JOKES ABOUT LIBERALS

I’ll know you’ll want to start filling up your catalog before Thanksgiving, so here are some bad jokes about liberals.

Q: Did you hear that Mary Mapes discovered that Santa Claus is real? She’s got the letters to prove it!

Q: What’s the difference between a puppy and a liberal?
A: Puppies stop whinning after they grow up.

Q: What do you get when you cross Bea Arther and a Raggedy Ann doll?
A: Maureen Dowd.

Q: Why do liberals and Rubix Cubes have in common?
A: The more you try to figure them out, the more confusing they get.

Posted by admin on November 14th, 2005 in Articles |

84 Responses to “JOKES ABOUT LIBERALS”

stayhuman Says: January 6th, 2006 at 4:47 am

Of course the best republican joke is………..wait for it…..
GEORGE BUSH……hahahahahahahahahahahahaha……….i can’t believe
someone like that is the leader of your country…..
don’t you find it so embarrassing???
sedurie Says: January 7th, 2006 at 11:31 am

Hello stayhuman
I think we think alike
Yes the best Republican joke is

King George
Good Grief

Sedurie
sedurie Says: January 7th, 2006 at 11:37 am

Yes I know it was to be funny.

It is not funny

Why?

Because we have King George in office thanks to the likes of you.

And

I doubt you even know what a Liberal is now do you.
Oh gosh did you forget that -
Jesus was a Radical Liberal and Yes a Jew

I thought being a conservative meant you were a born again Christian or something like that. Well Republicans, Liberals, and Jesus well it does not match

Sedurie
Tony22 Says: January 8th, 2006 at 4:16 am

stayhuman…… how can you even talk about george bush when bill clinton is the biggest laughing stock there is!
Tony22 Says: January 8th, 2006 at 4:26 am

sedurie you also don’t know what the hell you are taklking about. How can you not find clinton embarassing?
Jack Antilla Says: January 8th, 2006 at 7:58 pm

Tony, Think about it for a second, Clinton is tarnished for 1 reason and 1 reason only, he cheated on his wife.

I don’t know about you, but that sounds like a personal problem to me.

However, Jr. has managed to do far worse, and it filters down to people like you and I.

For example he took a surplus, that would have sustained the economy if the housing bubble were to burst, and turned it into a record defficit, that our children, and grandchildren will have to payfor, and he doesn’t stop spending, he continues to do it even though the defficit is already at a record high.

He managed to take a country that after 9/11 was more like 1 big small town, more unified than ever, and divide it as bitterly as it was during the Vietnam war.

He told the American People he would capture and kill bin laden at any cost, then focuses purly on suddam hussein

he goes to war with a country on the intel that they “might” have nuclear warheads, than ignores the country one the otherside of the world that activly paraids it’s 6 nuclear warheads down a mock “Red square” along with their massive military capable of destabalizing the entire pacific reigon.

and most suprising of all he’s able to get away with pathological lieing.

his administration said we’d be greated as liberaitors in Iraq. I guess an RPG is their way of saying thankyou

he said the insurgensy would last only months, It’s been over 2 years

they said that the insergency is in it’s last throws, yet they continue to raid weapons depos than use them on our troops, and most ironic of all is that after cheney made that brodcast, Rummy goes up and says the insuergency couls last up to 12 years…

He claims he won’t put up with tyrrany and injustice, yet doesn’t say a word to Saudi Arabia, where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from.

I can go on and on, but I’m tired, and I still have work to do.
stayhuman Says: January 10th, 2006 at 6:51 am

tony 22……….clinton is yesterday’s man……and besides, no one died when clinton lied.

you guys are losing so many people…..by the end of the year it will be up around 3000!

averaging around 3 a day at the moment…so sad.
nutslikebush Says: January 12th, 2006 at 3:29 am

In his speech today, Bush told his Kentucky audience that the war in Iraq would require more “sacrifices” in the coming year. How many sacrificial lambs will his alter hold? The ancient ritual of sacrificing lives to one’s God to receive special favors has a strong pull on the psyche of this president.
Celumnaz Says: January 13th, 2006 at 9:16 pm

Jack Antilla said:
“Tony, Think about it for a second, Clinton is tarnished for 1 reason and 1 reason only, he cheated on his wife.”

That’s a lie if I ever heard one.

The rest of that dribble even a 12 year old could win a debate against.

So many liberals to laugh at, so little time.
Jack Antilla Says: January 14th, 2006 at 7:51 pm

First of all Celumnaz I am not a liberal.
Far from it actually, and if you want to tarnish some one, use “Leftist” not liberal, Liberal and leftist are 2 different terms.

and so, tell me, what else besides monika lewinski tarnishes clintons reputation? Im interested to know, since you think your so much smarter, which just by your attitude i can tell your not, I challenge you.

Bring it.
Celumnaz Says: January 16th, 2006 at 10:33 pm

“Liberal and leftist are 2 different terms.”

It’s rare I get to talk to someone that understands that, and you’re right, I’m not smarter than pretty much anyone. I’ll be the first to tell you I know there is Alot I don’t know. I sometimes refer to myself as an ignorant schmuck, others disagree.

Understand this, I didn’t call you a liberal. I said your statement is a lie and that someone who has not yet reached his teenage years would be able to see through the dribble you were posting.

I haven’t had the pleasure of reading all your posts to say whether you’re liberal, leftist, libertarian, fascist, right wing, communist, marxist or whatever… so I didn’t comment on it.

I could care less that Clinton cheated on his wife. Sure there’s an aspect of seriousness of vows or whatever, but that isn’t even close to being “serious”.

I’d rather look at things like the rapes, lying under oath, I blame Eschelon on Clinton, I blame the Chinese boost in military capability on Clinton, I blame alot of our unhealthy social discourse on Clinton… seriously, I could go on and on enough to write a book if I were good with words, but I’m not.

I’d like to see him tried for Treason, him and John Kerry too. I won’t get that, but oh well. Work with the system we have.

Nothing to do with Monica at all. That whole Black Hawk fiasco in Somalia tarnished Clinton in my eyes more than Monica ever dreamed she’d be able to in her wildest delusions.

And I do wish I had more free time to laugh at infantile leftist liberals.
nutslikebush Says: January 16th, 2006 at 11:31 pm

Explain how Clinton was responsible for the military build up of China. Give me details. Why not blame Wall Mart? That’s where the money comes from that is building the Chinese military.
nutslikebush Says: January 16th, 2006 at 11:33 pm

Bush seems to have actually committed treason. Would you like to see him tried too? Or do you think we should only charge those who haven’t actually committed the crime?
Celumnaz Says: January 17th, 2006 at 4:19 pm

I don’t personally have details, only what I remember hearing and what I can find on the internet. That’s why I want a Trial.

======================================
Clinton and Chinese Missiles
Charles R. Smith
Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2003
Chinese Army Gets U.S. Missile Technology for Money

A newly released document from the U.S. State Department reveals that the most successful Chinese espionage operation in recent history occurred during the Clinton administration.

The document accuses Hughes Space and Communications Company of violating U.S. national security 123 times by knowingly sending detailed missile and space technology directly to the Chinese army.

According to the State Department, the most serious violations occurred when Hughes gave the Chinese army information that supported its analyses of the investigation of the January 1995 failure of the launch of a China Long March 2E (LM-2E) rocket carrying the Hughes-manufactured ASTAR II commercial communications satellite.

On Jan. 26, 1995, approximately 52 seconds into flight, a Chinese LM-2E carrying the Hughes APSTAR II communications satellite failed. This was the LM-2E’s second failure. The first failure of the LM-2E in December 1992 involved an attempted launch of the Hughes OPTUS B-2 commercial communications satellite.

“Respondents decided to form and direct a launch failure investigation beginning in January 1995 and continuing throughout much of that year. The investigation involved the formation of several groups of leading technical experts from China and the U.S., which throughout the investigation engaged in an extensive exchange of technical data and analysis, producing a wide range of unauthorized technology transfers,” noted the State Department charge document.

“At no time did the Respondents seek or receive a license or other written approval concerning the conduct of their APSTAR II failure investigation with PRC authorities,” states the charge document.

According to the State Department, “this strategy was further influenced by Respondents’ business interests in securing future contracts with the PRC and with Asian satellite companies in which PRC influence figured prominently, and concern that U.S. Government policy constraints on technology transfer as administered by ODTC were an impediment to achieving these interests.”

Chinese Rocket Failure Blamed on U.S.

According to a 1998 Defense Department investigation, the reason for Hughes passing the technical information to China was because the Chinese army blamed Hughes for the rocket failure.

“Following the APSTAR II failure, there was disagreement between Hughes and the Chinese about whether the principal cause of the failure was the launch vehicle or the satellite. The subsequent joint Hughes-Chinese failure investigation was apparently intended, at least in part, to resolve this dispute,” states the 1998 Defense Department report.

“According to the Hughes/Apstar materials, the disagreement between Hughes and the Chinese focused on two views of the cause of the launch failure: (1) the Chinese claim that the satellite was defective as evidenced by satellite fuel igniting; and (2) Hughes’ claim that the satellite was a contributing factor only after the launch vehicle fairing had failed which exposed the satellite to catastrophic conditions.”

