Nodrog's Greatest Hits

No answer, so it's off to the races!

2008-09-12T12:21:00.000-07:00

Well, Charles Johnson has decided to ignore my request for reinstatement. A few lizards threw some lame insults my way on a September 8 thread, and that was it.

So now I am officially closing Nodrog's Greatest Hits (it will remain available for your viewing pleasure), and I am starting a new, long-term study of LGF. This study can be found at the following location: http://lgfbannedandblocked.blogspot.com/. See you there!

For those of you typing-impaired, here is a direct link.

Nodrog's Greatest Hits - a Final Appeal

2008-09-08T12:55:00.001-07:00

This last post to the Nodrog's Greatest Hits blog consists of a final appeal.

An appeal to Charles Johnson, the Lizard King himself.

Dear Charles,

I hereby request reinstatement as a lizardoid in good standing on Little Green Footballs.

If reinstated, I promise to post arguments rather than ad hominem insults, even when provoked. And I promise not to insult you, or misuse the comment ratings system. In fact, I promise not to use the comment rating system at all. If I ever renege on this promise, you can block me again.

Please reply to me via my email address at theposterformerlyknownasgordon@gmail.com

Sincerely,

Gordon/Nodrog/The Poster Formerly Known as Gordon

LGF BANNED AND BLOCKED - the Nodrog

2008-08-28T08:34:00.000-07:00

All good things must come to an end, even great things, even the Nodrog's reign of the LGF threads. On October 4, 2007, Charles posted "Google Hearts USSR," yet another in a series of slams at the high-flying search engine, for having the effrontery to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the 1st vehicle in space, because it happened to be Soviet. I commented, acidly, in #20:

Another cheap shot at Google. I chalk it up to jealousy.

Notice the dings - minus 44! Mandy Manners, near the top on the LGF "number of posts" hall of shame, told me in #24 to "piss off already." But meanwhile quite a few posters were taking issue with Charles, and in #46 I made an interesting note:

Wow, Charles actually has a negative rating for one of his posts! LGF Dittoheads, you better start sticking in your + votes!

Don't worry, Charles, by the time this gets posted, you'll probably be back in the black.

This prompted the slavish lizardoids to respond, and Johnson ended up in the black with a plus 28. And I noted the change in #74:

Wow, Lizards to the rescue! If Charles writes it, it must be gospel (or perhaps Torah).

Mandy Manners intelligently responded in #87 with FOAD, you jew-hating bastard. And then Charles Johnson himself came down off of his high horse in #154 and ended it all:

That one did it. I've allowed Gordon to rant and spew for years at LGF, and now, in an attempt to get me to notice him, he resorts to Jew-baiting. OK, Gordon, I noticed you. I noticed that you're a real creep. A creep without an LGF account.

Plus 36 for Chuckles on that one! The lizardoids, led by Mandy Manners in #160, gushed all over Charles for ending their 4 1/2 year nightmare. (to his credit, long-time lizardoid Occasional Reader came to my defense in #199, pointing out delicately that claiming my comment was "jew-baiting" was, of course, ludicrous).

A nightmare of truth speaking to power. A nightmare of intelligence speaking to ignorance. A nightmare of facts combatting fiction. And now power, ignorance, and fiction reigned supreme on Little Green Footballs.

Except that it didn't. There have been additional disturbances in the force since the banning of the Nodrog. We'll discuss that in our final blog post.

The End of Ahmadinejad, and the End of ...

2008-08-27T08:40:00.001-07:00

On October 4, 2007, Charles posted "Ahmadinejad Lashes Out at U.S.," bemoaning once again his presence in our sainted land. In #36 I quoted part of his post and demolished his argument:

[Johnson wrote] Looks like that dialog and free speech at Columbia University really helped him understand us better. Kumbaya.

Nice try, Charles. The point of inviting Ahmedinejad to Columbia was to educate us, not him. He's clearly uneducatable.

And given the significant discussions going on here, elsewhere in the blog world, and everywhere in the U.S. for that matter, Adhmedinejad at Columbia served that purpose quite well.

Lawhawk in #56 tried to claim otherwise, but his arguments were unpersuasive.

In #74, I linked to Seymour Hersh's piece in the New Yorker:

[Link in Original] Plans for Iran:

Alternative Title: How the Bush Administration has learned NOTHING from Iraq

More desultory responses from the lizardoids, but then an electrical post in #119 from loppyd: GORDON JUST GOT HIMSELF BANNED!

And that brings us to our final installment in the legendary Nodrog story.

LGF Embarrasses Itself Against an Ivy Leaguer

2008-08-26T08:51:00.001-07:00

On September 24, 2007, Charles hosted two Columbia students who actually attended the dreaded Ahmadinejad event in their hallowed Ivy League Halls. The thread, entitled "Email From a Columbia Student," then hosted a "debate" between the earnest, intelligent "Jwakswman," and the usual illiterati. In #212 Charles pumped himself up by posting LGF, still a tough room. It was tough for the lizardoids, who got the floor wiped up with themselves against an actual educated individual. In #493 I commented:

Good luck debating these yo-yos, Jwaksman! It's like punching a bowl of jello.

You're absolutely right, by the way. And the abysmal quality of the responses is proof of that!

As if to prove my point, Talkin' Kamel in #494 came back with his Baldwin the Leper King schtick. I came right back in #495:

And on cue, the dolphin jello man extraordinaire shows up.

Maybe you should make your dolphin arguments to Eugene Volokh, who agrees with Jwaksman [link in original].

And the thread comments on that site aren't puerile jello either. You definitely wouldn't fit in.

As if to highlight the thread absurdity, TaxFreeKiller showed up in #506 to provide his usual insight and clarity to matters. In #507 I responded, and added a new wrinkle:

I've seen several LGF spouters over the past several days stating that the Iranian President was one of the hostage takers in 1979. That fact is definitely not proven. [Link in original] And no one's come up with new evidence since.

So stop spouting it like it's fact.

And TFK, all I've ever seen of you (still) is your feet sticking out from under that pickup trip behind the bar in Fort Worth !

The Lizardoids had been intellectually led to the slaughterhouse, and they didn't even realize it!

Dinnerjacket Feeding Frenzy

2008-08-25T08:36:00.000-07:00

The LGF frenzy over the President of Iran's visit to the U.S. reached a fever pitch when he was invited to speak at Columbia University. It was "all Dinnerjacket, all the the Time" (Dinnerjacket, and Nutjob, were LGF nicknames for President Ahmedinejad). On September 23, 2007, Charles posted "Columbia Students: Clueless and Proud of It."

The following needs to be said to the LGF community, so afraid of discussion and so tolerant of "destroying our freedoms in order to save them."

[Link in original to an article: The Price of Freedom]

From The Nation?

No, The Economist.

I was immediately attacked in #117 by house sycophant Sharmuta, who has undoubtedly morphed into a bootlicking monitor lizard by now. Notice her counterattack includes no substance of any kind - typical for this loser. Note that after this U.S.395 and Sharmuta got into a little illiterati pissing fit - quite amusing, while the Nodrog left the building. Other lizardoids reacted as if I had definitely hit a nerve.

The next day, September 24, 2007, amidst the frenzy, Charles posted "Video: Columbia Students Applaud Ahmadinejad's Reply to Bollinger." To Charles' credit, he immediately posted email replies from Columbia students actually there, who disputed the "general applause" claim and stated most students had sat on their hands. In #187 I commented:

Thank you, Charles, for putting on the reply from the Columbia student. It earned you the first "plus" from me to one of your posts :)

And the Columbia student hit the nail on the head. It's important to see Ahminedijad for what he really is - a crazy tinpot fanatic in charge of a crazy, dysfunctional, but dangerous nation. And what better way to see him than in person? It's better than just taking your word for it.

And who should show up to respond, but my old buddyette Zulubaby in #203, with "Shaddup, Gordon!" In #244 I replied:

Hello again. It's nice to see that not all the oldtimers have been banned, or moved to a certain weird site that I perused for the first time today, or both.

And, thanks to Charles' rating system, I got to put a nice little "minus" by your comment! Life is grand, ain't it?

On a more serious note, it's nice to see that some LGF regulars like realwest don't think that Ahminedijad's visit to Columbia was quite the disaster some LGF doomsayers are all to eager to argue.

Zulubaby responded in #248 with LOL! Gordon, I think that is the first time you have ever made me laugh. Evah! You're still a tool though.

By the way, the "weird site" was none other than Gulf Coast Pundit, which made the news as the site for disaffected former alleged LGF purists. My mentioning of this site, even obliquely, may have led Charles to consider banning me - he was getting awfully touchy and big/pig-headed about things.

The Last Great LGF Brouhaha

2008-08-22T06:39:00.001-07:00

We come now to the last great perfect storm LGF brouhaha, where the Nodrog took on all comers and vanquished them. The time was September 2007, and (gasp!) President Ahmedinejad was coming to New York. Hide the women and children! On September 21, 2007, the news was that DinnerJacket wanted to visit the 9/11 site. In "Violation," Charles linked approvingly to house cartoonists' Fox & Corkum on the subject. In #17 the Nodrog voiced his opinion:

I don't have any problem with President Ahminenutjob visiting Ground Zero, or Columbia University, or anywhere else where he won't find any national security interests.

Maybe he might learn something himself.

And why are we so afraid of this guy? He may want to destroy this nation, but he doesn't have the power to do so, and he's not going to get the power by visiting ground zero or Columbia University.

Saying "no" to him on such symbolic issues shows fear and weakness, not confidence and strength.

The lizardoids erupted in fury, proving my point that their America was weak and needed protection from the boogey men. Under Charles' new rating system my comment earned an amazing -28, showing the antipathy. I didn't even need to provide any more comments on this thread to completely take it over with my presence.

And Charles post? He got +113. Sort of like an old Soviet Union election - everyone vote for me, and those who don't, we know who you are! And it will soon be the banning stick [or off to the Gulag in the original version].

LGF Cognitive Dissonance: U.S., Israel, Torture

2008-08-21T09:20:00.000-07:00

On September 17, 2007, Charles posted "Monday Afternoon Open." A recent story had caught the Nodrog's eye, and it was nowhere to be found on LGF. So in #360 I introduced it:

There is another nation that gives the most heinous Jihadi terrorists basic protections of the rule of law that the U.S. doesn't.

France?

