 month, and a few have even 24 months. But, whenever there's a budget crunch, almost all of those districts shed teachers and move administrators horizontally and some even get a promotion or increase in pay. But not a one of those schools would even consider the idea of cutting any sports programs either. One district has had some success in letting the teachers have more control over the curriculum versus the administrators.

  Personally, I think and others do too, that they should be paid well otherwise they will just change professions. Not only that, but there's that whole money multiplier effect within the community also in regards to their wages. But none of those schools around us are having to consolidate either because their budgets have been starved of revenue.

  You would really complain about how much my wife makes and the cost of tuition at her school, but they also have a 100% acceptance rate to private and public 4 year colleges of their graduates too.

dagwud
Senior Contributor

Re: Response to Tim Pawlenty "Stealing Public Employee Pensions"

No Don I don't think I'm any great debater.  I do try to answer any questions and appreciate it when others do as well as it helps to get a better understanding on where people are coming from in a debate.  Often I have a hard time figuring you out as you often seem to have two sets of rules when it comes to politics.  One for Dems and one for Repubs.

 

As far as the teacher in question the school board would liked to have gotten rid of him for some time long before the complaints about touching and looking down blouses started showing up.  I have several friends that have served on the  board over the years and they said they had received lots of complaints from parents and pupils over the years on his teaching skill or lack there of.   I'm guessing having the school's dismal rating for its math program listed in the Des Moines Register, the state's largest newspaper also helped play a roll in the board's wanting to get rid of this teacher.   The "facts" must have been serious enough for the school administration as they put the teacher on leave and would not allow him to teach his classes the last two months of the school year.  I forgot in your mind Don everyone except a Repub is guilty or wrong doing only when they have been formally charged and found guilty in court.

 

By the way I have no idea if the teacher in question is a Dem or Repub.   I don't assume all teachers in the union are Dem since a couple I know personally are Repubs. 

 

Tom,  the UAW wages and benefits I listed came from the Indianapolis Star which I came across doing a Google search.  I believe I wrote in my post "assuming these wages are correct" since I had no way to verify and could not really consider the Star as an official authority on such matters. 

 

On the teachers I agree it is much easier to get rid of a newer teacher as opposed to one that has been there for many years. 

 

I have spoken to a couple school board members and all replied that it is not easy getting rid of a teacher especially if it is not on account of budget cuts or declining enrollment.  In short it is hard to fire an established teacher simply for being a poor teacher and many folks are just now admitting this including our POTUS.  

 

A couple of years ago our local school terminated one of its principals that had a history of personality conflicts with other school employees as well as with the general public.   I had a friend who received a royal butt chewing from this principal for "going above the principal's head" and asking the superintendent for permission to use the gym for a public fuction after the principle had refused.  For many years the school had always agreed to let the gym be used for this fuction but the pricipal who was fairly new at the decided no at that it was his decision since the gym in question was located in his building.  When terminated at the end of the school year the principal had another year left on their contract and took the school to court.  I believe there ended up being three seperate trials with some ending in favor of the teacher and some in favor of the school.  It ended up being decided by the state supreme court which decided in favor of the school which had argued that they terminated the principal because of declining enrollment. 

 

I for one thought it would have been wiser and less expensive to simply wait one more year and then not reknew the principle's contract.

 

I agree Tom that teachers should get paid better and especially if they are gifted teachers.  

schnurrbart
Frequent Contributor

Re: Alec Baldwin, 16 December 1998

What's your point?  You've been saying along with all the other rightwingnuts that political violence talk didn't cause this and now it appears that you are saying that baldwin did the same thing.  Which is it craigo?

Milligan Hay - Iowa d:^)
Veteran Advisor

Re: Alec Baldwin, 16 December 1998


@schnurrbart wrote:

What's your point?  You've been saying along with all the other rightwingnuts that political violence talk didn't cause this and now it appears that you are saying that baldwin did the same thing.  Which is it craigo?


Alec Baldwin did not play around with cartoon bullseyes on a website.....No, .... he appeared on National Television, encouraging the population to rise up and go to Congressman Henry Hyde's personal home, and to take stones and kill every man. woman and CHILD in that home.....yup, no biggie at all, just normal democrat talk, move along, nothing to even worry about.

tomexrepub
Senior Contributor

Re: Alec Baldwin, 16 December 1998

I find it humorous that craig has to go back 12 YEARS for a possible example of what the right has been spewing 24/7 for the last 2 years.   All one has to do is listen to rush for 1 of his 3 hours and would be able to hear 1/2 dozen examples of vile hatred.   

dagwud
Senior Contributor

Re: Alec Baldwin, 16 December 1998

"I find it humorous that craig has to go back 12 YEARS for a possible example of what the right has been spewing 24/7 for the last 2 years.   All one has to do is listen to rush for 1 of his 3 hours and would be able to hear 1/2 dozen examples of vile hatred."

 

But Tom you still have to admit that the left does this same type of crap that you guys are complaining about the right doing.  I agree that Repubs are currently worse at it but its kind of like condemning driving drunk as bad and stating that I'm not part of the problem cause I only rarely drive drunk.   I contend the party out of power tends to be more guilty of this hate type speech plus Repubs seem to be able dominate the radio shows with people like Rush and Beck which also gives them far more opportunity to act out in this fashion.

 

I also believe the race card has been way over used by Dems.  I'll bet that even if Dems had a white as president you would still be hearing the same kind of language being used by Palin, Rush, Beck and others.