to our beloved raghead camel shagger friends, from Russia with love and redneck mystic and other American patriot strains of common sense and hopes for the afterlife
Those gentle, always polite Canadians.
Maybe being a hockey commentator makes a difference.
DON CHERRY, Canadian Hockey Commentator for CBC Television, was asked on a local live radio talk show, what he thought about the allegations of torture of suspected terrorists. His reply prompted his ejection from the studio, but to thunderous applause from the audience.
“If hooking up one rag head terrorist prisoner’s testicles to a car battery to get the truth out of the lying little camel shagger will save just one Canadian life or American, then I have only three things to say:
‘Red is positive, black is negative, and make sure his nuts are wet.”
I would not even laugh if they wired G.W. Bush and his confederates up like that, to get the truth out of them. But I would be glad to hear the truth, finally.
Republican snowbird amigo replied:
Would you like me to take you off of the jokes list? Everyone I know likes this stuff. And he didn’t mention either Bush or Obama.
What do you imagine, friend, that ragheads in Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Egypt, Somalia, Kuwait, Yemen, Qatar, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. reading forwards of that joke online does to their warm, loving feelings toward the US? Americans think that sort of shit doesn’t circle back around and bite them in the butt? You warmly supported a President who did far more harm to America and to Americans and to non-Americans than all the ragheads added up and multiplied by several numbers did to America and Americans. You don’t see that?
Republican Snowbird Amigo replied:
I’ll take you off the jokes list.
Some of the jokes you send are hilarious, such as the Russian wife joke, which you also sent today. Your America and/or Republicans the Beautiful and/or Obama, Democrats and Others the Ugly jokes, however, are not.
Republican snowbird amigo replied:
You’re off the list. If you want back on, let’s not have the political dialogue. I would send them to my political list, but can’t because of the bad language.
Cussing and telling adult jokes are me and my Republican amigo’s favorite pasttimes. I be damned if I would belong to a fucking political party that frowned on cussing or adult jokes like the Russian wife tale, although she sorta looks more like a Swiss or a Dutch wife to me:
NO Speak English
A Russian woman married an American gentleman born in Virginia and they lived happily ever after in his home town.
In The Key West Citizen today:
‘Patriotic’ phrase is effective propaganda
A funny thing happened last night while I was on Facebook. For those of you that are unfamiliar with Facebook, it is an online “social networking” format that allows one to, among other things, get into arguments with total strangers.
I usually avoid these conversational “threads,” but last night I got sucked into a debate on the phrase: “Support the Troops.” I honestly and with no malice stated I am done using that slogan for a couple of reasons.
Before you freak out and tar and feather me for being a traitor, hear me out (First Amendment). The phrase was introduced during the first Gulf War as a pre-emptive marketing strategy to counter any anti-Gulf War sentiments. The aging military hierarchy was still smarting from Vietnam and wanted to get out in front of the possible negative civilian blowback. Who could possibly not support our brave fighting men and women of the armed services? So if you were against this war, you were considered anti-troops.
The other troubling aspect of the slogan is the dehumanizing phrase “troops.” When we hear about troops being blown up by roadside bombs, or troops coming home alive but armless or legless, it is easier to process. Soldiers used to be called soldiers, human beings with parents and spouses and kids.
The slogan “support the troops” is a fallacious bit of effective propaganda.
I was severely verbally attacked for my viewpoint, and had we been in close proximity I’m sure these patriots and lovers of freedom would have strung me up. In other words, freedom and democracy are fine as long as I plod along like a zombie in agreement. I’m sure that’s what Franklin and Jefferson had in mind.
Amensky, and the best way to support the troops is to encourage the troops to leave Afghanistan on their own and not let another American president send them into another colossally stupid fucking war not even an idiot would start or support.
This also is in The Citizen today:
The drone dilemma: balancing priorities
At this writing, neither Congress nor the American people have the facts or details necessary to judge the policy of killing an American citizen in the name of national security. This difficult issue needs to be debated publicly so the people can express their views on the delicate balance between protection from foreign threats and protecting the laws and values of our democracy.
The nation requires a thoughtful solution, supported by the electorate, that enables every commander in chief to fulfill his constitutional duty to protect the nation, while also protecting citizens from governmental abuse.
Our society routinely authorizes soldiers and police to use deadly force to protect Americans, and the president has even bigger responsibilities and authority in that regard. The current administration, headed by a constitutional scholar, is trying to find the right balance. On one hand we’re confronting a homicidal non-state, non-uniformed terrorist enemy with access to weapons of mass destruction, which requires secrecy, vigilance and 100 percent successful deterrence on our part. On the other hand, giving the power to kill an American without due process, transparency or oversight to a handful of politicians isn’t the American ideal. And further, it doesn’t make constitutional or practical sense to give prior approval power to Congress or the judiciary.
There is a need, however, for congressional briefing and more formal oversight within the executive branch, and this could be achieved by an independent three-person review board with judicial, national security and political experience.These reforms would create pressure on every senior official to exercise prudence without preventing appropriate and timely action.
Those who see this issue as black or white should imagine a U.S. president or vice president (past or future) they don’t trust, and then imagine that individual having this power of life or death. For progressives, civil libertarians and this administration, the thought of a future Dick Cheney or Dan Quayle making deadly judgments behind closed doors should be a wake-up call to fix this policy once and for all.
Roger C. Kostmayer
Amensky, but I would add to the hit list, George W. Bush and Barrack Hussein Obama.
Sloan Bashinsky, cross my heart and hope to die redneck mystic patriot insurgent jihadist looking forward to going to be with 70 Russian virgins, although Swiss or Dutch, or just about any other kind of virgins would probably do …