No, Israel [link in original]

From the Supreme Court Amicus Curiae brief Table of Contents:

--For decades, Israel has faced an unremitting, mortal threat to its survival.
--Despite this unremitting terrorist threat, Israeli courts have discerned no practical obstacle to exercising jurisdiction and guaranteeing the rule of law, regardless of the petitioner’s nationality or location.
--Despite great danger and pressing needs for intelligence, Israel affords all detainees prompt, independent judicial review of their detention, protected by procedural safeguards and aided by access to counsel
--Unlike the United States, Israel provides suspected unlawful combatants the right
to judicial review of the basis for their detention within no more than 14 days of
their seizure.
--Unlike the United States, Israel provides suspected unlawful combatants the
right to judicial review in a tribunal independent from the executive.
--Unlike the United States, Israel limits detention to only those circumstances in
which the suspected unlawful combatant poses a threat to State security and when
no other means are available to neutralize the threat.
--Unlike the United States, Israel subjects the evidence and judgments supporting
the detention of suspected unlawful combatants to searching judicial review.
--Unlike the United States, Israel prohibits all inhumane methods of interrogation
and limits the use of coerced testimony against suspected unlawful combatants
when assessing the basis for their detention
--Unlike the United States, Israel requires judicial approval before limiting a
suspected unlawful combatant’s access to classified information offered in support
of detention.
--Unlike the United States, Israel provides access to counsel within no more than 34
days
--Unlike the United States, Israel provides for periodic review of detention at least
once every 6 months, permitting the continuation of detention only upon a fresh judicial finding of dangerousness following a fully adversarial hearing.
--As Israel’s experience during Operation Defensive Wall illustrates, providing prompt access to independent judicial review is practical even under the most demanding circumstances

Lizardoid responses were interesting. Mondoreb in #367 had a thoughtful response (as usual). By contrast, idiot lizardoid buzzsawmonkey told me to go post it on the Daily Kos in #368. Crazed islamophobe Storagemanager in #383 had a non sequitur Islamo-hatred post in response. An even stupider response came from Sifty in #440, seconded by the moronic hous bin pharteen in #448. In #477 I responded to all:

Sifty, Yochanan, and Hous Bin Pharteen seem to have missed the point of my original post (#360).

I suggest that you actually READ the linked document, or at least as much of it as you can.

Israel, which has far worse problems with crazed criminal-terrorist scum than we will ever have, still manages to treat them as any civilized, confident western democracy does. With fairness and equity that they undoubtedly don't deserve, but will get anyway because that's the way civilized nations do things.

Sifty's "solution" shows someone who is NOT confident of his own nation. It also show's someone who has no interest in the rule of law, or civilization as we know it.

It's pathetic.

On this same day in LGF history an ominous Orwellian feature took hold - Johnson had implemented his "rating" system for comments and now he added ratings for his own posts that "members" could do. Being the Nodrog, I promptly started rating Charles' posts - and less than a month later I was banned. Hmmmm.....

Ignorance and Islamohysteria About Turkey (Again)

2008-08-20T08:16:00.001-07:00

An old LGF standby reared its ugly head on August 28, 2007, as Johnson posted "Islamist Wins Turkish Presidency," Johnson called it "very bad news" and made a thinly-veiled wish for a military coup at the end of the post. The lizardoids were called up short, however, when the Nodrog had this fact-filled refutation in #163:

Some context on this story that Charles has omitted:

Turkey was a notoriously mis-governed country under the secular regimes in place from the 1970's on. Corruption was rampant. The police force as brutal, corrupt, and prone to torture. Kurds were violently suppressed, being forbidden to even speak their own language. The economy was mismanaged, resulting in spotty economic growth, high inflation, and lost opportunities. And overt displays of Muslim piety were strongly suppressed - which is fine if you think Islam is an unredeemable scourge, but imagine thke response in this country if the wearing of yarmulkes were banned, or a fundamentalist Christian President was deposed by a military coup. Secular governments were notoriously jingoistic in foreign affairs, invading Cyprus in 1974 for example.

Under the current Islamic party, economic policy has resulted in strong and sustained economic growth, with a great reduction in inflation. Corruption has greatly diminished - in line with the fact that local governments in Islamic hands were run cleanly, efficiently, and most interestingly, fairly toward all. Repression of Kurds has diminished, although the recent resurgence of the PKK has threatened this development.

The most recent political crisis is a sign of how different Turkey's government is from the garden variety Middle Eastern theocracy. When the current government nominated Mr. Gul and the outrage and military threats commenced, the government decided that this matter should be tested in an election. The results were very favorable for the government, and now it has fulfilled its mandate and elected President Gul.

What now? The first term of the current government led to a great improvement in Turkish economic and political freedoms. The government was rewarded with an even larger mandate. I suppose the government coujld do a 180 and start acting like Hamas, but this is highly unlikely. In fact, this government has strengthened Turkish democacy and made the rule of law more paramount in the nation. The gains Turkey have made will serve it well whether or not it joins the EU, a prospect becoming less likely every year. And the Turkish government may now be strong enough to resist the call of the (secular) generals to invade northern Iraq and mess things up thoroughly there.

As soon as the discredited secular opposition unites and presents a cogent program for the country I'm sure it will provide a strong opposition for the government, and will likely win future elections. Turkey is not in danger, despite the hysteria expressed in this thread.

The responses, or lack thereof, from the lizardoids was of poor quality even by LGF standards, as fact-free and pointless insult were piled one after another by the illiterati. In #455 I summarized the mess:

Well, Well, Well, I see that my long and fact-filled post has generated the usual content-free comments from the usual suspects. Hello, Storage Manager, Mahmoud Ed, Kosovo-Manzikert, Mandy Manners, Beaver Cleaver, and the rest! I'm glad I was apparently missed.

As for non-content free responses:

#168 reb3: Turkey banned executions in 2002. The current government won the subsequent election, but has not repealed this law.

#172 Storage Manager: There are no Turkish criminal laws that prescribe hand removal or eye gouging as a penalty, nor are any proposed.

"The Trains Run on Time" argument - This implies that political freedom in Turkey has been sacrificed for efficiency and honesty in government. That in fact is not true. See this Freedom House summary spreadsheet of international political freedoms. Since the 2002 elections, Turkey's rankings have gotten better (lower numbers mean more freedom in the table).

#218 Mondoreb: A thoughtful response, thank you. The 1974 Cyprus invasion was done by the left-wing government of Bulent Ecevit, in part it is suspected to bolster flagging political support at home. But you are correct that Turkey hasn't made a habit of military adventurism. Perhaps I can more correctly state that Turkey has been notoriously paranoid about "Turkishness," as is evidenced by its denial of the Armenian holocaust, it's repression of Kurds, it's threats toward Kurds in Iraq, and its repression of Armenian and Greek minorities in Turkey. These policies have certainly not worsened under the current government - in fact, policies in these areas have slowly improved.

As for economic history, you are correct that under Turgut Ozal Turkey advanced economically in the 1980's. However, incompetent government policies afterward led to the crashes of 1994 and 2001, which set Turkey back greatly. The current government has corrected the flawed politically-based economic policies of the 1990's governments.

As a final note, Turkey is an exception to the malignancy of the Muslim world today. The government certainly bears watching - there are Islamic nuts in Turkey that want to pull the party in their direction. However, the party leaders know that to do so means not only Army intervention but, more importantly, loss in any future election.

So yes, this thread has exhibited hysteria about the situation, although you, thankfully, seem to be immune to it.

See mondoreb's substantive response to me in #527 - notice how weak his counter-arguments are. The Nodrog had won again! Just like old times! (but not for much longer - banning was around the corner)

Jimmy Carter is Bad Enough Without Making Stuff Up

2008-08-19T10:41:00.001-07:00

On August 23, 2007, a misleading Charles attack on Jimmy Carter in "Carter Enabled Mugabe's Land Grab," combined with the fact that the source for this written excrement was the execrable Jammie Wearing Fool, led to a quick demise for the "polite Nodrog" strategy. In #296 I turned full guns on the two:

Well, Well, Well, it's a shame to see that Charles is now parroting the line of JammieWearingPoo, who is apparently digging through his pile of fertilizer in a desperate attempt to smear and pile on upon poor Jimmy Carter, already thoroughly discredited both as a President and as a former President. When the score's 50-0. you don't try a fake punt to make it 56-0 - because if you do, your star quarterback is likely to be needlessly injured in a fumble pileup.

Carter, like any President worth his salt, was trying to facilitate a peace agreement in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe which, for those of us not historically challenged like Charles and JammiePoo, was an important goal for American governments from 1965 (when Ian Smith led a white coup against the British) to 1980.

And until Dictator Mugabe messed things up in 2000, the deal brokered by the Carter administration had led Zimbabwe down a reasonably prosperous and successful path in the tricky world of African nation-building. Carter can't be blamed for the fact that 20 years after he became President Mugabe apparently went senile and demented and decided to destroy his country.

If Carter and the U.S. hadn't acted, Zimbabwe would have had years more of brutal civil war, leading to inevitable African victory and suffering far greater than even the great suffering Zimbabwe is facing today.

But, of course, in their rush to smear and simplify, JammiePoo doesn't think about his ridiculous allegations and Charles doesn't think about his ridiculous parroting. The only other alternative scenario is that both know exactly what they are doing and the lies and distortions they are fomenting on this issue. I don't think Charles is that bad, but as for JammiePoo...

A quick followup in #297:

And, of course, Charles once again is guilty of the old "misleading headline" trick. The events Charles is misinterpreting occurred in 1980, while Mugabe's land grab occurred in 2000. So Carter enabled events 20 years before the events Charles is following (one can't expect Charles to actually read a history book now can one?).

It was late in the thread, so I only got two responders, first LanceKates, who provided a fact-free insult in #298, and mondoreb, who provided substantive responses in #300 through #303, arguing that Zimbabwe became a hellhole long before 2000, and that Carter therefore bore some responsibility. I responded in #304: Moondoreb:

I see that, unlike LanceKates, you make substantive arguments.

So let's move the date of Mugabe's descent to disaster back to 1992, when his first wife died.

That's 12 years after the U.S. brokered the final peace deal that ended the civil war and transferred power to the Black Africans in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe.

Then let's look at the fact that adminstrations previous to Carter (Johnson, Nixon, Ford), who supported a peaceful settlement and ostracized the white supremacist regime of Ian Smith, and after Carter (Reagan, Bush), actively supported the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe with financial aid.

So put the blame on Jimmy Carter? Sorry, it doesn't pencil out.

Mondoreb provided more evidence that Mugabe was misruling Zimbabwe all the way back to 1980 in #306 and #307, acknowledging that Carter wasn't ENTIRELY to blame for the fiasco. I made a final response in #308: Mondoreb:

The actions you ascribe to Mugabe were done in the context of an economically prospering Zimbabwe, mainly due to the economic engine of the "white" farms. While it is true that Zimbabwe was never a democratic regime in the western sense, when compared with the admittedly deplorable neighbors it was a beacon of civilization. Only when Mugabe decided to destroy his nation's economy to keep power did things go terribly wrong in the country.