“DoD believes that the scope and content of the launch failure investigation conducted by Hughes with the Chinese following the January 1995 APSTAR II failure raises national security concerns both with regard to violating those standards and to potentially contributing to China’s missile capabilities,” states the Defense Department report.

PLA General Shen Rongjun

Chinese General Shen Rongjun led the penetration of U.S. missile and space technology during the Clinton administration. The 2002 State Department letter makes it clear that they believe Gen. Shen led the successful penetration of the Clinton administration and Hughes.

In 1994, Gen. Shen was second in command of a Chinese army unit known as COSTIND, or the Commission On Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense. Shen, and his COSTIND operatives in front companies, secured a wide range of advanced missile and space technology from Hughes after a 1994 meeting with Commerce Secretary Ron Brown.

Commerce documents obtained using the Freedom of Information Act show that Brown met with Gen. Shen in 1994 during a trade trip to Beijing. President Clinton personally authorized the meeting between the Chinese general and Brown.

Before moving to Commerce, Brown headed the Democratic National Committee. The Federal Election Commission fined the DNC in 2002 for “knowingly and willingly” accepting donations from Chinese army sources.

Gen. Shen did obtain help from the White House by pressuring Hughes with satellite contracts. Hughes CEO Michael Armstrong wrote President Clinton in 1993 threatening to pull support for Clinton if he did not allow the space technology transfers to China. In 1994, Clinton approved a waiver for Hughes to transfer advanced satellite encryption systems to China.

According to a Sept. 20, 1995, memorandum, Hughes regarded Gen. Shen Rongjun as “the most important Chinese space official.”

The Chinese army penetration of Hughes was so successful that Gen. Shen managed to get his son, Shen Jun, a job at Hughes as the lead software engineer for all Chinese satellites. According to Hughes, Shen Jun had access to “proprietary” satellite source code.

“On July 9, 1996, Respondents submitted a munitions export license application to ODTC seeking authorization for one of its employees, Shen Jun, described as a dual Canadian Chinese national, in order to provide Chinese-English language translation and interpretation support for the preliminary design phase of the APMT satellite project,” states the 2002 charge letter.

“In no place in that submission nor otherwise did HUGHES SPACE AND COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY inform ODTC that this individual was, in fact, the son of PLA General and COSTIND Deputy Director Shen Rongjun, which fact was material to the U.S. Government’s consideration of whether the license application should be approved or denied.”

“The record indicates that Shen Jun’s role for Respondents went well beyond that of an interpreter/translator and more closely resembled that of an intermediary with his father, General Shen, and other PRC space authorities, in order to cultivate their support in various matters of interest to Hughes, including the handling of the APSTAR II launch failure investigation and the APMT contract,” noted the State Department 2002 charge letter.

According to the State Department, Hughes contends that it followed the law with regard to hiring Gen. Shen’s son.

“Respondents have maintained as of December 3, 2002, that this information was not material and that its omission was proper because there is no place in the munitions license application for them to disclose father-son relationships between General officers at the People’s Liberation Army who are overseeing a project they are working on and their foreign national employees working in U.S. facilities on the same project.”

Clinton Overrules Secretary of State

The alleged improper export by Hughes of satellite technology was cited as a key reason when Clinton’s secretary of state, Warren Christopher, rejected a plan to give the Commerce Department full authority to control satellite exports.

According to a Sept. 22, 1995, memorandum, Christopher rejected plans to give Commerce the authority to approve satellite exports after an interagency study noted that “significant” military and intelligence capabilities could be lost.

The memorandum stated the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence agencies strongly opposed the policy change because Hughes exported two satellites with sensitive cryptographic technology without first getting a State Department munitions license. Cryptographic technology is used to scramble communications sent to satellites to prevent unauthorized access.

President Clinton, who transferred the power to regulate sensitive satellites to Commerce, under Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, ultimately overruled Christopher.

Clinton’s transfer allowed the Chinese army to acquire advanced U.S. technology for military purposes. Hughes satellites currently provide the Chinese army with secure communications that are invulnerable to earth combat and highly accurate all-weather navigation for strike bombers and missiles.

Hughes satellites purchased by Shen also provide direct TV and cable TV broadcasts to most of Asia. Thus, cable and pay-per-view services help pay for the Chinese army satellite communications. The brilliant planning and logistics mean that Chinese military communications pay for themselves.

Clinton Legacy – A New Arms Race

The satellite and missile technology obtained from Hughes by the Chinese army is critical for the design and manufacture of missile nose cones and electronic missile control systems. The technology clearly helped the Chinese army field a new generation of ICBMS, including the Dong Feng 31 missile, which can drop three nuclear warheads on any city in the U.S.

The success of Shen is a story of missiles, politics and greed. Gen. Shen succeeded in using Hughes and President Clinton as valuable tools to obtain weapons that are now pointed at the United States.

China won and the U.S. lost what may very well be the first round of World War III. Gen. Shen led that victory and he did it with a checkbook. The Clinton legacy for the 21st century is a new arms race.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/1/14/143258.shtml
======================================
Last Independent Counsel Report Set For ‘Release’; Focus On Clinton Administration
Sun Jan 15 2006 19:35:32 2006

In Monday’s edition of the NEW YORK SUN, reporter Brian McGuire and contributor R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., break the first look at the long-anticipated report from Independent Counsel David Barrett, whose investigation lasted 10 year and cost taxpayers $23 million.

The SUN outlines the report’s details surrounding the alleged illicit activity and cover up that involving former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros before and during his time in the Clinton Administration.

The Sun reveals that the Barrett report connects the dots that allege that senior officials of the Clinton Administration hindered investigations by the IRS in both Texas and Washington, as well as the investigations of a grand jury examining the independent counsel’s evidence.

The full report, more than 400 pages line, with more than 100 pages of redacted material, hits the street on Thursday morning at 9 am.

Democrats in the House and Senate have been fighting for months to block the release of the report and keep the 100 pages of highly damaging redacted material from ever seeing the light of day.

Developing…

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm
==================================

Any of these ring a bell?

Clinton-China
http://prorev.com/china.htm
Johnnie Chung
http://prorev.com/chung.htm
Chinagate
http://prorev.com/china2.htm

That’s just a quick google so your lazy self doesn’t get tired looking. There’s more I’m sure. Didn’t see Alta Loma referenced anywhere.

Hey, if Bush is guilty I’d see him tried too. No problem. I’ve yet to see any evidence of Bush’s improprieties anyway… I don’t like his spending but that’s not treasonous.

But I’m not going to join any choir that fails to recognize that Clinton needs to go down, or says “well what about Bush then?” to avoid the issue, or ANY defense of Clinton, then No. Even though I didn’t, and wouldn’t ever vote for Bush, I won’t join that choir.

They ignore these problems over 12 years and want an acting president to take the heat for what they Never asked of Clinton?

Flaming Leftist Liberal Hypocritical Jerks. Which makes them rather funny. Especially when they’re not so high on the totem pole anymore.

*does the marxists out of power dance*
Jack Antilla Says: January 18th, 2006 at 12:49 am

No one can be blamed for the military build up of china accept the Chineese.

Simolia had little to do with clinton, the fact that it went to hell in a handbasket the way it did was due to poor military planning.

As for rape, I agree that would be a good thing to look into however people chose monika instead, for reasons I have yet to understand.

and for lying under oath, I’d like to see several members of the current administration looked into for that to, because I notice what they say and what happens dont exactly match up that often.

but yes, every president has their faults, treason is streaching it, quite a d@mn bit actually.

Treson would be more along the lines of the president sending money to Al queda, or sending them them infrmation on high population gatherings etc…

and as far as I know none of that has happened, and if you actually meet a democrat you’ll realize it probably never will.
Celumnaz Says: January 18th, 2006 at 3:38 pm

more excuses and deflections. What I posted is probably 0.00001% of what’s known about what happened during his Admin, and to me there’s a compelling trail of money and technology illegally going from here to there.

Just between Jonnie Chung and Alta Loma, Something fishy was going on, those monks, AlGore’s fundraiser, No controlling legal authority, BC was in charge… Gore is barely capable of keeping his stories straight much less orchestrating the money laundering scheme the Clintons seem to have done, to the Detriment of the Nation.

China has that specific capability because Clinton in some deal the people were never told about gave them the tech, not that they figured it out on their own. Maybe it was a Clinton lackey and BC had no knowlede? Maybe, I’d like to find out. Where does the buck stop in that case?

What happened after Somalia goes directly to the commander in chief at the time.

The Monica thing is what I touched on in our social discourse going south. Monica was sensationalistic for the press, Clinton a media darling, still pushing that free love movement the old used to be hippies in the newsrooms. Condoms, sex, what isn’t and is sex, get kids to have sex… but rape? Well, we can’t go there it’s the president, and not just Any president, the first black president, the one who feels our pain.

Republicans in general, the rank and file, are too honorable, and there were other things going on at the time more important… judicial nominations, anything that had to do with Janet Reno… But the media had all kinds of time to focus on the more publicly palpatable story of cigars. Asprin factory?

