I wonder if the terrorist scum at Gitmo have been received their absentee ballots yet?

We've already made them honorary US citizens. I'm sure Democrats will want them to vote.
 

I can't wait for the US to begin supplying the terrorists with Lawyers.

A Vote for a Democrat is a Vote for Allah.

ALLAH AKBAR 2006!!!
 

You gotta love Uncle Osama. Good job.
 

Thanks Jay, I actually got this from the formerly nicotene stained hands of Rush Limbaugh.
 

MRC, if you actually want to hold a position as an elected government official I hope you get some sense of reality.

You are basically saying that 50 percent of the country is evil and want to see terrorists win. That is a foolish proposition on its face.
 

I do have a sense of reality Rob, and I am displaying what will happen by my perception if the Republicans do not go out and vote.

I am not saying that 50% of the people in our nation is evil, and you will not find that I presume that on any post I have made in almost two years.

However, you can go to almost any Liberal Blog and see that they beleive that EVERY Republican is evil.

There is a double standard in politics, and it begins and ends with the Democrat party.
 

You post up a picture of bin Laden saying he wants folks to vote for Democrats. You have a doctored photo presumably of Iranians wanting Americans to vote Democratic. Then you claim that Dems have a double standard.

What a joke.

Unlike your hatred of all things Democratic, I don't hate Republicans. The reason is that I know that they are not one big monolithic group. The idea that Democrats somehow want terrorists to win - which is exactly what you are implying - labels the 50 percent of Americans who vote Democratic as terrorist lovers.

Please explain to me how it is that your post does not accuse anyone who votes Democratic as a bin Laden/terrorist supporter.
 

Of course Bin Laden would want you to vote Democrat, because the Democratic Party is all about appeasement.

There is a blatant double standard, and you trying to tell me I am a joke is the root of it all.

Sure Gerry Studds can molest a child, and the Democrats appauded him.

Mark Foley sends some crude e-mails, and the Democrats cry bloody murder.

If that is not a double standard then explain how so.

Also, I AM labeling the Democratic Party as a whole the "Appeasement Party" not terrorist lovers. I leave that sort of conversation for someone like Anne Coulter.
 

OK, it is nice to know that you DON'T think that anyone who votes for Dems loves terrorists. It sure is hard to tell by your pictures that you don't believe the millions of voters who vote for Dems this election are not pro-bin Laden.

What Dems applauded Studds? He was censured by a Democratic Congress.

Foley sent crude emails and propositioned 16-year old pages. He did this with the knowledge of leaders in the House of Representatives. I also think that there is bi-partisan outrage and that is why there is House Ethics panel looking into it.

What double standard are you referring to?
 

OK Rob, Gerry Studds not only ignored his censure, but was applauded by the Democrat House members in 1983.

His reasoning why he ignored the censure was that he took the 16 year old boy out of country to have sex with him, and he said that he didn't break any laws.

Studds was re-elected and stayed in the house until 1996 i think, and Nancy Pelosi attempted to make him a Committee Chairman several times.

THAT IS A DOUBLE STANDARD.
 

How was he applauded if he was censured?

Where in the world are you getting your "facts?" Studds had sex with a 17-year old page - but in DC 17 year olds are of legal age. He didn't break any laws, but was censured for unethical behavior.

Again, how could he be applauded if the House voted to censure him?

Also, Pelosi didn't become Minority Leader until 2002. Here first leadership position was in 2001 when she became the minority whip. So, Pelosi didn't have any power to make him a chairman - even if she wanted to.

You don't offer any facts to support your claim of a DOUBLE STANDARD.
 

MRC, are you not going to post my response? Perhaps you did not get it.
 

What Response?
 

Ah, that response...

1) William Jefferson
2) Barney Frank
3) William jefferson Clinton
4) Gerry Studds
5) Mel Reynolds
6) Harry Reid

What do all of them have in common?

Do you know how to use google? Look up Gerry Studds Applauded 1983.
 

Do we really want to bring up all of the names of Republican Congressmen who have been convicted, indicted, or are under investigation currently?

Why not stay on the Studds and Pelosi factual errors you have made?

Any comments on what I wrote about Pelosi? She wasn't in a leadership position until after Studds left Congress.

As for the Studds discussion. I pointed out that he had sex with a 17-year old page - that was/is legal in DC. So no law was broken. What law do you think was broken?

However, ONCE AGAIN, the Democratic House censured him for unethical behavior - how is that applauding him? What do you think the House should have done?

I googled "Gerry Studds Applauded 1983" and all I found was some comments on blogs or other sites - no actual stories to corroborate your contention that we was "applauded."
 

I admit that I was wrong about the age of the boy that Gerry Studds molested, but it doesn't make what he did acceptable. He breached the trust of that boys family, and the honor and integrity of his office.

Gerry Studds stayed in office for a long time after that along with Jefferson of late. Foley does the unexcuseable and is excused from public office.

Bill Clinton disgraced the highest office our nation by getting felatio from an intern while his wife was undoubtedly in the same HOUSE.

Pelosi was not the Minority leader, but as a lobbyist she tried several times to make him a Chairman of some committees.
 

Foley resigned on his own. That was his decision. Studds was re-elected by his constituents. Jefferson continues to run and his constituents can choose him if they want. I have no idea why folks would vote for Studds or Jefferson, but that was/is their decision. Perhaps there weren't/aren't better options.

Clinton got a blowjob - so what? He and his wife resolved their problems. After his impeachment his approval rating was above 70 percent.
(http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeachment.poll/)

He left office with an approval rating of 65 percent.

http://uspolitics.about.com/library/bl_historical_approval.htm

You and I can agree that his personal behavior was wrong, but his wife stayed with him and the people spoke.

Finally, w/respect to Pelosi, why do you think she was a lobbyist? She was a part of the California Democratic Party in leadership positions from 1977 through most of the 1980s. She was elected in 1987. What is your source for her being a lobbyist and further, what reason and what power would she have for trying to make Studds a committee chairman? Also, what committee do you maintain she tried to make him the chairman of?