As for what the UK and US faced in 1979, the choices were" 1) Mugabe and ZANU (majority Shona), 2) Nkomo and ZAPU (minority Ndebele), 3) Abel Muzorewa's party, 4) a party led by a gentleman named Sithole (both 3 and 4 were partners with Ian Smith, and 5) Ian Smith and his British version of South African apartheid. In reasonably free and fair elections Mugabe's party won a landslide, based upon ethnic voting and the complete discrediting of Muzorewa and Sithole by their collusion with Ian Smith.

So the choice facing the US and UK was 1) protracted civil war, or 2) transfer of power to Mugabe and ZANU. Carter's position was thus eminently sensible.

Please note that my opinion of Jimmy Carter's Presidency is very low. And my opinion of his ex-Presidency started going downhill when he stopped building houses with Habitat for Humanity and started opining again on world events. But this article by JammiePoo, parroted by Charles, is an unwarranted smear.

The mean Nodrog was back - notice that JammiePoo didn't dare take me on when I trashed his story!

Man Bites Dog - Nodrog is Lauded on LGF

2008-08-18T08:24:00.001-07:00

During the Summer of 2007 I kept my visits and comments to LGF on an infrequent basis. On August 14, 2007, Charles posted "Tuesday Afternoon Open," and the topic of discussion eventually got onto Hugo Chavez and Cuba. I took a slightly different tack in #84:

The way to counter Hugo Chavez is to promptly approve free trade agreements with Panama and Peru, and start negotiating more of them with Latin American nations. Unfortunately, the Democrats have become enamored of economic protectionist stupidity, evidence for which was amply provided at their last debate when many were even stupid enough to attack NAFTA.

Occasional Reader responded in #86: My God, I'm agreeing with Gordon. Imploder seconded my words in #87. BenZacharia showed his obtuseness by agreeing with the left-wing that "fair trade," not "free trade" is needed. And my longtime nemesis goodbye_natalie heartily agreed with me in #98. The Nodrog was popular, for once (and not for long!).

Nodrog Resists the Immigration Flames

2008-08-15T16:50:00.000-07:00

The immigration hubbub continued, and on June 28, 2007 Charles gleefully reported on the demise of the McCain Immigration Reform bill in "Immigration Bill Cloture Vote Fails." The lizardoids were jubilant (see post #1 from allegedly intelligent Zombie, Yeah Baby!) - the Nodrog was not. In #343 I provided an extended discourse:

Now that this bill is dead, let's look at a real solution. No, not putting up a 1000-mile Berlin Wall, but rather an open border with Mexico, allowing free flow of non-criminal Mexican and American citizens back and forth through authorized border checkpoints.

There are 100 million Mexicans. There are 300 million Americans. Even if every Mexican moved to the U.S. we would be a majority. And that's not going to happen - the majority of Mexicans are happy to remain in their own nation.

If Mexican workers are legalized they will no longer be exploited to the extent currently by employers. They will be able to legitimately earn a minimum wage, they will have safe workplace conditions, and when they've earned enough money they can decide whether they want to become American citizens or move back to Mexico with their families. My prediction is that an open border will actually increase the number of people returning to Mexico, because they will know they can come back if needed, and they won't be stuck in the U.S. if they no longer want to be here.

The economic law of supply and demand means that these workers are a net benefit to our economy. They do jobs that our capitalist system wants and needs done - at pay rates that optimize benefits for us all. The workers are here because they can make more money than they can in Mexico, and for some of them, they can become Americans. They don't want to become Americans so that they can turn this country into another Mexico, they become Americans so that they can enjoy the same life that we already enjoy. The U.S. unemployment rate is low - there really aren't U.S. citizens available to do these jobs in the locations that they need doing.

Yes, these Mexicans put a drain on social services and health services. But they also spend their money on goods and services needed to live here - it doesn't all go back to Mexico. That money gets recirculated in the economy, and generates overall tax revenues in excess of social service expenditures. The problem is that the tax resources are mis-allocated - the federal government gets most of the tax revenues, while state and local governments get stuck with the social service costs. The answer is to reallocate tax revenues, not kick all the Mexicans out.

Well, this should be enough to generate some interesting responses! I'll try to respond to all responses that contain factual rebuttal and not ad hominem attacks (Nodrog is a La Raza scum!) or anecdotal evidence (three Mexicans pooped on my front yard yesterday!).

The lizardoid responses can be divided into categories - the first is evidenced by a new Nodrog opponent, and now LGF irregular regular Sharmuta, in #346, asking for proof of my statement that "the majority of Mexicans are happy to stay in their own nation." Occasional Reader in #360 also asked skeptical questions of the Nodrog. The second is evidenced by RickZ in #359, who provided mostly anecdotal rebuttal evidence. The third is evidenced by none other than long-time illiterati 'nam Grunt in #361, who had this to say: Well I must say, that was a great post Gordon and it hurts for sure, but you are right,( did I say that) but illegals should not be here or welcomed when there actually are Americans to do those jobs. And the fourth is evidenced by ... 'nam Grunt, who "came to his (lack of) senses and started spewing the usual pointless insults that he was comfortable with in #370, #378 and #400. In #402 the Nodrog came back with the first of many measured and intellectually devastating responses:

Sharmuta: Here's one link [link in original]

a poll of residents of the metropolitan area of Mexico City taken in September 1997. To the question "What is your opinion of Mexicans who go to work in the United States?" 47 percent of those polled answered, "bad" or "very bad

I'm going to assume that at least this one-half of the population of Mexico City (approximately 20 million) has no interest in moving to the U.S.

Here's a comprehensive recent poll of Mexico. The question you raise is not directly answered, but the poll results show a mixed bag for Mexico - good points and bad points, as with any country. It certainly doesn't provide evidence for a conclusion that most or a majority or even a large plurality of Mexicans want to move to the United States.

As a sideline, the Mexican economy has grown faster than the U.S. economy since the 1995 economic debacle, and is projected to grow by 3.5% per year over the next five years, compared to our rate of 2.5%. By fully implementing our treaty obligations under NAFTA, we can make sure Mexico continues on this trend toward prosperity (which will further dampen immigration urges) and, based upon the well-recognized benefits of free trade vs. protectionism, make our nation more prosperous too

I continued my measured responses in #406:

#359 RickZ: One of your assertions I answered - the losses to state and local service providers doesn't mean there isn't a net economic benefit - it means that the benefits are misallocated between the federal and state governments, and if the federal government provides tax revenues to compensate the states and localities for their losses, it will still be ahead economically.

As for remittances to Mexico, since we have a free trade agreement, increased prosperity in Mexico means more spending on goods and services from the U.S. and increased prosperity in the U.S. The economics of free trade show that it is not a zero-sum game - the most economically efficient allocation of goods and services across borders lifts all boats over the protectionist alternative.

A lot of your other statements are anecdotal and I can't answer them - but I will make an exception for your assertions about illegal uninsured motorists. If these motorists were legal residents, they would be much more likely to purchase insurance. Their current illegal status precludes them from buying auto insurance.

Occasional Reader had asked a snide question in #363: I gave him a straight answer in #417:

Occasional Reader: Our current (2006) unemployment rate is 4.5%. If you look at this chart, you will see not only that this is a low rate historically over the past 30 years, but that the U.S. economy has been steadily providing better and better employment opportunities over that period (the lows get lower, the highs are getting lower too). When the rate gets as low as it has, much of the remaining unemployment is "structural" (consisting of unemployable people), and the economy can be considered close to a full employment mode.

In comparison, the EU overall unemployment rate is 7.1%, and much higher in some of the bigger countries, notably France and Germany. Japan's unemployment rate is about the same as ours (4.2%), where traditionally is was much lower during the past 30 years.

I followed up with him in #422:

As for your other question, part of the "structural unemployment" issue is the fact that people aren't always as mobile as the jobs. People who live in cities can't or won't immediately move to farms to become farm workers. Over time, people will make these moves, but it often takes many years or even decades.

See Occasional Reader's response in #420 - wrong, but at least trying. Compare and contrast to nutcase Taxfreekiller's content-free response in #423. An embarrassment to Johnson all around. Meanwhile, in #371 Bunkerbuster claimed that immigrants were a net drain on the economy. I answered respectfully but firmly in #430:

Bunker Buster: Supply and demand isn't just for goods, it's for the skills people bring to their employment as well. There is a demand for low-wage work right now that is being met by a supply of Mexican laborers. The demand is not met by U.S. citizens at the price of labor that the market is willing to pay.

Of course, you say, we could just pay farmworkers housecleaners and others $15 or $20 per hour, and Americans will take those jobs. Well, first of all, at full employment, Americans taking these jobs are foresaking other jobs that will need to be filled. Next,and most importantly, if a lettuce grower must pay $20 per hour to a lettuce picker, the price of lettuce will go up. People will buy less lettuce. And there won't be a need for lettuce pickers. The jobs disappear.

As for net benefits, you are forgetting this fact: if prices are lower for food and housing and other items because of l0w-wage migrant workers each of us has more money to spend on other things, or save. This results in greater tax revenues, which, if allocated to the losing local service providers, will pay for the costs of providing social services to immigrants.

In #431 Occasional Reader found it necessary to distance himself from the taxfreekiller loon division of LGF by noting that he was for immigration in general. Splits in the lizard ranks, courtesy of the Nodrog's stunning intellect and new-found rhetorical restraint. In another response to Occasional Reader in #451, I had this to say:

Occasional Reader: I have no doubt that some of the demand for farm products could be met with increased imports from those countries. I have no problem with that - although the agricultural sector is one of the most protectionist in the U.S., and a lot of otherwise right-wing members of the U.S. Congress will fight to the politcal death to keep that protection.

However, there will always be a local market for a lot of goods because of the transportation costs of bringing the farm products to this country. So there will always be a need for at least some low-paid agricultural workers in this country.

In #452 whiskeraway accused me of using anecdotal evidence regarding the attitudes of Mexican immigrants, a fair charge. So I answered with statistics in #456:

If they want to turn us into Mexico, why among the third generation of Mexican-American immigrants do only 25% speak any Spanish at all, with virtually none not being proficient in English? Why do 50% of those who speak Spanish at home also speak English "very well," according to a 2003 U.S. census survey?