What member of the current administration has lied under oath to a grand jury? If there are any, why have they not been fired yet? Why would a Democrat never ask that question of themselves?

How about giving aid and comfort to the enemy (”terrorists”)? What do his international speeches do? They’re not the same speeches he gives here in the states. Bin Laden specifically mentions *Clinton’s* boondoggle in Somalia as a great encouragement to him and his efforts.

There Is No Way to defend the man, and I’m positive once the facts are learned, which they never will be…
and that’s another thing, spineless republicans that won’t go after people, taking the “high road”. bullocks. They’re afraid of the Ted Kennedy types, and at the upper eschelons of the social ladder they’re apparently one and the same. Almost like the last elections there were really no choices, just different faces of the same choice in the big picture. Just Kerry has that traitorous past and is a big lying pretentious prick to boot, blowing with the winds.

Anyway, IF the “ruling class” deigns to look into Clinton, reasonable Americans (especially if they didn’t know the name of the person being described) would call for his head, figuratively and possibly literally.

Freak show leftists would defend him even if he raped and ate children. But Bush lied. The war is only about Oil. Bush spys on Americans. lie after lie after lie. “Vegitarians should stop murdering plants.” that kind of lie.

I really think there is enough evidence to try and convict Clinton for treasonous acts against America. John Kerry too. Libs throw that word around “treason” because of it’s “impact” as a word, debasing it. Just like the word “Liberal” that those infantile enlightened progressive socialist marxist leftist jerks took over. Being Liberal imo is a fairly noble thing, but “Liberals” today are not real Liberals, they just called themselves that.

Like a pissed off homosexual is still called “gay”. grrrr…

I really mean treason when I say it, unlike those “impact” writers and talking heads that bandy the word about, especially towards Bush.

Vegitarians should stop murdering vegitables.

This is like my 5th or 6th time coming here and I just realized this is a blog and not a forum… hope this isn’t published anywhere cause I’m just a rambling schmuck with an opinion. I’m not afraid to defend it, but I don’t want to get in the way of true intellectuals with greater minds than I. From the “leftist” commentary here I didn’t see any heavyweight ideas, and on the right I like to learn from others and was looking for some lighthearted reading, jokes, etc…

it seems all the good comics, gag pictures and what not on politics all come from the left. I always just figured they needed pictures more, but hey, sometimes I want to give the old noggin a rest too y’know? Lookin for jokes about liberals. Rightys make jokes about themselves all the time, Libs fly off the handle even at each other!
nutslikebush Says: January 19th, 2006 at 1:10 pm

Just to cut to the chase, you asked “What member of the current administration has lied under oath to a grand jury?” Hum, ever heard of Elliot Abrams? The guy convicted of perjury due to lying to congress during the Iran-Contra (treason) hearings? King George 1 pardoned him and King George 2 gave him a high-level cabinet post. Ever heard of Scooter Libby? And guess what, Karl lied too and will most likely be indicted this year (Fitzgerald is still meeting a grand jury to introduce the evidence against Rove and ask for an indictment on perjury against him).

I don’t come to this site for jokes. I come to this site to kick the *sses of fascists.
nutslikebush Says: January 19th, 2006 at 1:13 pm

Was it treason when Reagan-Bush sold arms to Iran and used the money to sponsor terrorism in central america and did all this against the explicit orders by congress against it. and then lied their asses off about the entire thing, got caught, then gave presidential pardons to all of the criminals?
nutslikebush Says: January 19th, 2006 at 7:21 pm

You may have noticed, Celumaz, if you are paying attention, your guys have taken lying and treason to a whole new level. They are evil incarnate. They are destroying our great nation. But you won’t get it if you listen to the conservative media (that is, most of the contemparary american corporate media) because they have a vested interest in keeping you brainwashed and voting against your own interests (unless you are at least a multimillionaire.) You are shooting yourself (and our constitution) in the foot by supporting those clowns.
Celumnaz Says: January 20th, 2006 at 5:24 pm

So Clinton still gets a pass because in his defense, Bush sucks.

What’s wrong with hiring someone that’s been pardoned? http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm

Is Libby still employed by the Admin? Hillary lied too, and she’s never been taken to task for it. Rove… did he? Hillary DID. Billy Bubba Boy DID. Why the interest in the speculation when it’s proven in another case? Double standard? (I can see the wheels turning, “spin that to show that it’s Celumnaz with the double standard!”)

Why am I even responding to you? You say “your guys” like I’m a republican or something and then dribble the same baseless junk that I hear from contemparary american and international mainstream media. You don’t even know your audience!

If you haven’t noticed with your head apparently sand-bound, there are usually more than 3 sides to every story. “nutslikebush” is too long, so I’ll just refer to you as “nut”.

“King George”… hahaha… is there an original thought anywhere on that side anymore? Seems the last original thought was the silver foot thing.

So you come to a place called “laugh at liberals” to bash fascists? Are you getting paid for that? Maybe should think about getting your contract rewritten. This doesn’t seem like the place to find a high concentration of fascists. Or would it be comparable to going to a blue state to bash idiotic marxists? lol I said idiotic marxists… like there’s a difference…
nutslikebush Says: January 21st, 2006 at 3:55 pm

C,
No, you will notice that I wasn’t defending Clinton. In fact, it is you who are obsessed with Clinton. I do agree with you that Bush sucks though.
nutslikebush Says: January 21st, 2006 at 4:01 pm

This site used to be teaming with fascists. I considered it a “target rich environment” to borrow a term from my military days. I just call W King George because he believes that the power of the presidency should be unrestricted (i.e., he is spying on you, and probably this very dialogue, without even getting court approval to do it).
nutslikebush Says: January 21st, 2006 at 4:05 pm

C,
A major problem with the Bush administration lies is that they have killed tremendous numbers of people, wasted hundreds of billions of dollars, and strengthened our nation’s enemies. If I didn’t believe that, I would let him off the hook. But I work very hard to understand how his policies are affecting our country and the world. I do believe that he has damaged our country and therefore it is my responsibility as a citizen to oppose him and his administration. I won’t back down from a debate on this topic anywhere anytime.
nutslikebush Says: January 21st, 2006 at 4:08 pm

C,
Elliot Abrams is still in the administration. He was CONVICTED of perjury and lying to congress.
nutslikebush Says: January 21st, 2006 at 4:12 pm

Ah, but he was lying about selling arms to Iran and supporting US-sponsored terrorism in central america where the contra terrorists were trying to overthrough a democratically-elected government. So I guess lies like that don’t register on your meter. It’s ok for guys like that to serve in the current administration. Why don’t you obsess over that? It seems more serious than what you are currently obsessing over.
Celumnaz Says: January 21st, 2006 at 7:14 pm

more excuses and deflections from a now proven useful idiot rhetoric preaching, double standard nut. It’s only wrong when this side does it. If you can’t be honest with me, at least be honest with yourself.
What Bush has done is Nothing compared to how Clinton abused power. But you don’t address any substance, just… Bush sucks followed by perspective opinion driven lies disguised as facts.
Is it possible to debate with a useful idiot or should I just stick to laughing at them? Oh, now it’s got to be spun that Celumnaz is the useful idiot… whoopie… I just want to laugh at their ideas, I don’t want to make them cry or anything.
nutslikebush Says: January 22nd, 2006 at 2:31 pm

Celumnaz,
It is you who have said nothing of substance. Your guys spent $40 million and investigated Clinton for 6 years and found only that he was dishonest about a consensual relationship with another adult. You found nothing else - period. A great deal of crap was made up and published by discredited publishers like Regnery and the Washington Times (e.g. the Moonies). But just because the right wing has a lie factory that is second to none, doesn’t mean any of it is true.
nutslikebush Says: January 22nd, 2006 at 2:36 pm

Oh, Celumanz,
I wasn’t clear on your answer regarding the Elliot Abrams question. A convicted felon in the current administration - how do you like those apples? That seems pretty substantive to me. Maybe you are confused about what the word deflection actually means. That must be it.
nutslikebush Says: January 22nd, 2006 at 3:33 pm

Interesting that you think that lying about WMD, lying about al qaeda relationship with Saddam, spying on their political opponents is not worse than lying about sex. That’s just plain weird. The Bush administration is the most corrupt administration in history - period! They handed the government over to lobbiests, demonize good science, and trash the environment (for more read “The Republican War on Science” by Chris Mooney - great book!). Your guys loose on every single point - except their appeal to the lower half of the IQ bell curve.
nutslikebush Says: January 22nd, 2006 at 3:42 pm

PS Celumanz - i realize that you are just trying to sound like the right wing mutton-heads on the radio when you adopt their pathetic rhetorical style (e.g., claim deflection when someone makes concrete substantive points that score against your point, call people who are whipping your butt in an argument a “useful idiot”.) I see right through those rhetorical smoke screens. You are on the ropes. If this were a boxing match your corner would be screaming “for god sake, stop the fight.”
Celumnaz Says: January 23rd, 2006 at 6:13 pm

Good Golly Molly you don’t address anything do you? Just dancin and skirtin around issues.

