I decided to take another spin around the blogosphere (besides here) for some entertainment (aka comment reading), and the gems I find cease to amaze me. Conservatives were outraged because someone posted a youtube video of Ron Paul not supporting Israel enough during this latest installment of the Gaza problem. And to most points I agree with them, Just War Theory and common sense give Israel enough reason to halt rocket fire against its citizens. But then there are the numerous thoughtful comments such as:
100% pure unadulterated bigoted moonbat:
The Ron Paul Campaign and its Neo-Nazi Supporters
Fvck him.
This man is coming ever closer to being racist.Mr Paul you are no consev.you and your kind make me sick.
Paultards are modern day aplogist of Nazi’s, who happen to worship Hitler as well, for good reason. Mein Kampf is still a top seller there.
Nazi Paul should be parashooted in the middle of Gaza with “Mohammed is a Pig” tattooed on his forehead.
None of which was surprising, but this one was:
He seems to think we can put the Teddy Roosevelt/Woodrow Wilson foreign intervention genie back in the bottle.
Congressman Paul, that train left the station over 8 decades ago.
Someone who hates non-interventionism actually knows, and is willing to admit, just where their flavor of foreign policy comes from. Now if you read into it a little more, you will see the nice hypocrisy going on. Apparently, if you don’t back everything Israel does 100%, you’re a racist and an anti-semite. But the foreign policy they are advocating comes from two racists. Woodrow Wilson was a southern liberal Democrat, who didn’t allow black students while he was heading Princeton University. He then allowed segregation of the federal government. Finally, he screened “Birth of a Nation” at the White House, the famous silent film portraying the KKK as heroes in American history. Meanwhile Teddy advocated genocide of Indians, and was by many accounts, legally insane.
Most of those commenters are probably happy of any form of violence against the A-rabs. It’s only important to note racism if it’s white people being effected and not colored I guess. I’d also bet a good amount that members of the modern day KKK voted for the Republicans this election, yet they don’t obsess over that as much as one white supremacist donor during the primary season.
But why interrupt with history or real debate, when I can sit and watch them whine about waste-of-time topics such as 911 truth?
Filed under: Politics
Yeah, but the hate mail you get from Paulians when you criticise him makes that lot seem pale in comparison.
In the meantime, the Democratic leadership burned the 17th Amendment today and refused to seat an appointed Senator… one who would be the only black in the Senate.
The solution to the Illinois mess is a quick special election, not tearing up the Constitution. However, they fear that because people are so disgusted with the antics involved that the Keystone Kops that are the GOP would actually have a chance at winning.
[quote]Yeah, but the hate mail you get from Paulians when you criticise him makes that lot seem pale in comparison.[/quote]
Not in my experience. I’ve criticized the guy with no such backlash -no rebut either, but certainly no hate mail of any sort (eye rolling and sighs don’t count)…
As for Israel stopping the rocket fire out of Gaza, has anyone considered that the Israeli government might begin to treat the Palestinians as if they were human beings? These days, the Palestinians might settle for being treated as mammals instead of insects.
Of course, such a change in Israeli policy might be facilitated by a change in US policy. Much of the current mess over there stems from the fact that the Israeli government knows it is the Fair-Haired Boy and the Palestinians are the Red-Headed Stepchild when it comes to US policy.
Mike – the solution to the mess in Illinois is a little something called “the Law”. Yesterday, Burris was not seated because his credentials were not in order with respect to Illinois law. His appointment has not been certified by the Illinois Secretary of State. I was a bit surprised to hear that, since the last I had heard from Jesse White (IL Sec of State) was that it was a legal appointment by a sitting governor and he would be required to certify it. (His tone indicated some degree of resignation to me.) That was at the time of the appointment. Perhaps he has been advised otherwise; perhaps he is buying time for the legislature to get rolling on impeachment. Regardless, this matter will be heard by the Courts, who shall determine if Mr White has the right under the laws of the State of Illinois to refuse to certify this appointment without also resigning his post. I don’t know that answer and I doubt Mike that does. We’ll have to wait for the Court to get into the weeds and sort this one out.
So, it is actually the complete opposite, Democratic leadership supported the 17th Amendment by refusing to seat Mr Burris. Illinois law requires that such an interim appointment be certified by the Illinois Secretary of State; the appointment in question was not. Therefore, Mr Burris currently has no more right than my dog to serve as the junior senator from Illinois.
Of course, some have no appreciation for the choreography of the legislative process. I forget the source, but my favorite quote about the Senate is this: “When the Senate appears to be doing nothing, it is acting exactly as the Founding Fathers intended.”
I suspect upon thorough examination, Ron Paul supporters would demonstrate similar spectra of intelligence, tolerance, emotional stability and sanity to those of supporters of Barack Obama, John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Mike Huckabee, et al. So far, I’ve found nice people and assholes among every large group of people I’ve ever encountered.
I don’t think the 17th Amendment is an issue in the Illinois case. The Legislature can change things as they want, the amendment just provides a “solution” to pick a Senator unless the State has a law describing another solution.
Which, Lance, the State does not have in this case. The Secretary of State has admitted has has no legal right NOT to certify the appointment; it is he violating the 17th, with the Senate support. This is a purely political decision, since nearly every constitutional lawyer without a ‘dog in the hunt’ agrees that the argument not to seat him doesn’t hold water.
And Lamont, considering how the Palestinians treat their own (the Fatah/Hamas conflict, using hospitals, schools and mosques for weapon storage and launch points), considering the tactics employed by Palestinian militants in deliberately targeting civilians, considering the cheering in the street they do for every mass terrorist attack that occurs around the world (9/11, Bali, etc.) I have a real hard time feeling sorry for them.
And before you throw ‘being tossed from their lands’ and the injustices therein, remember my wife’s family had to flee their homelands in the same timeframe. But her people decided to build up, rather than tear down, with the aid that they got.
[...] There’s another hate filled topic over at the American Spectator blog to go along with this earlier post. It’s all about this video put out by [...]
Point taken on the 17th amendment, but I will take the position that I believe that a State can do whatever it likes (even in picking a Senator) regardless of the Constitution. State sovereignty overrules the Constitution in my book.
As for your response to Lamont, I do have a couple of things to say. Your first paragraph is misleading because you ignore that the Palestinians cheer because they see every attack as something that can pressure Americans and the West to stop dominating their lives. They are essentially refugees from the great American colonial empire–our obsession with the Middle East has turned us from one of the most loved to the most hated country in the region.
I do agree with the homeland statement, though, the Palestinians are idiots. I read something this morning that I think I will post that you might rather like (from an anti-Israel’s-war position)