And do you have anything against bilignualism? One of the great barriers to American competitiveness in the world economy is our lack of proficient foreign language speakers, whether it be Spanish or Chinese or Hindi or any other language. On a non-economic front, do you think it's wise to have a lot of people proficient in Arabic so that we can better fight our enemies?

Meanwhile, Sharmuta and others continued to harp on the "most Mexicans want to move to the U.S" theme," so I respectfully and devastatingly answered in #460:

I appreciate the link about the 4 in 10 Mexicans polling data - I had been looking for such a poll, and appreciate you bringing it forward.

Assuming the Mexicans who would move here also bring their families, that's 40 million Mexicans.

First, not all would actually come here - I don't know what percentage would, but it certainly wouldn't be 100%

Second, the poll indicated that many rich and middle class Mexicans with skills would like to come here too. There are certain professions in the U.S. (nursing, engineering, etc) where we have a current shortage of employbable persons. I wouldn't object to some skilled and highly educated Mexicans as immigrants, would you?

And finally, even if all 40 million trooped into the U.S., that would make for about 90 million Hispanics in a population of 340 million. Still nowhere near a majority. And Mexican birthrates have plummeted in the past 30 years - they're down to 2.5 children per woman, not much more than our native birthrates.

And as for concentrations, one of the most interesting aspects of recent Hispanic immigration is that it is no longer concentrated in the Southwest.

But some lizardoids would have none of the "New Nodrog." Peck in #480 demanded that I be ignored. And Sharmuta never engaged in a rational debate with me again - she was clearly scared, and celebrated when I was finally banned.

Yes indeed, the new Nodrog provided facts, not flames on this thread, despite vicious provocations by the likes of 'nam Grunt and Tax Free Killer.

The Return of the Nodrog

2008-08-15T08:04:00.001-07:00

Lizard Nation remained agog at the Nodrog's departure - and then, I was back! I actually didn't read the site for four months, then in June 2007 started looking at it again occasionally - and then an issue came forward that I felt strongly about - immigration. On June 26, 2007, Charles posted "Railroading the Immigration Bill in the Senate." Johnson and the rest of Lizard Nation were inflamed with blood lust against illegal aliens, almost as much as against Muslims. In #287 I showed up with some facts:

There is a clear solution to the immigration issue with Mexico. We should have an open border with Mexico, allowing free flow of people both ways.

But before we do this, we must work with Mexico to improve security. Mexico must agree to coordinate with our security services to prevent terrorists and Jihadists from entering Mexico and then the U.S. This will mean extending what I presume are our sea and air defenses to Mexico, and establishing controls along the border with Guatemala (which is a lot shorter than our border with Mexico). Mexico must also improve its law enforcement capabilities - this is something that Presidente Calderon is already working vigorously on. I see no reason why Mexico wouldn't agree to these measures in return for providing an open border between our two countries. Mexican citizens should be allowed into the U.S. at official border checkpoints, upon proof only of Mexican citizenship and no criminal record. Then we'll know that anyone crossing the desert is engaged in criminal activity of an actual harmful nature, and can be dealt with accordingly.

Mexico's per capita gross national product is only 16% of ours ($7,000 to $44,000). But let's look at the European Union. The new Eastern European EU members have per capita gross national products that are a fraction of the Western members. Poland's is only 25% of Germany's for example. Yet there are still millions of Poles in Poland - they haven't all left to become plumbers in France and elsewhere. My belief is that a majority of the Mexicans who want to be in the U.S. are already here. A few million more still won't tip the scales - there are 100 million Mexicans and 300 million of us.

Furthermore, an open border, and full implementation of NAFTA, will make the Mexican economy grow faster. It is currently projected to grow at 3.5% per year, faster than our 2.5%, and it has been growing faster for the past decade. For And it could grow faster - India, another imperfect democracy, has an economy growing at a rate of over 7%. If Mexico can start growing faster, with out help, there will be less economic incentive for Mexicans to come work here.

As for the lack of assimilation, the statistics, and the logic of American history and economics, don't back those claims up. By the third generation, three-quarters of Mexican-Americans don't even speak Spanish as a second language. Even among those who speak Spanish at home, half of them also speak English fluently. And the reason these people are coming here is not turn the U.S. into Mexico - they're here because they want to succeed and prosper like previous immigrants have done. And they know that the path to success includes English language fluency. Furthermore, what is the problem with bilingualism? One of the hindrances to American competitiveness in world economic markets is our lack of fluent foreign language speakers among businessmen and others. Spanish fluency opens up economic markets in huge swaths of the globe.

As for the "taking jobs away from Americans" argument, that's bunk. Americans don't want jobs paying minimum wage doing hard physical labor. But, you say, employers should just pay high wages, and then Americans will do this work, right? It doesn't work that way. If lettuce pickers start earning $20 per hour, the price of lettuce goes much higher. Fewer people buy lettuce, fewer people plant it, and guess what? Those jobs have disappeared. Economics is not a zero sum game.

Anyway, I believe our goal should be an open border with Mexico.

It's great to be back. I'll prepare for incoming missiles now...

And sure enough, the missiles came out of their bunkers. Goodbye_natalie started the invective in #298, spouting anecdotal evidence and attacking my facts (but without any counter-facts, not surprisingly). V the K had more fact-free information in #299, throwing around insults instead of arguments, as usual. In #300 I replied:

goodbye_natalie: Your post was long on invective and anecdotal evidence and short on facts. You only have one fact in your post, that 60% of Mexican immigrants don't have a high school education. I'm not sure what the relevance of this statistic is, since most of these Mexicans are doing jobs that don't reqwuire a high school education. Jobs that Americans, most of whom have a high school education, don't want to do.

And, like with all other immigrant groups, Hispanic education rates go up with successive generations of the descendants of immigrants. More than half of Hispanic kids graduate from high school, a higher percentage than American blacks, although less than the general population.

As for V the K: it's not my fault that Republicans in California, and now the nation, are throwing away their otherwise excellent chances to capture the votes of culturally conservative Hispanic voters with their anti-immigrant hysteria. And, the last time I looked, a CONSERVATIVE had just been elected President of Mexico. So much for your "wave of socialists."

It was the new Nodrog, light on invective, heavy on facts! EC Marm (#303), Goodbye_natalie (#305 and #309) and the repulsive V the K (#306) just repeated the same tired and discredited talking points, mixed in with insults. At least Killgore Trout, the one with the alleged gay man crush on Ed the Weatherman, welcomed me back in #316. Goodbye-natalie was a lot more sour regarding my return in #318 - his echo chamber was ruined. But in #334 I tried again with facts:

Sorry for getting into the anecdotal evidence swamp - EC Marm proves that the immigrant-haters have the edge there. By the way, EC Marm, you could change a few words and your post could have been written by a Mississippi Klansman circa 1960. So I'll go back to facts.

One of the prime arguments against immigrants is that they take jobs away from Americans. If employers would pay higher wages Americans would be willing to fill those jobs in agricultural labor, heavy industry, restaurant service, etc.

But basic economics says that higher wages will mean that a lot of those jobs will disappear. I would be surprised if very many LGFers agreed with the Democrats that the minimum wage should be a lot higher. The reason - stated eloquently by small businessmen everywhere, is that a raise in the minimum wage means that employers must raise their prices to offset the wage increases. Once prices are increased, demand for the product drops. Once demand for the product drops, there is less demand for employment.

The same law of economics applies to jobs filled by illegal immigrants. If employers must suddenly double or triple the wages paid to farm workers, restaurant workers, construction workers, etc., they will have to raise their prices. This will reduce demand for their product. Which means they will have need for fewer employees. Many, if not most of the jobs freed from the curse of illegal immigration disappear.

My primary reason for advocating an open border with Mexico is not to destroy the American way of life and our economy. My goal is to make both stronger.

EC Marm challenged by characterization of his (her?) post #332, so here it is in its entirety: nodroG Translation (to my post #329, not reprinted here, my words in bold): There were some gang members and some slumdwellers, Could hardly walk out the front door without being shot at or having my ass kicked but, if you want anecdotal evidence, I saw many new or nearly new middle class residential subdivisions filling with Mexican-American families who, Five families per household, three cars up on blocks in every driveway apart from sometimes speaking Spanish at home and having somewhat different tastes in music and fashion than mine, Yeah, that gang color thing again. Loudspeakers blaring 120 db music 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Threatening me in spanish everytime I asked politely to maybe turn it down. Yeah, the American dream.

So when EC Marm challenged my characterization of his post in #335, I responded succinctly in #336:

EC Marm. I can read English. I can look at what you wrote and note 1) it is free of verifiable facts, 2) it is filled with racial stereotypes, and 3) it is filled with race-hatred.

Mostly annoyed in #340 actually made arguments without insults attached, but I easily countered them in #341:

Mostly Annoyed: You are correct that illegal aliens are exploited unfairly by employers. But the better solution to that is not to deport them all and hurt our national economy. The better solution is to bring them under the protection of our minimum wage and worker safety laws. And, if these folks were legal, they would have no disincentive to report illegal employer conditions.

I disagree with your statement that economics is a sterile academic exercise. I believe that economics is the only "social science" that in fact has major demonstrable impacts upon our lives, even if people don't recognize or accept this fact. You point out that some markets, such as for food or housing, are necessities and are almost immune to changes in price. This is true - however, if an individual must pay more for food or shelter, the money doesn't appear out of thin air, it must be obtained through cutting back on some other more discretionary expenditure. And this means that the maker of that product suffers because of the higher price for food or housing.

As for the fact that "food prices are rising anyway," the cost of labor is not the only input into food prices. The input that is probably causing the biggest rise in food prices right now is the energy costs of producing and transporting that food. An increase in labor costs would just make the food prices rise even higher.

Yes the Nodrog was back, with facts on his side! And the pathetic lizardoid response told me that standards were getting even lower!

The Voluntary (and Temporary) End of Nodrog's Reign of (T)error

2008-08-14T08:56:00.000-07:00

After my early January LGF bouts, I took a breather from LGF. I returned with a vengeance on February 1, 2007, when Charles posted "Arkin Blasts Critics as Arrogant and Intolerant." I made a snarky comment in #84:

Sorry Lizards, the Iraq war will soon be over, Americans will no longer be killing Muslims there. You'll have to get your jollies in some other way.

Ed the Weatherman replied in #95: I see Asshat Nodrog got is on the computer today. So Nodrog worked for the city government in a small Oregon city. Meter maid, perhaps? I was alarmed by Ed's post, and did some backtracking to early January. I had made the mistake of posting on LGF sycophant spinoff Jammie Wearing Fool's blog, and JammiePoo had posted some personal information about the IP address I used. So in #179 I had this to say:

Ed: I was a bit baffled by your comment. I haven't posted on LGF for a while because, quite frankly, I had more important and better things to do.