While I see it’s a waste of time debating with you the way you ignore and spin things, it’s a time well spent Laughing!

Oks, for the bit o fun today…

27: Lie much? Not everything was prosecuted, some things weren’t even investigated. It’s impossible to debate with useful idiots who not only lie to others, but lie to themselves as well. I’m sorry, but the only response to your so called “substance” is… you’re actually a liar. Or ignorant, but the way you talk to me I’d say you’re well informed on the lies and spin you do. I can hope your just ignorant, but it seems you’re a plain run of the mill shill. I’m aware of the appearance of “losing the argument” when you start to call names… but a tiger is a tiger, a shark is a shark, and a liar is a liar. nut, you’re lying. (”I am not! You are! Prove I’m lying!”)

You’re still saying “your guys” like I’m a republican, or even like I voted for Bush. I’m not, and never have. I don’t have any “my guys” to defend. Quit asking me to defend something as if I was affiliated with it in any way shape or form.

You defend Clinton raping Broaddrick among others, the embezzlements, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Elian, Eschelon, the frauds, the dismissals, Chinagate, Travelgate, Clipper Project, CALEA Project, the investigations of Defenders of US Constitution against the Federal Government, Christian Identity, Larry Pratt, Project Megiddo, Richard Jewell, the endorsement of the “Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s initiation of the “Know your customer” thing, on and on and on and on and on and on. *IF* you can defend all of those, there’s more where that came from, and IF you can agree there’s some problems to be looked at, And agree to move forward with action on these and others, Then Maybe your voice wouldn’t be a pitiful whine in the wind. Till then you’re just another “Bush Sucks” parrot.

28: Let me state what I said for your answer, but in American English.

What’s wrong with hiring someone that’s been pardoned? http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm
Maybe you are confused about what the word “pardon” means. That must be it.

29: Interesting you’re still lying about there being no WMD, still lying that there was no relationship between al qaeda and Saddam, still lying about Bush spying when the WORST abuses of spying and power I’ve heard come straight from the Clinton Admin. The Democratic party is nothing but a hodgepodge of lobbyists for the most part. There you go with this “your guys” garbage, with a lackluster un-witty dig at a group of people. You bigot. *IF* they lost a point, which I reject that lie of yours, all I can say is at least they Have points.

30: Is this one of your “substantive points”? About your boxing analogy, (amusing how your analogy has to do with violence) do you speak from experience? Coochie-coochie-coo, I think you do! Are you trying to boost your ego by pretending that I’m one of these radio guys your so infatuated with?

You’re right to a point though, I am saying “for God’s sake! Please stop! I’m going to die from laughter!!”

Hope the pay is good. Let me know if I go too far, I really don’t want to make anyone cry. I just came here to laugh at “liberals” but seems I found a fun troll to play with.
nutslikebush Says: January 25th, 2006 at 3:38 am

So, c, you were saying that conservatives like to laugh at themselves and don’t take themselves seriously. you might want to look over your rant and see if you still agree with your lighthearted chucklemonkeyself.
nutslikebush Says: January 25th, 2006 at 3:42 am

C, You may have an anger management issue. DOn’t cha think? Your position is that I need to prove that Clinton didn’t do all that crap that conservative hate-mongers made up about him? Strange logic at best.
nutslikebush Says: January 25th, 2006 at 3:47 am

I must have struck a nerve with the IQ comment. You really lost your train of thought in the last post - meltdown?
nutslikebush Says: January 25th, 2006 at 12:39 pm

So to summarize- you demanded: “name someone in the Bush administration who lied under oath.”
I name someone (Eliot Abrams).
You say “boy you dance around the issues” and “what’s wrong with hiring someone who lied under oath, as long as they have been pardoned?”
Looks to me like you are the one dancing around the issue.
nutslikebush Says: January 25th, 2006 at 2:09 pm

Emory study reveals the political brain

ATLANTA, Jan. 24 (UPI) — Emory University scientists say political partisans of both parties apparently don’t let facts interfere with their judgments on political issues.

The researchers wanted to discover why Democrats and Republicans can hear the same information, but reach opposite conclusions.

The investigators used functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, to study a sample of committed Democrats and Republicans immediately prior to the 2004 U.S. presidential election.

The participants were asked to evaluate threatening information about their own candidate while undergoing fMRI. The scientists say what they found was striking.

“We did not see any increased activation of the parts of the brain normally engaged during reasoning,” said Drew Westen, director of clinical psychology at Emory who led the study. “What we saw instead was a network of emotion circuits lighting up.”

Once partisans reached completely biased conclusions — essentially ignoring information that couldn’t be rationally discounted — they then got a blast of activation in circuits involved in reward.

“None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged,” he said.

The findings are to be presented during this week’s annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology in Palm Springs, Calif.
Celumnaz Says: January 25th, 2006 at 2:43 pm

You had to go all the way to my first post #16 to find something you can pick out to comment on? And even then you get it wrong… ugh… I know better than to banter with liars lol, but it still supprises me, the blatentness of it.

There’s only 2 things you can control, the way you interpret things, and your actions. It’s not my fault you interpret my stance the way you do. Since your ignorance isn’t my fault, I get to laugh at it, Again!!! Because you can’t help your actions, for your ignorance!!! Ahahahahahahahaha!!!!

So I’m not good with words. Sue me. I’m not a professional hater like yourself. Just a rank and file gay American that’s feeling a little pity for you right now.

And are you trying to make fun of the mentally challenged with that IQ comment now? Talk about Projection!

How does it feel to be a proven hypocritical, lying, bigot with a tendancy for violent hyperbole?
Celumnaz Says: January 25th, 2006 at 2:47 pm

Feels pretty low doesn’t it? When I was a liberal I felt that way too. Marxism does that to a person.
Celumnaz Says: January 25th, 2006 at 2:52 pm

Since it’s impossible to discuss substance with you, lets lower the bar a little to a superficial level that you can communicate on.

The name “nutslikebush”… is that a personification of an acorn with an affinity for a shrubery?

Good Lord I hope Hillary runs for pres. Would be Allah’s gift to the Republican party.
Celumnaz Says: January 25th, 2006 at 2:58 pm

Have to try everything. Wondering if there’s something to making a bunch of little posts several minutes after each other.

Hmmm… not doing anything for me… guess that’s why he’s the nut.
Celumnaz Says: January 25th, 2006 at 3:09 pm

My candidate for “Hypocrite of 2002″ has to go to Time magazine for suddenly discovering the dangers and benefits that come from whistleblowing. The cover of a recent issue features their “Persons of the Year” ? three women who blew the whistle on corporate and government incompetence or wrongdoing. I don’t want to discourage whistleblowers or those who choose to ride on their coattails; surfacing the truth about corporate and government wrongdoing is usually considered a good thing. But I find it difficult to understand how we can turn truth “on” and “off” like a switch. Not long ago this country went through a wrenching period which ended in a president’s impeachment. Not only was Bill Clinton chasing skirts in the Oval Office, but he and his administration were gutting national security safeguards to the point that we ? as a nation ? were seriously vulnerable to espionage and terrorist attacks. Now there were those who tried to blow the whistle on Bill Clinton and his merry band, but they were attacked repeatedly by the media, including Time. After Monica Lewinsky became a worldwide embarrassment to our country, Time dutifully reported that there was a “Vast Right Wing” conspiracy hellbent on Clinton’s destruction. They downplayed numerous abuses and said it was “all about sex.” Somehow, we “Clinton Haters” were only out to get Bill and Hillary. They actually reported this with a straight face alongside various graphs and photographs showing how the conspiracy worked. In the Time version of events, it was not important that the serious allegations about Clinton were true. What was important was the appearance, or the personality, or the political leaning of the whistleblowers. Thus, truth tellers like Linda Tripp were demonized while the shocking conduct of a president was downplayed as a loveable rogue’s personal preferences. Lost in the wall of noise about “what is sex” and what is “is” was an obvious pattern of misconduct on the part of the President of the United States, including the dismantling of national security safeguards previously mentioned. Apparently to Time, there is a time when it’s appropriate to talk about national security and a time when it is not appropriate. Could it be that Time is more interested in FBI incompetence during a Republican administration ? in other words, when it’s George W. Bush’s FBI and not Bill Clinton’s FBI? But consider that if the warnings about national security, beginning in 1993, had been taken seriously and not written off as the rants of the Right Wing, it might have been possible to head off the horrific terrorist attacks in 2001. As early as the summer of 1993, national security professionals were sounding warnings about the Clinton administration’s incompetence in protecting this nation. Today, there are few who would argue that, for whatever reason, Bill Clinton dropped the ball on Osama bin Laden big time. Despite the efforts of many to get the attention of Time and other media, this developing story was ignored. They only seemed interested in joining the White House in the most remarkable smear campaign to ever rain down on those who were simply and courageously trying to warn the nation of a dangerous administration. Regardless of the reasons for Clinton’s incompetence in national security, Time had a duty ? at least insofar as they share the same real estate as the rest of us ? to play the story straight. After all, Time can be blown up as easily as the rest of us, can’t they? But instead, they chose to become part of the Clinton “spin” machine. Is it sufficient to conclude they were just unable to connect the dots? I believe the evidence is so overwhelming on this score that not even Inspector Clouseau could have missed the mountain of clues. But, when my best-selling book, “Unlimited Access: An FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House” was published, Time had a field day ? along with the rest of the national media ? destroying my credibility on the say-so of the Clinton White House. My book was 98% about the national security breakdown inside the Clinton White House and 2% about the ill manners of some liberal Democrats. Nevertheless, national media like Time scoffed at the well-documented claims of a senior FBI Agent who had been working in the Clinton White House, full time, for more than two years. They preferred to believe that somehow I had lost my mind. History unfolded, however, has vindicated me. The lack of “DNA” evidence for Clinton’s reckless womanizing, as described in my book, is hardly ever mentioned these days. What is recalled is that I was a serious whistleblower who tried to surface wrongdoing, abuse, and corruption occurring in the White House right under the nose of the national media. Back then, Time thought differently about whistleblowing. They went on to ignore or demonize every single whistleblower that bravely stepped forward to describe Clinton’s shameful conduct or Clinton administration corruption. Most of these whistleblowers were women, like RTC investigator Jean Lewis, or Linda Tripp, or Juanita Broaddrick, or Paula Jones, or Kathleen Willey, or Gennifer Flowers. All were attacked and dismissed as bimbos and liars. Time had it wrong: Clinton was the liar. But these women will never grace the cover of Time magazine, even if the passage of time has proven them to be correct in their claims. You see, media giants like Time are so corrupt that they actually believe they don’t need to admit their mistakes. Slanting or mis-reporting the news is a serious corruption because it can lead the general public and political leaders on dangerous and time-wasting wild goose chases. The fact that Time is politicized or is a “one-party” magazine is no excuse for lying. I cannot wait for the first Time magazine whistleblower to step out of the pages and tell the truth about how corrupted Time magazine is. I look forward to that glorious day.
Gary Aldrich is the president of The Patrick Henry Center, a Townhall.com partner organization.