I now see, going back to early January, that JammieWearingFool decided to try and "out" my identity. He hasn't succeeded, but as a result, I'm going to stop posting on LGF. If that was Jamhead's goal, he is successful. I have no interest in having my true identity, or anywhere within 50 miles of my actual location, disclosed to the likes of TFK and some of the other crazies who infest this site.

By the way, thanks to WriterMom for questioning Jamhead's tactics back in early January. She seems to understand what's at stake here.

I also want to thank Charles for putting up with me for these last few years. And I will continue to occasionally peruse this site, because, despite its many flaws, it performs a valuable service.

So Adios, LGF. You can disconnect my registration, CHarles, because I won't be back.

A couple of the lizardoids were gleeful at my departure (see, e.g., Doug's profane outburst in #180 and maddog in #183). BabbaZee in #184 predicted (correctly) in #184 that I would eventually be back. And then came an unexpected outpouring. Mandy Manners, Peacekeeper, Writermom, EC Marm, Talkin' Kamel, goodbye natalie, and Zulubaby(!) all asked me to stay.

It was touching, but JammiePoo had spooked me. I changed my registration from "The Conscience of LGF" to "The Former Conscience of LGF," and took what turned out to be a five month extended vacation from LGF.

The lizardoids hadn't forgotten me - there were numerous references to the legendary Nodrog sprinkled throughout threads, and numerous alleged sitings under the new nicknames of pathetic would-be Nodrogs. But BabbaZee was right - eventually, like a bad penny, the Nodrog would turn up again!

LGF: Intellectually Barefoot and Pregnant

2008-08-13T09:14:00.001-07:00

Charles was up to his old tricks as LGF welcomed in 2007, in January 4th's "A Klan President?" Robert Byrd, a former klansman, was the new Senate President Pro Tempore. I found the immediate flaw in Charles' shilling in #67:

Well, from 1995 through 2002 the third in line for the Presidency was a nonegenarian (briefly centenarian) guy from South Carolina who was starting to dribble uncontrollably at meals and also had a somewhat unsavory past as the leader of the arch-segregationists.

This seems to be an argument for not making the senior member of the majority party in the Senate the President Pro Tem, not an excuse to bash the Democrats.

But I wouldn't expect Charles to actually let historical context (assuming he isn't ignorant of it) get in the way of a good partisan hack rant.

Ed the Weatherman defended Johnson in #77 (not much LGF defense from Ed these days over at GCP!), claiming the MSM brought up Strom's segregationist past often. In #96 I answered Ed:

Ed: Charles and the LGFers are now making the same mistakes as the MSM.

If Charles had included mention of Thurmond in his post, and pointed out the foolishness and potential danger to the country of the practice of making the senior majority party Senator the President Pro Tempore, then your argument that Charles and LGF and the right-wing blogging world are better than the MSM would hold water.

As it is, Charles is just making the same mistakes the MSM makes. And he's keeping his loyal readers equally, if not even more, ignorant and misinformed.

Ed once again defended Johnson in #111, pointing out that Johnson attacked Republicans at times too. I responded in #116:

Ed, it's one thing to be partial - it's another to omit key facts and context. By doing so, Charles is doing exactly what he accuses the MSM of doing. Charles is entitled to his conclusions, and the conclusion that Robert Byrd's KKK past makes him unfit to be President Pro Tempore is a conclusion I agree with.

But by completely omitting any mention of why and how Byrd has become President Pro Tempore, Charles is misinforming his readers, and adding to their collective stock of ignorance.

Then, on a new tack, as if to prove LGF ignorance, Adrenalyn in #148 claimed that Jimmy Carter and arch-segregationist Lester Maddox were bosom buddies while serving as Georgia's Governor at Lt. Governor from 1971-75. I set the record straight in #150:

Adrenalyn: From Wikipedia:

Under the Georgia constitution of 1945, Maddox was prohibited from running for a second consecutive term, necessitating a 1970 run for Lieutenant Governor of Georgia. Although Maddox was elected as a Democratic candidate at the same time as Jimmy Carter's election as Governor as a Democratic candidate, the two were not running mates; in Georgia, particularly in that era of Democratic dominance, the winners of the primary elections went on to easy victories in the general elections without campaigning together as an official ticket or as runningmates. Carter and Maddox found little common ground during their four years of service, often publicly feuding with each other.

At this point, Johnson needed some prodding, so in #171 I started trying to taunt or shame him into providing some context:

And I see that Charles hasn't yet updated this post to provide some necessary context.

Charles likes to keep his readers intellectually barefoot and pregnant, apparently.

A great line! So I reinforced the point in #172:

In fact, I would suggest that as an LGF rotating title:

LGF Readers: Intellectually barefoot and pregnant!

No response from the Lizard King, so I summed up my frustration in #219:

Or, Charles, are you just too important now to be called to account for your distortions and obfuscations?

Interesting that Johnson has recently challenged some of his more intellectually barefoot and pregnant followers with his campaign against "intelligent design" nonsense. Many of the more maroonish lizardoids are disagreeing, leaving, or being banned. But Johnson can't be too sure whether the remainder truly agree with him, or are just sucking up!

A Couple of Nodrog Christmas Zingers

2008-08-12T09:08:00.001-07:00

On December 22, 2006, Johnson linked to LGF House Clown Iowahawk, who presented a lame parody of a Wall Street Journal attack on blogs in "Iowahawk: Blogs Make Me Puke." I couldn't resist a zinger in #104:

The reaction of unthinking imbeciles to the truths I post on this very site are proof enough of the truth of Mr. Ragan's piece.

And Charles ignores me because he knows it isn't wise to argue with one's mental and moral superior.

Amidst the usual garbage thrown my way in response by the likes of taxfreekiller, Live4Truth in #115 posted an amazingly (for LGF at least) thoughtful commentary on the original blog criticism piece in the WSJ. In #123 I thanked him, and added a new zinger for the rest of the gang:

Live4Truth: Your thoughtful commentary, which I partially agree with, is completely out of place of this site.

Putting your commentary out on this site is like putting pate de fois gras out on a table for a raccoon to eat.

A pretty good analogy, I must say!

The Logan Act Meets LGF

2008-08-11T11:18:00.000-07:00

On December 20, 2006, Charles slammed Senators Kerry and Dodd for meeting with Syrian Dictator Assad in "The Dictator and the Democrats." (a week earleir he had slammed Florida Senator Bill Nelson for the same offense). Comment #1 started the lizardoid tirade, as M. Bensson-Levi stated, "TIME to ENFORCE the LOGAN ACT." The LGF response in a nutshell - if lizardoids don't like it, it must be criminal behavior. In #16 I presented my first response:

They're just trying to implement the Baker-Hamilton report. Talk is cheap. It's called DIPLOMACY.

A followup in #26:

Of course, if you believe, like LGF yo-yo-dom does, that Assad is part of a giant Islamo-supremacist conspiracy enveloping al qaeda, both Sunnis and Shiites, Mathathir of Malaysia, the Bosnian Muslims, and of course most of Dearborn, Michigan, then these Senators shouldn't be speaking to Assad.

But for the rest of us, repeat these words: DIPLOMACY IS GOOD ...

As for Silhouette's complaints in #28 that the Senators were setting up a parallel government, I had the best reply in #36:

Silhouette: In a perfect world, these Senators would leave diplomacy to the State Department.

Unfortunately, the existence of a stupidly incompetent and stubborn executive branch means we don't live in a perfect world.

After lots of abusive illiterati replies, I threw out the gauntlet in #144:

I don't believe there is any law against members of the United States legislature meeting with foreign heads of state. It has been going on for many decades, if not centuries.

Can anyone make a straight-faced plausible claim or cite to any United States law violated by Senators Kerry and Dodd?

And the answer came back - THE LOGAN ACT. So the Nodrog had to do some research, and came up with this reply in #180:

Some interesting information about the Logan Act: [Link]

Although the act has been found to be constitutional, no one since the act was enacted in 1799 has ever been prosecuted under it. Perhaps that's because the act has been so consistently ignored, violated, or alternatively narrowly interpreted.

It is the opinion of the State Department (from the 1970's) that the Logan Act does not apply to members of the U.S. Congress who are talking to foreign governments in pursuace of their legislative duties under the Constitution. To take an alternative viewpoint would have opened hundreds of Congressmen and Senators over the past several decades, liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican, to prosecution under the Logan Act.

To which the lizardoids provided the following debate points and legitimate responses .....[crickets]

This thread exemplifies the paucity of intellectualism among the mass of lizard nation - when faced with legitimate counter-argument, they are at a loss for (non-insulting) words.

More Torture, and a New Sinister LGF Response

2008-08-08T09:12:00.001-07:00

The Democrats were coming to power, and the lizardoid torture supporters, including Johnson, were becoming nervous, as is evidenced by the December 13, 2006 post "Durbain to Oversee Detainee Treatment." He accused the D's of plotting to make the FBI even more politically correct and useless than ever, and attacked Senator Dick Durbin as the man who compared the American military to Nazis, the Soviet KGB, and Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge. The lizardoids took the bait starting right off the bat with beavereater in #2 who opined, Failed commie pukes! The Nodrog had something more intelligent to add in #278:

Thanks to the Bush administration, torture methods such as waterboarding used and perfected by the KGB,Gestapo, and Khmer Rouge have been adopted by the U.S.

So Durbin is right.

And LGF'ers should be proud of it, since you all support waterboarding and torture.

In #282 and #288 I took a misstep, accusing Charles of lying about Durbin and then retracting the charge after further evidence (how often does Johnson do this, by the way?). I got back on track in #296:

Sorry to provoke such anger, but the truth hurts.

And under the "leadership" of George W. Bush, U.S. troops have been using the same tecnniques against prisoners used by the Nazis, KGB, and Khmer Rouge.

And unless you are one of those idiots who believes that "the end justifies the means," you should hang your head in shame as an American. And hope, Like I do, that our country chooses leadership in 2008, whether it be John McCain or Rudy Giuliani, or Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, that will turn our military and our country awasy from this nightmarish path.

I further attacked in #314:

I don't know what la-la land you are all lviing in, but a clear majority of Americans (thank God) do not support routinized torture of prisoners.

The "he knows about a plot to blow up America tomorrow, so do we torture him now?" canard is easy to answer - of course we do.

But I doubt that any Gitmo or Abu Ghraib or secret torture rendition center prisoners, or U.S. CITIZEN Jose Padilla had any such knowledge more than about 48 hours after their capture and detention. And yet the torture continued, authorized by the Secretary of Defense and the President. And, more recently, belittled by our monstrous Vice-President.