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/garyaldrich/2003/01/08/168934.html

You’re just going to ignore it all aren’t you, because Bush sucks. You’re not out for the common American, Just another Bush Sucks Parrot.

“King George” didn’t give us Eschelon. (there, a bone for you, I don’t want you to go away… you’re the only recent joke here)
Celumnaz Says: January 25th, 2006 at 7:48 pm

Wait… I don’t even know if you’re aware of what Eshelon is…

If not, let me know and I’ll find some links for you if you don’t believe it exsists.

I’ll try to find the most offensive sources for you.
Celumnaz Says: January 25th, 2006 at 7:50 pm

errr…. inoffensive. Sources you can look at without feeling dirty getting information you’re not used to.

Probably something over on cnn for you. Just let me know if you need help searching. Good little helper I am sometimes.

stayhuman? sedurie? Jack? ya’ll awefully quiet. Care to chime in on Eschelon?
nutslikebush Says: January 26th, 2006 at 3:41 am

C,
If I admit to being “a useful idiot.” But I must say that you seem to me to be a useless idiot.
Celumnaz Says: January 26th, 2006 at 5:27 pm

Your summary is an example of my not being good with words. Someone currently employed, lying to grand jury during their time in this Admin, and not being fired, compared to what the Dems do. Promote the liars consistantly. Hillary’s never been taken to task for it and they think she has a chance at being the nominee! hahahahaha!!!! Liars Gore? Kerry? Bubba? Pelosi? Kennedy? Practically any leadership. I don’t know why Zel hasn’t run screaming from that party yet.

Hmm, sorry I missed your article post. There’s some kind of delay.

I commented on that in another forum, this is part of what I said:
“It’s like when I used to be a liberal, and started questioning things. Some others here have commented on it, and I’ve seen it. There’s “Trigger Issues”. They act like normal every day regular people until you hit their particular trigger issue, be it religion, environmental issues, reproductive issues, gender issues, there’s all kinds… once you hit their issue they become a rabid animal. That study seems kinda related.”

I’m glad you admit to being a useful idiot. It’s rare to see even a miniscule portion of honesty from the Bush Sucks crowd.

(I don’t care for Bush much myself, but bedaggled if I’m going to be lumped with these pathetic ideologies)

So called “Liberals” are a hoot. Many are pretty good in bed too. It’s just the problem of the heart leading the mind rather than the mind tempering the heart, and it gets funny. Even when brought with fact and data, the arguments are still boiled down to emotional ones from that side.

It’s the Left that gave us Political Correctness.
It’s the left that perpetuates race issues and class warfare.
It’s the Left that creates the “dependant” class.
It’s the Left that tells us to do one thing, while they do another.

And I imagine, if I’m still alive in 20 years, I’ll be as hard on the right as we move too far that way. But we’re not there yet, and there’s years of payback for them being stereotyped as homophobic racist bigot sexist religious nut fascists they’ve got to get out of their system. I don’t blame them.

It’s gonna be good for a great laugh, with their angry twisted faces, quaking in their sandals, cursing at a god they don’t even believe in. Pure comedy.
Jack Antilla Says: January 27th, 2006 at 12:41 am

Celumnaz I find your debate tactics tiring, that is why Im quiet, because I have yet to hear an intelegnet debate from either you or left, more of the same, I grew tired of that a LONG time ago.

And I most certinly tire of the trash talking. rightwingers calling people of the left such as John Kerry, a veteran of a war no man should have to fight, traitors, is extramly annoying. sure he shamlessly used it to further his agenda, but you shamlessly tarnish the purple heart.

on the oppisit end I grow mercilessly tired of left wingers calling our President a Nazi, or a facist. sure his policies such as the patriot act and Iraq are questionable, but they don’t make him a Nazi or a facist, quitefrankly that is an insult to Mussilini and Hitler who worked too long and too hard for too many years to be that evil, and to claim that many lives, for any tom dick and hairy to be called Facists.

I’m interested in reason. You both present decent facts, but heres the problem with facts they have value attached to them, and I find it annoying, I could go online and find a thousand facts supporting either cause, quite frankly I just don’t care about debating wether an issue is right or wrong, I’d prefer to talk about how to solve the problem.

I couldn’t care less about wether Iraq was justified or not, what I care about is geting our troops home without creating a giant black hole of anarchy and destabalization.

I could careless about clinton and China, we need to take precautions to make sure China doesn’t become a threat.

I don’t care who screwed up with Korea, so long as their nukes aren’t sold to the highest bidder.

etc…

If either of you manage to pull your heads out of your asses for 5 minutes and want to have an intelectual debate, I’ll listen, but if you insist on this childish namecalling and pointless debate on blaming politicians, then I shall keep my peace.
nutslikebush Says: January 27th, 2006 at 3:39 am

C,
Let’s just settle down here. First, I never defended Clinton. But you attacked him like a pit bull. I happen to know some of the people who funded the attacks against Clinton (I am related to a family that owns one of the most right-wing publication businesses in the country. The publishers of much of the information that you cited. So I am intimately familiar with it. I also am friends with several people who write columns for TownHall.com. I know that stuff inside-out.) And, you were the one who first said that Bush sucked, I just agreed with you. Then you tagged me as a Bush Sucks guy. In reality, I am one of the most moderate people you could meet. People who know me in real life would be shocked that I would even spend a millisecond at this site, much less posting (for over a year now, by the way). I am a partner in a successful biotech corporation and have a Ph.D. in neuroscience. I spend my days trying to discover cures for diseases like Alzheimer’s and how to use stem cells to repair brains that have been damaged by events like strokes. I do dispair about Bush and the path that he has led our country down. We didn’t need a trillion dollar war right now. We did need to actually go after terrorism, not use it as an excuse to stage an invasion of the middle east. We need leadership that respects rationality. After the last election, I just decided that I had been passive for too long. We need a healthcare system that works for everyone. We need to recognize that unbridled capitalism (unchecked by good government) will eat you alive and produce poor quality products (see McDonalds, Walmart, etc for examples). These days I speak up about political issues and come to this site because I want to engage people who don’t think the way that I do. For the most part, I have tried to use my comments here constructively. When you showed up, I decided to let you lead the dance and reflect back at you exactly what you were throwing at me. I was just a mirror for you.
Celumnaz Says: January 27th, 2006 at 3:39 pm

I’d almost believe you guys, you probably believe your as reasonable as you seem in your last posts.

The only problem is, Jack, you started out with saying Clinton is tarnised “for 1 reason and 1 reason only”. What does that imply Jack? That all the other problems, Real issues with Clinton don’t exsist? That those that think that are unreasonable? That’s the implication Jack. And the rest of your post #6 belies your stated reluctance for “trash talk” with the perspective drivin Lies, Spin… for one purpose, to trash Bush. If you’re as objective as you claim, it should be clear to you as you re-read your post. If your not, then you won’t. It isn’t “name calling” if it’s the truth. It’s calling a spade a spade. Who’s not being honest here? Is there a difference in tone between post #6 and post #46? Yessir there is. Nice backtrack. You’re the one that said “bring it”. Where’s the rolling eyes smiley? My “debate tactics” are taken from watching liberals attack conservatives over the last decade or so. Only difference is they used lies and spin as their support.

nut, I feel pretty settled. If you think I’m “worked up” you have no clue! lol. But how’s this for “unsettling”

“How many sacrificial lambs will his alter hold? The ancient ritual of sacrificing lives to one’s God to receive special favors has a strong pull on the psyche of this president. ”

your first post here where I was introduced to the nut while on my search for jokes. That statement just urges serene peaceful thoughts, eh? Is that where you’re supposedly using your comments here constructively? Check it out, here’s a mirror for you.