The attitude of the typical LGF poster (and Charles) would be scary if I didn't know that you are nothing more than a marginalized, extreme fringe of our national political scene.

Amidst the usual lizardoid charges that anyone who didn't support torture was anti-military, I had this to say in #319:

I'm proud of our U.S. military, and grateful that they protect me.

And I will be even prouder and more grateful when the shameful and odious civilian leadership team at the White House is sent out on their sorry butts in about two years.

In #316 mich-again called b.s. on my claims that we were using techniques that had been used by the Soviets, Nazis, and Khmer Rouge. I supported his argument (!) in #339:

mich-again:

Here's a source on past use of water-boarding: [Link]

When U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel William Harrison came home from the Korean War, his treatment by waterboarding was showcased as an example of the immorality of his North Korean captors.

So far, no Nazis, Khmer Rouge, or KGB. Just the North Koreans. That's MUCH better ...

tfk was really on my case on this thread, and in #329 accused me of being unhappy (?) I gave an appropriate response in #344:

tfk: I was reasonably happy between 1993 and 2001, when we had a President who was fellated by interns instead of a President who authorized torture of prisoners and lied to get us into a military adventure that we can't extricate ourselves from easily now.

Then a lizard got into scary territory - in #341 gymnast implied that a military coup might be appropriate. I called him on it in #354:

gymnast: Is your real name Agusto Pinochet Jr.?

Because that statement is appropriate for a Latin American Banana Republic, not our great nation. Shame.

I then followed up with several posts providing additional links to Khmer Rouge torture center museums showing waterboarding tanks. Iron Fist in #364 and #370 gave typical responses for him, a mixture of insults and bad arguments, a few cuts above the TFK nonsense, admittedly.

The lizards were getting scared, if #341 gymnast was any indication. Military Coups in the U.S.? Barf me out!

Imbeciles with Spitwads

2008-08-07T16:44:00.000-07:00

More LGF (perhaps willful) ignorance was on display with December 7, 2006, "We're All Progressives on This Bus," about a conclave between Howard Dean and "far left" (Johnson's description) Portugese and other European Socialists. After over 600 posts of bloviation, the Nodrog stepped in with #630 to offer some sanity:

Only in LGF la-la land would the equivalent of America's Democratic party (the European "Socialist") be considered "far-left."

But this is LGF la-la land, so I'm not surprised at all. Charles seems to have the understanding of the subtleties of world politics that an average fourth grader in Gadsden, Alabama might have.

I suggest a subscription to The Economist, Charles, so that you can ameliorate your ignorance. But, then again, your ignorance may be wilful, in which case you are beyond hope.

SaneInMN responded in #648 with news about Vermont electing a Socialist, to which I provided the needed correction in #660:

#648: (In)Sane: Sanders is a Socialist, not a Democrat.

The European parties with the name "Socialist" in them have long ago dropped (for the most part) platforms that require the state own the means of production.

For example, how much of the German ecnomy did Gerhard Schroeder and the "Social" Democrats turn over to state control while they were in power? How much of the Portugese economy under the "Socialists," or the Spanish economy when Felipe Gonzalez, the "Socialist" prime minister, was in power from 1982 to 1996, were turned over into public ownership?

The Labor party in Great Britain is a sterling example. When they won the election in 1945, they prompty nationalized the railroads, steel industry, coal mines, etc. When they took power in 1997, they nationalized nothing, and did not undo the privatizations accomplished by the Conservatives.

Gawd, I feel like a school teacher talking to a class of imbeciles here. Imbeciles with spitwads.

Feeling a bit frisky after having coined my new proposal for a rotating title, I went back and took on the deified Zombie, who back in post #2 had said: Dean is also protesting an election result in Florida. The guy just won't shut up! I took Zombie down with #665:

By the way, Zombie (#2), the "election result in Florida" involved 18,000 ballots not registering an electronic vote for Congress, in a Democratic County, in a closely fought election where the Republican won by a few hundred votes. That sounds like it is objectively worthy of an investigation.

Would you still be so nonchalant if the result was reversed, Zombie? Or are you just another stinking partisan hack?

Wow, another potential rotating title; ZOMBIE, PARTISAN HACK!

LGF Absurd Pretentions - Case Study # 35,678

2008-08-07T08:24:00.000-07:00

On December 7, 2006, after dredging up Pearl Harbor on another thread, Johnson posted "LGF Nominated for 2006 Weblog Award." He complained that his nomination in the "Best Conservative Blog" category was a misnomer, and he urged that his lizardoids vote every day (hint, hint) for him in this category anyway, and in addition in the "Best Blog Ever." It was too good a target for the Nodrog's rapier-sharp keyboard to pass up, starting in #8:

I'll vote for this blog in any category other than "blog with the most genocidal loony thread posters,"...

when hell freezes over.

I continued in the same vein in #12:

Make that genocidal loony DELUDED thread posters.

And how about a category for "blog with the most disingenuous webmaster?"

Charles "I'm not in control of my threads" Johnson with his Cheshire cat grin would win hands down.

Of course, Charles expects other popular weblogs, such as Kos, to better control their loons.

How about "most hypocritical blogmaster?"

Cattt in #13 said Come on, Gordon. You know LGF is your favorite blog. :) To which I responded in #22:

Cattt: Maybe so. After all, I also like to watch Stanford football games. Maybe sadomasochism is just my bag.

The ridiculous response on this blog to the utterly sensible Baker-Hamilton report is just the latest final straw in the LGF loonbag collection.

How about the "don't confuse me with the facts" blog?

I followed up with a Pearl Harbor slam in #32:

And, based upon Charles' sly Pearl Harbor post earlier today, LGF is also in the running with Michelle Malkin for the:

"Let's round up the Muslims like we did with the Japanese (and rightly so!)" weblog award.

The lizardoids responded with equal measures of humor and vitriol. And in #71 I changed tack (the quotation in italics is from Andrew Sullivan, although it is unattributed so I'm not completely sure): I've changed my mind:

LGF is indeed the best conservative blog:

Here you have a U.S. citizen detained on American soil, kept without charges for 3 and a half years, accused of plotting a dirty bomb attack (an accusation never substantiated in any way), tortured until he may be mentally incapable of standing trial ... and the conservative blogosphere is completely, utterly silent. Habeas corpus disappears not with a bang, and not even with a whimper, but with deathly quiet. Well, we know what American conservatism now stands for.

Yes indeed, LGF is the new face of the American conservative movement.

I don't think LGF won anything this time, and by the end of 2007 LGF had a host of new enemies due to Charles' bannings.

Nuke Iran - Then See Me

2008-08-06T16:43:00.001-07:00

A quote from a 1980 National Lampoon summary of Presidential candidate positions - Ronald Reagan's entry. But it seems to fit the LGF world view. On December 6, 2006, the Baker Report commissioned by President Bush was released. Johnson commented on December 6, 2006 in "Baker Report Released" that the report advocated "defeat and retreat." I posed the question in #81:

1. "Defeat and retreat" is the LGF critique of the Baker-Hamilton report.

2. The current policy/level of troops is not working. Do any Lizardoids disagree with this basic assumption? If so, provide evidence that Iraq is succeeding or on the road to being a stable democratic nation.

3. Assuming the current policy is failing, what is the LGF response? ("Nuke Tehran" is not a serious answer, Kosovo-Manzikert) If it is more troops, how many more? Where will they come from? A new draft?

Us non-lizards want to know the answers. It's easy to carp at others - how about some realistic solutions?

No immediate response, other than the usual nonsense, so in #107 I asked again:

Still waiting for a thoughtful lizard to step up and provide a realistic alternative.

You could step up yourself, Charles. If you've thought about an alternative solution instead of just the usual seething and carping you're so good at.

In response to Totally Sirius' non-response in #104, I zinged in #112:

Totally Sirius obviously doesn't have a viable solution. So he (or she) has decided to hide behind the mother's dress of stupid insult.

Anyone else willing to step up?

In #118 I couldn't resist a swipe at the loon of loons on LGF, taxfreekiller, and one of his cronies: I

see that unreconstructed rebel has decided to hide with TFK under the pickup in the "White Trash Tavern" parking lot in Fort Worth instead of giving us all a constructive alternative.

Anyone else willing to step forward with a constructive responsive alternative to the policy solution outlined in the Baker-Hamilton report?

This finally elicited some responses. Revka in #114 stated, among insults for anyone to the left of Dick Cheney, WE need to go into Iran and Syria and wipe them out as well since they are part of the insurgency. Iron Fist in #115 gave us his (final) solution: Kill Sadr and every single member of his "Madhi Army" and half of our problems go away. Take a hard line with the Sunnis ("Do you want to live or don't you?"), and then back it up. We can simply depopulate the Sunni Triangle if that is what it takes. I don't believe that it will take that, but we need to be willing to go there. And funky chicken in #116 helpfully linked to a Ralph Peters column in the New York Post entitled "Kill Muqtada NOW." I responded to them all in #146:

#116 funky chicken and #115 Iron Fist: Thank you for at least taking up the challenge.

The sum-up of the Peters article in the Post: If we can't leave a democracy behind, we should at least leave the corpses of our enemies.

It didn't work for the Nazis in Yugoslavia, but maybe it will work in Iraq?

#114 revka proposes invading Iran and Syria now too. OK, revka, you yourself admit that the country isn't willing to do this. Do you propose a conscription of troops to get the job done?

At this point my bringing the Nazis into it further enraged Lizard Nation. After much abuse, most of which I was absent for (and accused, of course, of cutting and running), I responded in #275: My

comparison to the Nazis in Yugoslavia in World War II in #146 was not meant to compare U.S. forces to Nazis. It was meant as a tactical comment - if the utterly ruthless tactics used by the Nazis in Yugoslavia during World War II didn't work, perhaps the utterly ruthless tactics advocated by certain posters on this thread won't work either.

And, I should note, the willingness to use utterly ruthless tactics is a sign of moral and ethical degeneracy anyway.

One final point: I certainly don't agree with any suggestions in the Baker Report that Israel be forced to give up the Golan Heights, or make any other concessions, associated with the Iraq mess.

As a final ludicrous postscript, Lizardoid Grandma posted a meandering lengthy screed in #280. In #281 I made a trenchant comment about her use of language:

I don't know whose Grandma you are, but my Grandma never used the term "cluster f-ck". And I'm quite happy that she didn't.

That's what LGF can cause - swearing Grandmas!

The Idiocy of Dennis Prager

2008-08-06T08:29:00.001-07:00

Among the more interesting outcomes of the election debacle of 2006 (debacle for Lizard Nation, that is - redemption for the rest of us) was the election of Black Muslim Keith Ellison to Congress from Minnesota. I was expecting the frothing to erupt any day, and sure enough, it erupted when it was revealed that Ellison planned to take his oath of office on the Koran instead of the Bible "like everyone else."

What is also interesting about the this issue on LGF is that the Nodrog was actually caught flat-footed by the lizardoids TWICE during this exchange! Only quick side-stepping prevented a rare victory for the illiterati against the Nodrog.

The first joust came on November 29, 2006, on a thread entitled "Ahmedinejad's Second Warning," After Interloper went OT with the story in comment #14, the Nodrog, after reviewing the disgraceful diatribe from Dennis Prager himself, commented in #72:

What Dennis Prager wrote is perhaps the most un-American pile of crap he's ever produced.

Here's the response of a RATIONAL conservative, Eugene Volokh, to Prager's Christianist nonsense [Link in original]

Perhaps "Christianist" wasn't the correct adjective, as BabbaLouie pointed out in #76, with the succinct comment, "Prager's a Jew, As***le." I made a quick comeback in #81:

Then Prager's even stupider than I thought. He's self-destructive as well as bigoted. Many Christianists want a strong Israel so that Jews like Prager can go live there and stop sullying their "Christian nation." To be fair, the others supporting Israel aren't motivated by such base thoughts. They merely think it will help bring an end the world!

I completed my recovery for a devastating rejoinder to the Prager nonsense, from none other than the U.S. Constitution, in #90:

Article VI, paragraph 3, of the United States Constitution:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

How stupid is Prager, anyway?

The story continued, and on December 4, 2006, Charles posted "CAIR Goes After Dennis Prager." In comment #372 I repeated by quotation from the U.S. Constitution. I was immediately castigated because the Constitution issue had already been discussed on the thread, although with typical lizardoid ignorance attached to many of the comments. Cattt in #378 immediately upbraided me, and Darleen attached lizard spin to the whole issue in #394 by denying that Prager was an idiot, and claiming that affirming on the Bible was some sort of unifying community experience, or some such nonsense. I responded to her in #409:

Darleen: So, it's just a "unifying value system representing American civilization?"

But, if you are an atheist or a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Hindu and you refuse to take an oath on the Bible you will not be allowed to serve in Congress?

Sounds like a religious test to me.

I say let anyone who wants to swear on a Bible to do so. Or on any other "holy" book. Or on none at all. A representative must swear to uphold the Constitution - how he or she does it is up to him.

No, this wasn't the second Nodrog mis-step - that was to come. In #401 I noticed that some posters were claiming that Ellison couldn't be trusted to take an oath from the Koran because the Koran contained the concept of Taqqiyah, or lying to protect oneself from non-Muslims. In #401 I questioned this:

It is my understanding that the Taqqiya lying stuff isn't in the Koran, but rather in one of the supplementary books.

So if Ellison takes his oath on the Koran itself, he's not taking his oath on a book that tells him to lie to promote Islam.

Can anyone point me to a passage IN THE KORAN that tells Muslims to lie to promote Islam?

I thought I was in the clear at first, when idiots like Earth2moonbat in #403 and hous bin pharteen in #406 and geepers in #415. But Killgore Trout in #418 and Cattt in #422, being among the more intelligent lizardoids, found specific Koranic passages involving Taqqiyah. The lizardoids crowed, and the Nodrog acknowledged a rare defeat at the end of the thread.

Of course, that still begs the question of Lizardoid paranoia over Ellison, but let's let the illiterati take their victories where they can find them!

Crazy John Conyers, Crazy BabbaZee

2008-08-05T12:00:00.000-07:00

The 2006 election did not go well for Lizard Nation (may the 2008 election make them just as unhappy!), and on November 15, 2006, Charles turned to the task for smearing the new Congressional majority. His target on this day, in "Congressman Conyers and Islam," was worthy of scorn - Congressman John Conyers, crazy black guy from Detroit, about to become Chair of the House Judiciary Committee by dint of 40 years of seniority and not much else. In #91 the Nodrog said as much, but with a little twist to annoy the illiterati:

There's a lot of hyperbole on this site about "far left" Democrats that I think is unfair when applied to someone like John Murtha, or even Nancy Pelosi.

However, John Conyers deserves the epithet. He is unfit to chair the Judiciary committee, and if the Democrats have any sense they will give the job to someone else.

The lizards ignored the main message and immediately counterattacked with claims that Conyers, Pelosi, and Murtha were indistinguishable birds of a feather (see, e.g., Dustoff-507 in #96, EC Marm in #102). But of interest was crazy BabbaZee nee BabbaLouie's response in #103, "SHADDAP, SULLY." He/she/it repeated the post in #196, and in #198 buzzsawmonkey asked the knucklehead why he/she/it used that phrase. I answered the question for BabbaLouie in #205:

He-she-it refers to be as "Sully" because I sometimes gives links to, and generally agree with, blogger and columnist Andrew Sullivan.

It's also a way for he-she-it to throw in some pinkish innuendoes, since Sullivan is openly gay.

Mainly, it's a way for Babba Zee to say "Gordon's right, but I can't stand it. So I'll just throw poo at him instead."

A look at BabbaZee's LGF spinoff site would indicate that the creature creating it is 1) Jewish, 2) a political idiot, and 3) on some sort of psychedelic or other mind-altering substance. Quite a combination! It reads sort of like LGF on an acid trip.

Make that an EX-LGF spinoff site. BabbaZee has joined the "Banned of Brothers," for daring to link to another site attacking Charles Johnson for his anti-creationist obsession (a good obsession, in my view, but an obsession nonetheless). And she is the reigning posting champion, with over 63,000 LGF posts, a good 19,000 over second place. Of course, according to a little lizardoid pissant named "Big Steve" who is now keeping track of such things, BabbaZee is "off the list." She's become a non-entity - and just like the victims of Stalin's purges disappeared from the photos, BabbaZee has disappeared from the LGF record books.

Except fortunately we don't live in Stalinist Russia, so BabbaZee and the Nodrog can continue to take our potshots at the tottering LGF empire with virtual impunity!

Election 2006

2008-08-04T08:35:00.000-07:00

It was coming up fast, and on November 5, 2006, Charles linked to house cartoonists Cox & Forkum with "Cox & Forkum: Election 2006." Outward lizardoid bravado was tenuous at best, and it broke down with the Nodrog's "contributions," beginning in #89:

One reason Republicans deserve not to win - a reason that Charles LGF'ers might just agree with. [Link in original]

They apparently have no interest in making us energy-independent from oil ticks.

Galloping Granny took me to task in #100 with her ludicrous claims that the Republicans were indeed in favor of energy self-sufficiency. Longtime lizardoid (now banned) Goodbye_Natalie in #106 sarcastically replied (but later in the thread defended my presence against "ban him" lizardoid losers). RTLM had to claim, of course, in #107 that global warming was a hoax. But the Nodrog had a pretty good followup argument in #122:

It's time for a protest vote against the wrong turns the current Republican President and Congress have made over the past two years (longer for the Republican congress, IMHO).

Putting Democrats in charge of the House and Senate does not mean that their candidate could or should win in 2008.

But it's time to send the Republicans a message - the current state of the party and its betrayal of core principles is unacceptable.

And doing this in an off-year election has a lot less impact than doing it during the 2008 Presidential election.

And a final comment in #130:

I'm sure Charles isn't very happy that his blog has become the haunt of "Republicans, right or wrong" idiocy, as has been spouted on this thread.

I'm not saying the Democrats will do better - I'll acknowledge there's quite a good chance they will do worse running Congress during the next two years.

But the Republicans deserve to be turned out on their butts. And it might do them a world of good to figure out where they screwed up and come back with a winning alternative in 2008.

At this point lucid argument disappeared and lizardoid invective began in earnest. But the next day, election day, would indeed vindicate the Nodrog and send Lizard Nation into gloom.

They Fall For It Every Time

2008-07-31T08:38:00.000-07:00

Charles and Stephen Emerson, that is. Charles took notice of a city council race in Anaheim California, of all places, in October 25, 2006's "Emerson: LA Times Violates Journalistic Ethics in Anaheim Election Coverage." In #63 I pointed the situation out for all to see:

This is nothing but a lot of hyper-ventilation.

The issues regarding membership on the Anaheim City Council have to do with providing effective city services, managing new development, providing a decent transportation system, and the like.

They have nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. Mr. Dalati's election to the Anaheim City Council will matter not one iota on that issue.

Which tells me that Shawn Steel has injected a non-issue into this race for political gain. Which is his right - although I would not vote for a candidate for any public office that campaigned on issues not relevant to the office.

But the interesting thing here is that the yper-ventilators among us, Mr. Emerson and LGF, have fallen for this campaign ploy.

The thread soon degenerated into Mexican-hatred, a distressingly common phenomenon on LGF as the immigration issue heated up.

As for Anaheim, Bill Dalati was not elected to the Council. So Mickey Mouse is safe, for now.

History's Strange Bedfellows

2008-07-30T16:10:00.001-07:00

Charles' lack of historical foundations became apparent once again on October 20, 2006, with "Spain Becoming Al Andalus." The thread started with "The ghosts of the Spanish warriors who fought to reclaim Spain from Muslim invaders are screaming in outrage." The Nodrog started counter-attacking in #34:

Only on LGF could the Spanish Reconquista, which led to the expulsion of not only Muslims but also ALL JEWS from Spain, which led to the inquisition inflicting unholy tortures on converted Muslims and JEWS who were suspected of backsliding, be heralded as a triumph.

Charles, do your friends in Israel know that you applaud the Spanish reconquista and inquisition?

In #39 I gave the thinking lizardoids (if there were any) more to ponder:

Read this book, if you want to find out what the "noble" Spanish reconquistadors did to the Jews once they reconquista'ed Spain.

[Link to Paul Johnson's "History of the Jews"]

But Charles and LGF think they are heroes.

I made another telling point in #41:

As for the topic at hand, are Charles or any other LGF'ers actually literate in Spanish so that they could read this book?

I thought not. Why educate yourself when ignorance allows you to spout at will, right Charles?

There was more on this thread as I battled lizardoid historical ignorance. But #53 was a good sum-up by the Nodrog:

Actually, Charles' post is symptomatic of one of the major flaws of Islamo-hatred - it leads to the embrace of some pretty unsavory characters, both past and present. Charles embraces the reconquistadors, another poster embraces Viking pirates in Sicily, other embrace barbarian Visigoths. In the present day, Islamohaters embrace brutal Russian occupiers and Slobodan Milosevic.