I could allllllmost agree with you guys. I almost did, but then I thought to myself, “self, these guys have already lied here in this thread. maybe you should take a minute to think about it before up and agreeing with them, just to make sure”

In a post that starts as jokes, the Bush Sucks crowd starts in with the vitrol and lies. I point out what, 10? 15? I dunno didn’t count them truely illegal apparent activities and it’s like “huh? what? hrm um, basically Bush sucks” (that’s great about your creds nut, I’m still just a plain American, would it help if I said I was a world traveler or said my occupation or that of my family and friends? I doubt it. Bush would still “suck” eh?)

Jack said:
“I couldn’t care less about wether Iraq was justified or not, what I care about is geting our troops home without creating a giant black hole of anarchy and destabalization.”

I do want the troops home, but not at the cost of losing, or even the appearance of losing. Remember when Israel just recently pulled back, how the rabble rousers chased them shooting guns and claiming for Palestine that they chased Israel out, A defeat for Israel, God’s on their side now, Israel is scared, and have the attacks stopped? Yes I want my cousins home, but they don’t want to come home until they’re done and well then dangit for that and the other reason neither do I. Not prematurely. And I don’t want the ones shooting at us to get wind that we’re even talking about it, or that will give them the courage to hang on just that little bit longer. I’m sure you’re aware of psy-ops, at least as far as how Bush is doing it domestically. (where’s that rolling eyes smiley??) Think that it can be in reverse, or an indirect tangent? Naah, mainstream media tells us it’s only Bush, matter of fact Bush pays people himself to print good stories in Iraq, right? hahahahahaha. sorry. I’m being civil aren’t I?

Jack said:
“I could careless about clinton and China, we need to take precautions to make sure China doesn’t become a threat.”

Well I would like to make sure China doesn’t become a threat too. How do we do That one!? Give them money and tech? The nation needs to be shown that we will prosecute Clinton. We need to know what happened to make sure more of it isn’t still happening with Clinton’s ideological friends still working in high places. China already is a threat, China Identifies the US as a threat. They’ve got good positioning on the value of the dollar atm too. Prosecuting Clinton is as much to me as a message sent to China as well as others as anything else would be. And other things need to be done as well, that’s just a clear message to the Bush Sucks crowd, and the Marxist Clinton/China supporters that that’s not what this nation will stand for. Pretty sure the rank and file Americans don’t stand for corruption… although sometimes I have my doubts about all sides.

nut, I wanted to respond to you but you’re still doing it.

nut said:
“I do dispair about Bush and the path that he has led our country down.”
That sounds like a personal problem to me.

nut said:
“We didn’t need a trillion dollar war right now.”
When do we ever want a trillion dollar war? I realize you said need, but need trumps want and we don’t get to choose. Yeah yeah no name calling, but that seems childish to me. We *needed* to take Saddam out during the 1st one, and things went downhill from there with him because we didn’t.

nut said:
“We did need to actually go after terrorism, not use it as an excuse to stage an invasion of the middle east.”

glad you recognize that need. There’s ALWAYS more than one reason. My opinion was the Taliban needed to go as soon as I heard about those statues being knocked. Was hoping the people would do it, but I understand the difficulty. It’s a buch of liberals (there’s so many different factions, I have to lump them… marxists, peaceniks, etc…) that needed the excuse, like frightened little rabbits with their heads buried in their sexual freedom dialog and late’s running around accusing conservatives of bing… well we know what they’re accused of. Where are the roots of islamofascism? Canada?

nut said:
“We need leadership that respects rationality.”
And in my opinion, we have one. What you’re implying is we don’t. So do we do comparison of others apparent respect for rationality like say… Gore? Or do we go from the angle of ideas, where we get to spend enormous amounts of time unraveling liberal spin(usually right from the first few words, like “Given that Bush is an intolerant religious zealot, …”)? Either way is fine with me.

nut said:
“We need a healthcare system that works for everyone.”
Ok, something that’s an actual issue where the debate is still reasonably open. It’s my opinion that socalized medicine programs become more problematic than any problem that occured before them. While I tend to “everyone pay for their own” is the most “fair”, it does leave some out. I think private companies, organizations and charities should help those that can’t. Or, like in my case, I will be caring for my mother instead of leaving it up to the state to do, which is basically stealing from my neighbor to take care of my mother. (I’m grinning, I do realize what I said.)

nut said:
“We need to recognize that unbridled capitalism (unchecked by good government) will eat you alive and produce poor quality products”

Yes, Capitalism needs Some checks, no doubt. But not a heck of a lot. From what I’ve seen, right when the water’s about to find it’s level (meaning, when there is a problem within the capitalistic system, I believe that with time it will usually correct itself… Usually… not always) someone goes and sticks a barrier in it (writes a law to fix a real or imagined defect in the system, right before it would have fixed itself over time) and makes things worse. Fewer, but more intelligent regulatory statutes.

We need less beurocracy, fewer laws, weaker central government, not more.

What’s the difference between Eschelon and Arafat?
One of them’s still around.
Jack Antilla Says: January 28th, 2006 at 5:05 am

Celumnaz, Think before you speak.

My previous post said clinton is tarnished for one reason. Yes, he has MANY MANY MANY more flaws and bad decisions, but do you see any of them in the media?

I sure don’t, the only thing i see when clinton is brought up (usually as a deflection) is Ms. Lewinski, or some other secratary.

And yes I am aware of psy ops, I was in a psy ops unit in afganistan before my transfer to westpoint, so please, don’t talk to me like I’m a child.

And would you stop refering to us as “bush sucks crowd” I find the term demining, as you do what all others in politics do, make your opponent out to be an idiot.

PAY ATTENTION.

do you read me going on and on about Bush sucking? no, If I go on a rant about the president, it alwayse an attack on his ploicy, never the man himself.

agian, I shall keep my peace untill you pull your head out of your ass and can hold a meaningfull, constructive conversation without trashing me, calling me a liar, or making me out to be a child.

Joy, if you’re still here, I wish to know your thoughts on the current situation with CHina and russia. I find you to be the least annoying person to debate with.
nutslikebush Says: January 29th, 2006 at 6:46 pm

For 8 solid years, C, your guys threw absolutely every dirty trick in the book at Clinton and attempted both through political channels and private sector right-wing hate publications to undermine his ability to govern. No doubt that enormous amounts of FABRICATED accusations were lodged against him (same thing happend in 2004 with the so-called Swift-Boat clowns against Kerry). The vast majority of this stuff came from people with absolutely no credibility - it was just dirty politics - plain and simple. You don’t appear to be capable of distinguishing credible information from the non-sense you have been force-fed by the conservative mind-control squad that you have fallen victim to. The conservative media relies on your gullibility.
Emory Says: January 29th, 2006 at 10:25 pm

Bill Clinton’s inabilities of governance were his own. A strong president shouldn’t let publications deter his path, even if the had been fabricated.
nutslikebush Says: January 30th, 2006 at 4:09 am

Emory, I didn’t say they suceeded in totally derailing Clinton. He had a fantastic success in the Balkans, the economy was better under Clinton’s policies than it was under Reagan or either Bush. Employment was fantastic, his welfare to work program moved more people out of poverty and off the welfare roles than any republican plan ever has (in fact, poverty has grown very fast under Bush). He was making tremendous progress in the middle east peace process (which has been undone by our recent poor leadership). More terrorists were successfully prosecuted under Clinton than under Bush. Unfortunately, Reagan created al qaeda to help him fight the soviets, funded them, and taught the how to defeat a superpower. Talk about your unitended consequences? According to Richard Clark, it was the Bush administration, not Clinton’s that failed to take the threat of al qaeda seriously.
Emory Says: January 30th, 2006 at 6:20 am

Clinton did do a great job in the bosnia and had the fortune of presiding over the Internet’s coming of age economy. The welfare reform efforts were driven by the Republicans, who, if I recall, had to twist Clintons arm (twice he refused to sign). Clinton probably did prosecute terrorists, but I think in retrospect, we can all agree he missed a few important ones, about 18. Reagan creating al qaeda is of course, false.
nutslikebush Says: January 30th, 2006 at 9:30 pm

Emory, I agree that it took both sides working together to get welfare reform legislation passed. It is also an exageration to say Reagan “created” al qaeda. But he sure helped bin laden and the organization that evolved into al qaeda by providing them with arms and funding. Reagan also pushed the king of Saudi Arabia pretty hard to get the house of Saud to support bin laden in afghanistan. Of course Reagan did not realize how this would come back to bite us. But when you play with fire, sometimes you get burned.
nutslikebush Says: January 30th, 2006 at 9:33 pm

As for the internet coming of age, legislation pushed through congress by Al Gore provided virtually all of the original R&D funding for the internet. Many people forget that the internet, like the interstate highway system, was just another federal government project.
McSpankerton Says: February 3rd, 2006 at 5:46 am

Mr Nuts, read this:

Good Bad? You Decide

Clinton awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Yugoslavia - good…
Bush awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Iraq - bad…

Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia - good…
Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq - bad…

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - good…
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad…

Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists- good…
Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator - bad…

Clinton bombs Chinese embassy - good…
Bush bombs terrorist camps - bad…

Clinton commits felonies while in office - good…
Bush lands on aircraft carrier in jumpsuit - bad…

No mass graves found in Serbia - good…
No WMD found Iraq - bad…

Stock market crashes in 2000 under Clinton - good…
Economy on upswing under Bush - bad…

Clinton refuses to take custody of Bin Laden - good…
World Trade Centers fall under Bush - bad…

Clinton says Saddam has nukes - good…
Bush says Saddam has nukes - bad…

Clinton calls for regime change in Iraq - good…
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad…

Terrorist training in Afghanistan under Clinton - good…
Bush destroys training camps in Afghanistan - bad…

Milosevic not yet convicted - good…
Saddam turned over for trial - bad…

I bet you and your liberal cronies starting laughing when you read this, Mr. Nuts, but when you realized it was sarcasm and that it was true, you started foaming at the mouth, convulsing, involuntarily urinating, and crying simultaneously.
McSpankerton Says: February 3rd, 2006 at 6:01 am

Mr. Nuts, if you want to talk about liars in the GOP, then first let’s look at a pair of quotes from your favorite poster boy of your party:

“I did not have…sexual relations with that woman, Mrs. Lewinsky…”

…weeks later…

“Indeed, I did have sexual relations…”

–Bill Clinton
Celumnaz Says: February 3rd, 2006 at 10:11 pm

For some reason this website crashes my browser! Wierd. Are there new jokes here or something that I’m missing or is it that trolls have done scared everyone looking for a laugh away?

Jack said:
“My previous post said clinton is tarnished for one reason. Yes, he has MANY MANY MANY more flaws and bad decisions, but do you see any of them in the media?”

nut said:
“For 8 solid years, C, your guys threw absolutely every dirty trick in the book at Clinton and attempted both through political channels and private sector right-wing hate publications to undermine his ability to govern. No doubt that enormous amounts of FABRICATED accusations were lodged against him (same thing happend in 2004 with the so-called Swift-Boat clowns against Kerry)”

So which is it? It’s out there, it’s not out there? Is this a difference in ideology or medium on what’s considered media? Maybe y’all two should get together, work out the story, and then get back.

Jack said:
“And yes I am aware of psy ops, I was in a psy ops unit in afganistan before my transfer to westpoint, so please, don’t talk to me like I’m a child.

And would you stop refering to us as “bush sucks crowd” I find the term demining, as you do what all others in politics do, make your opponent out to be an idiot.

I made you out to be an idiot?? You flatter me and give me too much credit, you helped some… (looking to see if I ever called you an idiot, or if you chose that for yourself)

What the HECK does Russia or China have to do with:

Original Post: “I’ll know you’ll want to start filling up your catalog before Thanksgiving, so here are some bad jokes about liberals.

Q: Did you hear that Mary Mapes discovered that Santa Claus is real? She’s got the letters to prove it!

Q: What’s the difference between a puppy and a liberal?
A: Puppies stop whinning after they grow up.

Q: What do you get when you cross Bea Arther and a Raggedy Ann doll?
A: Maureen Dowd.

Q: Why do liberals and Rubix Cubes have in common?
A: The more you try to figure them out, the more confusing they get. ”

??????????

What does Russia or China have to do with that?????

Good points Emory and McSpankerton.

nut? Jack? Got any amusing jokes about Liberals? I’ll take a Marxist joke, an environmentalist joke, a feminist joke… it’s all good fun!

Q: How many Liberal Democrats does it take to change a lightbulb ?
A: None. “Well it’s not really a question of should we change the lightbulb or should we not change the lightbulb, but more a question of… zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…..”
Joy Says: February 4th, 2006 at 12:08 am

Jack,
You mean tweedle dee and tweedle dum…with fangs and nukes and an inherent aversion to beautiful Americans?
The Bobsey Twins on Meth with crosshairs trained on my forehead?
The marriage of the black widow and the inland taipan?
THAT China and Russia?
Signed,
“LEAN(LEastANnoying)Conservative”
Joy Says: February 4th, 2006 at 1:07 am

Jack,
Below the surface:
Why has Israel became an issue in the discussion regarding the Iranian nuclear program?
Joy Says: February 4th, 2006 at 1:38 am

One more question…
Why are China and Russia backing referral of Iran to the UN Security Council…as long as the issue isn’t addressed for a month after referral?
Jack Antilla Says: February 5th, 2006 at 12:37 am

Celumnaz, I am not a democrat, I am a registered Republican. even though I do disagree with many of the areas of my party especially since Bush is not a true republican, just a conneticit boy with a fake texas accent posing as a republican, how else do you explaine the massive growth in government spending, the explosion of the beurocracy, etc…

not a very republican thing to do.

Lefty, (nutslikebush) is of a different political ideology then I, stop talking like we’re the same person, infact, take poli sci 101, maybe then you get an Idea there are more than 2 sides to political ideology.

and joy, once agian it is a pleasure to talk to someone Intelegent here.

and yes I am refering to tweedle dumb and tweedle dee. I’m not so much interested in their backing of Iran, as I am concerned in their rapid growth and militarization. The cold war was 2 Superpowers batteling for supremecy, and it nearly destroyed the world, Imagin 3 superpowers. And yes, if things continue as they are, I can see Russia and China becoming just as stron as the U.S and as Iran demonstrates, begin to influence world events to their liking.

THAT is what Im concerned about, becaus Bin Loden, Al queda, Zarqawi, etc… Is all remenants of the cold war.
Joy Says: February 6th, 2006 at 6:32 pm

I brought up the Iran situation because it is modus operandi for both Russia and China.
By the way, somewhere else in this blog, I noticed that you thought my belief system was totally against killing. I’m a qualified ‘expert’ marksman and believe in restraint with the skill - for which some people can literally thank God. Of course it is wrong to kill randomly due to personal wrongs, but I do not believe it is wrong to kill in true and immediate self defense, true and immediate defense of others, or in legal response to proven calculated cold-blooded torture and murder for the thrill of it. I do not believe that the death sentence is ‘cruel and unusual punishment’, as it quickly sends the murderer to their next stage - which is more than was done with their victims.
Torture is wrong, as it furthers dehumanization of all involved.
That’s a very brief - believe it or not- summation of how I view being a party to ending physical life.
Regarding Tweedles Dee and Dum, I’d like to read your line of reasoning behind “remnants of the Cold War”.
Joy Says: February 6th, 2006 at 9:27 pm

I want to clarify that, in my comment on people who could literally thank God for their life, I was not referring to just anyone with whom I became angry; I was referring to a few individuals who physically and emotionally seriously abused me and others. At that time it was ONLY the belief in the wrong of murder and a God Who expects and helps me to do the very hard right thing in real and practical ways, that kept them alive, NOT lack of skill or desire.

LONG QUOTE of Thomas Jefferson:
“He who made us would have been a pitiful bungler, if he had made the rules of our moral conduct a matter of science. For one man of science, there are thousands who are not. What would have become of them? Man was destined for society. His morality, therefore, was to be formed to this object. He was endowed with a sense of right and wrong merely relative to this. This sense is as much a part of his nature, as the sense of hearing, seeing, feeling; it is the true foundation of morality… The moral sense, or conscience, is as much a part of man as his leg or arm. It is given to all human beings in a stronger or weaker degree, as force of members is given them in a greater or less degree. It may be strengthened by exercise, as may any particular limb of the body. This sense is submitted indeed in some degree to the guidance of reason; but it is a small stock which is required for this: even a less one than what we call Common sense. State a moral case to a ploughman and a professor. The former will decide it as well, and often better than the latter, because he has not been led astray by artificial rules.” (”artificial rules”:
aka - political correctness)
nutslikebush Says: February 7th, 2006 at 4:39 am

I think Jefferson, as a Unitarian Universalist, meant something different by “artificial rules.” I think he meant religious rules. Have you read the Jefferson bible or his writings on universalism? He rejected traditional Christian interpretations of the bible and thought they were contrived, degenerate, artificial rules for human behavior.
nutslikebush Says: February 7th, 2006 at 4:51 am

short quote from Jefferson.
The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814
nutslikebush Says: February 7th, 2006 at 4:55 am

another wonderful Jefferson quote.
And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors.

-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
Joy Says: February 8th, 2006 at 4:57 pm

Lefty,
“Artificial rules” are artificial rules, whether in the religion of secular humanism, or those who claim to be Christian, Jew, Hindu, Muslim, Buddist, etc. Any added rules not supported by the basic idea, are ‘artificial rules’. Jesus, Himself, was angered by the Pharisees (religious hypocrites of the day) who burdened people down with rules that didn’t have anything to do with real life or compassion or true love.
Jefferson seemed to have his own set of artificial rules regarding slavery as he seemed to talk out of both sides of his mouth. In reality, even a jackass (referring to everyone at times and no one in particular) can speak the truth and the truth remains the truth - though it’s confusing when it doesn’t line up with actions.
I’m very familiar with Jefferson and his belief system. I don’t agree with it or adhere to it, but I do agree with him in many areas. We are all born with a sense of right and wrong which can be strengthened or weakened by our attention to and exercise of it. That was my point.
nutslikebush Says: February 9th, 2006 at 4:45 am

Joy,
Your point is well-taken. My point was just that I think that Jefferson wasn’t refering to “policital correctness” when he used the phrase “artificial rules” in the context of the quote that you provided. The quotes that I supplied were intended to shed some light on what Jefferson intended to communicate to us when he chose the words “artificial rules.” I also find it fascinating that a primary author of our country’s Declaration of Independence and Constitution suggests that much of what we find in the Gospels is “obviously a product of inferior minds.” Jefferson hated magical thinking and the stories of miracles and divinity. He thought that degraded the authentic meaning of the life of Jesus. I have long agreed with this perspective. In fact, the “dressing up” to make the religion appeal to the lowest superstious, irrational, primative parts of our minds has prevented many Christians from grasping the beautiful message of Jesus, the man. The struggle to comprehend the moment is enough to fill a man’s soul. To demand eternity, to require an infinite god that would want to be worshipped, that would demand sacrifices, that would play stupid mind games with people (Training to be a minister in my late teens and early twenties, I read the Bible cover-to-cover numerous times; In the end I concluded that it is largely the work of crazy people), all of this just confuses the believers and devalues the here and now, you and me, us. The fact that we live as finite beings in a finite world drives all of life’s meaning into this very moment. This being said, you would probably be surprised to know that I often speak at evangelical churches and I have learned to keep my true views on religion to myself because the reactions of true believers is so outrageous. It reminds me to some extent of how the crazy muslims are reacting to the silly cartoon of Mohammed. Do these people have no capacity for self-examination? The rioters are complete idiots. But never underestimate the violent tendencies of religious fundamentalists and zealots.
Joy Says: February 9th, 2006 at 5:05 pm

The violent tendencies of religious fundamentalists and zealots are the violent tendencies in human nature. When we try to cover our personal wrongs with ‘religion’, we’re simply putting an ornate false frame around a brimming outhouse, or, as Jesus said: “Whitewashed tombs, full of dead men’s bones” …no life there. Like black holes, these types suck others into their abyss one way or another (whether by recruitment or death)rather than humble themselves and admit they’re worse (due to hypocrisy) than those they condemn. Whenever we demand of others what we, ourselves, will not or cannot do, we are wrong at the least and deadly at the worst.
I agree, self-examination is an absolute necessity…no options. There must be a standard to have an examination, though - otherwise, how is it evaluated?
kolran Says: May 28th, 2006 at 5:31 pm

Hello to all republicans (or anyone that is not an all out liberal). Under PUFFERY, CHEST POUNDING AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS nutslikebush said he was waiting for the wheels to fall off the republican party. I also read one of nutslikebush’s posts that declared nutslikebush was not a liberal and it even hinted he was more of a republican. If someone can tell me where that post is we would be in bussiness.

P.S. I hope Jack Antilla or Celumnaz reads this.
kolran Says: May 30th, 2006 at 11:33 pm

I take that back. I found a lot more cases where nutslikebush switches sides.
Jack Antilla Says: May 31st, 2006 at 3:10 am

I fail to see what your obsession with finding hipocracy in leftys arguments has to do with Celumnaz and I.
kolran Says: May 31st, 2006 at 10:40 pm

Me too…
UrLiLiberal Says: July 10th, 2006 at 12:30 am

All politicians lie. Republican, Democrat, Independent. doesn’t matter really. It’s all about holding our leaders accountable by second guessing their policies and pure dissension. Yet it is Taboo to even speak of Politics in Texas, my home state, because it’s like questioning the existence of God to most people in the South. We shouldn’t be arguing about the fact that our leaders have misled us, we should immediately stop being jacked off by these ridiculous, rich liars and start figuring out how to hold them responsible for their actions.

Firstly though forget Clinton really… it’s quite useless. He’s gone… no more Clinton Bye Bye Bye Clinton. Who’s in office now? Who’s making decisions that are running our nation into the ground NOW!? That’s what we should be focusing on. We can’t do a damn thing about a policy Clinton instated 10 years ago now can we? We can get over that and flush that crap down the toilet. Progressive resolve can only be achieved through national dissension. Dissension is the only true action of a Patriot.
UrLiLiberal Says: July 10th, 2006 at 12:32 am

Q: Why do liberals and Rubix Cubes have in common?
A: The more you try to figure them out, the more confusing they get.

By the way that’s my favorite joke. I can never figure that stupid cube out for the life of me. Probably because a conservative invented it and their intelligence is quite unfathomable to my mediocre liberal mind.
pithy Says: October 17th, 2006 at 9:42 pm

ok morons… first of all, the fake conservative sounds like an idiot. second of all ‘nuts like bush’ writes the most haphazard bush bashing ever to be seen. lets think of what you are criticizing. phone tapping: MORON… ONLY BLACKLISTED (known al-qaeda related numbers) are listened in on. hate to break it to you, but NOBODY cares what some neo-hippie leftover is saying to his dyke girlfriend on his cell-phone. basically, being opposed to phone tapping is saying this :”sure, its cool if americans talk to the enemy, after all, its their right” do you realize how stupid and selfish that is? guess what, if people are talking to the enemy, THAT is treason. a president pushing a just war is not treason, but a soldier visiting the enemy capitol city and speaking to the enemy leader IS treason by definition! its amazing how ignorant you people are. second point, if you are opposed to the Iraq occupation (its not a war you bloviating nitwit, the war ended 3 weeks after it started) that is tantamount to you being against fighting Hitler in WWII. hitler didnt attack us, neither did saddam. but ah! we fought hitler because he was mercilessly slaughtering innocent people, kind of EXACTLY like saddam. also, for mr secular-progressive over here, dissent is not the ‘true action of a patriot’ that is the farthest thing from it. fighting and defending your country is the true action of a patriot. you will notice for example, that nobody protested the American Revolution. do you know where secularist liberals were during the revolution? IN ENGLAND NOT FIGHTING. if you have ever in your life read a history book, you would realize that the men who fought for and designed our freedom were republican beyond being conservative. not only that, for you aclu-type liberals who will do anything to keep christianity out of the public forum, everyone of them wrote essays and ideas detailing that the only way for a free society to exist is with the conviction that god is watching over those freedoms. (read a book cock) not only that, but what else can you say thats bad about bush? he cut taxes, raised the economy that clinton trucked in 2000, actually defended our country from terrorists unlike clinton who did nothing after the roughly 6 or 7 terrorist attacks on americans during his administration, presided over the biggest housing boom in history, is currently presiding over RECORD highs in the stock market, and best of all, saving your stupid ass. protecting you so you can protest that very action of him protecting you. you people are so ass backwards and off base from what America was meant to be and is still about (thank god) that it makes me sick. guess what, move to canada if you want to be a secular progressive.
nutslikebush Says: October 18th, 2006 at 6:35 am

Pithy,
Show me where you get the idea that only Al-Qaeda conversations are being intercepted and recorded. You are going to have a hard time supporting that notion because it ain’t true. Second, you have no idea why we faught WWII, from what I can tell (although WWII has absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about - but I am sure that your non-linear logic just springs you into irrelevant references to WWII and Hitler spontaneously and involuntarily). As for our founding fathers, I’d say that establishing a new form of government is about as non-conservative as one can get, by definition. The values of many of my stocks have soared, indeed. I wish the middle class were doing as well as guys like you and me who are invested in the stock market. Those poor folks who live off their salaries and wages are not doing so well. As for having my stupid ass saved, I doubt that the current administration can be given much credit for that. In fact, I think it is clear that they are endangering all of our stupid asses much more than they are protecting us. You think Bush cut your taxes? Guess what, the $8 trillion dept is just a deferred massive tax. Right now you personally owe over $40,000 (a family of 4 owes $160,000 on it). So running up long-term debt while reducing the taxes on a very small number of elite super-wealthy is an illusion. A very expensive illusion.
British_Nationalist Says: October 18th, 2006 at 11:01 am

Pithy, I’m not going to get involved in the Conservative vs Liberal row because frankly I couldn’t care less at the moment. I’m British and personally I won’t be happy until our lying, cowardly, two-faced, spineless idiot of a Primeminister is thrown out of office and cooked in a very hot cauldron. And he can take his Scottish, socialist lackey Gordon B

Laugh at Liberals

Laughs

Past Laughs

JOKES ABOUT LIBERALS

84 Responses to “JOKES ABOUT LIBERALS”