Get a grip.

No grips allowed on LGF when it comes to Muslims!

Iraq Flames - Johnson the Shiller and Coward

2008-07-30T09:08:00.001-07:00

On October 19, 2006, Charles decided to confront the burgeoning quagmiric mess in Iraq by ... attacking CNN as traitors. The post was "CNN Airs Islamic Death Porn." In #27 I started quite a ruckus:

The truth hurts, doesn't it Charles?

The war in Iraq has turned into a disastrous nightmare, for one of three reasons:

1. It was a mistake to begin with.

2. The successful outcome possible was botched by the Bush administration

3. Because Muslims are inherently evil, Iraq is ungovernable.

The CNN video is a necessary antidote to the Bush administration's failure to face reality regarding Iraq.

But you refuse to face reality on Iraq too, don't you Charles? Hence the attack on CNN. It's easier than admitting you are wrong.

I followed up in #42 with a dig at a long-time nemesis, the notorious Poitiers-Lepanto:

Kosovo-Mazikert: Comparing our now worthless war in Iraq with the crusade against Nazi Germany (not to mention our 40-year battle against Stalinism and its successors) is a sign of the blinkered unreality infecting this site and the entire right-wing blogosphere like antibiotic-resistant tuberculosis bacilli.

But hey, attacking CNN is easier than admitting that you are WRONG, WRONG WRONG.

Lizards to the left of me, lizards to the right of me - I picked out one to answer in #77:

#43 Kenneth: They are able to do this because the Democrats, liberals and leftist condemn the US and give hope, encouragement & financial aid to the enemy

Extraordinarily unperceptive of you, Kenneth.

The primary reasons that the Islamocrazies are succeeding in Iraq are:

1. Shiites and Sunnis hate each other and have decided to kill each other with abandon - your unholy alliance of Iran and al qaeda is fantasy - their proxies are fighting each other in Iraq.

2. The Bush administration botched the reconstruction of Iraq - this is now universally admitted by all but those who believe in fantasy or are politically beholden to the Bush administration.

3. World Islam is going through it's "reformation" today - and unfortunately the Martin Luthers and John Calvins of Islam are found among al qaeda types.

So any attempt to tie the problems in Iraq to the Western Left is absolutely absurd.

But both you and Charles have no other answers. So you're trying to mine this angle - sort of like the "stab in the back" nonsense that the Nazis and German right-wingers used to describe German socialists during the Weimar Republic.

In answer to lizardoids taunts, I gave my Iraq prescription in #128:

At this point, the only thing that has a chance of working in Iraq is either:

1. Put about a million U.S. troops into the country (we'll need a draft - unless TFK and his ilk will volunteer and the U.S. government waives the syphilis test) - and put a general in charge who has extensively studied why we failed in Vietnam and has a strategy for success.

2. Pull out of the country entirely and actively support the faction that is going to win (probably the Shiites) as they brutalize their opponents and eventually come out on top after a civil war. But I would still support the Kurds - perhaps recognize them as an independent state.

Not a bad guess - although the "surge" was a little short of a million more troops! And after giving my prescription, I turned the tables on Johnson in #133:

And, once again, to get back on topic, blaming CNN for reporting on this is a classic case of shooting the messenger.

Which is the only answer Charles has for Iraq.

Right, Charles?

What do you think we should do in Iraq, Charles? Let the lizardoid legions know!

Johnson the coward never did, of course. The flames continued, along with my demands that Charles speak up.

Of note, near the end of the thread in #951, is a visit from the subsequent LGF pest (from the LGF dictionary, "pest" = a person still possessed of their senses) - banned one ChenZhen, who used some of his internet prototypes to describe the epic flame war that had just enfolded.

Flamin' Election 2006

2008-07-29T08:47:00.001-07:00

On October 18, 2006, the Nodrog turned the spotlight onto Charles' squalid electioneering for the Republicans (or, to be more precise, against the Democrats) on two different threads. First came "Rangel - 'So Called Terrorists'," smearing the long-time Harlem congressman who was badgered into using those words on loathsome Bill O'Reilly's show. I posed a distinctly contrary view to Lizard Nation in #96:

Rangel is indeed a fool.

He's a fool to even go on a show hosted by a worthless piece of toady crap like Bill O'Reilly.

I would have told O'Reilly to go F--- himself.

When lizardoids stated that O'Reilly read LGF, I gave him a message in #122:

Bill O'Reilly reads this site?

Then read this, Bill.

YOU'RE A PIECE OF TOADY CRAP!

By the way, I plan to vote the straight Democratic ticket for the first time in my life this November, I am so disgusted with the beloved (by Charles and LGF loserdom) Republicans.

The thread then degenerated into flames between the Nodrog and all comers. Of note was one exchange with Elric in #192, who asked "what's wrong with torturing jihadists?" In #202 I gave him an answer he didnt' want to hear.

Elric: George Washington didn't find it necessary to torture captured British soldiers. He gave specific orders to treat them humanely.

We didn't find the need to torture German or Japanese soldiers captured in World War II, even when they had committed barbarous acts.

It's not the American way, Elric. And after George Bush and his torturers are thrown out of office in 2008, we will reconfirm that.

In #197 galloping granny shamefully stated that sleep deprivation and other such inconveniences weren't torture. In #208 I posed a devastating rhetorical question:

galloping granny:

The techniques of "water boarding" and sleep deprivation that our forces are now allowed to use (and have been using) were learned from the techniques perfected by the KGB in the Lubyanka and in the Gulags in the 1930's.

Is that OK with you, granny?

I summed up my attitude in #218:

I guess I missed the latest LGF epistle.

"Waterboading is not torture"

This is one sick site.

A ridiculous comparison of today with Civil War times and President Lincoln led me to this riposte in #276:

#273: Abraham Lincoln never advocated or sanctioned torture of Confederates.

He also didn't give rich Union plutocrats tax cuts during wartime. In fact, he raised the first (temporary) income tax to pay for the war.

Also, despite the chicken little Islamohatred festering on tiis site, the "War on Terror" doesn't even come close to the mortal jeopardy this nation faced during the Civil War. It's part of the blinkered unreality that Charles has allowed and encouraged to reproduce like tuberculosis bacilli on LGF.

Flames continued until they sputtered out, but were reignited on the "Jihadist Killilng to Influence Our Election," post, a ridiculous piece of Johnson nonsense. I cut through the crap in #23:

I smell the sweat of desperation on the brow of a certain Santa Monica Lizard King.

You're sinking to new shilling lows, Charles.

It's too late. The Republicans are doomed.

And you know what, Charles? The sky will not fall in when Speaker Pelosi takes office.

The Lizardoids talked a brave front, but thank God they weren't representative of the American people in the Fall of 2006.

Minnesota Taxi Jihad

2008-07-28T16:45:00.001-07:00

On October 11, 2006, Johnson posted "Airport Drops Plan to Institute Sharia," an incendiary headline for a story about some Muslim Minneapolis Airport taxi drivers refusing to take passengers carrying alcohol. Several other threads were devoted to this topic, and the lizardoid losers, as usual, blew the story way out of proportion. In #12 I counter-attacked:

You can wipe that spittle off of your Santa Monica computer screen, Charles.

First alcohol packages on taxis will be banned, next we'll all be praying to Mecca five times a day (or be dhimmis or dead), right, Charles?

Your "fire them all" rhetoric is nothing but overheated bile. The response of the airport officials is the right one.

The lizardoids, amidst their pointless attacks on me, denounced the response of the Minneapolis airport officials - to send the offending taxi drivers back to the end of the "pickup" line, as way too lenient. In #134 I responded further:

I would also point out, for all of you totalist Islam haters infesting this site (including Charles?) - that the article said "some" of the hundreds of Muslim taxi drivers were refusing to ferry alcohol-carrying passengers. I would suspect that a deeper digging into the story would find that most of the Muslim taxi drivers have no problem with it. So sending these few to the back of the line seems to be a pretty clever punishment - a choice between religious purity and the wallet.

Meanwhile, other illiterati were claiming that the passengers' constitutional rights were being violated. I educated them in #149:

Taxi drivers are not government employees, they are private owners with government licenses. There is a difference.

Also, "passengers carrying alcohol" is not a protected class, subject to strict constitutional scrutiny of discrimination.

So it comes down to the Minnesota taxi law. Clearly the Muslim drivers refusing service were in violation of it. Any claims of "relgious exercise" freedoms are fatuous - the 1st amendment free exercise clause does not apply in this situation, as Christianist landlords violating state laws by refusing to rent to gays have found out to their detriment.

So now that they've broken the law, what is the appropriate punishment? Charles' would be termination of their licenses. Another numbnut on this thread suggested deportation. I think the solution found by the Twin Cities airport authority is quite ingenious, as long as it is just a few taxi drivers. They will pay the price in lost revenue for their law-breaking, and they will either change their minds or go out of business.

At this point, Israeli illiterati member Ben Zacharia started taunting me and misreading my posts in #150, #152, and #153. I responded promptly in #158:

Brush up on your reading skills, Zacharia. You are quoting a law - a law that I point out has been broken by the cabbies later in my post.

I was merely pointing out that, if there were no law in effect, the cabbies would not have any constitutional restrictions on their ability to refuse service to alcohol-carrying passengers.

Ol' Ben slunk back into his hole after that smackdown.

A greater Islamic menace in the LGF paranoid universe than even this was soon to come out of Minnesota after the November 2006 election, as we shall see.

Hugo Chavez! Booga Booga!

2008-07-28T08:32:00.000-07:00

In September 2006, Hugo Chavez blustered at the UN with his infamous "Bush El Diablo" speech, and Charles was suitably outraged. At Chavez? No, at the UN for letting him speak, and the US for letting him into this country. In #453, I summarized Charles' response:

Why are you so scared of Hugo Chavez, Charles, that you want to ban him from the U.S. despite our hosting of the United Nations?

Do you think our nation is that weak that we have anything to fear from a tinpot dictator clown like Chavez, even one with a lot of oil?

Better go hide under the bed, Charles. I hear Robert Mugabe will be coming to the UN soon.

In a followup thread on September 21, 2006, entitled "Flying Pig Not Sighted," Charles found a way to slam Nancy Pelosi and Charles Rangel even though they condemned Chavez' loony attack. His claim? That Pelosi and Rangel had also called Bush similar things. I asked for proof in #135: [

quoting Johnson]by people who have said the very same things Hugo Chavez is saying

Charles, find me a quote from Pelosi or Rangel calling Bush a "devil."

Or admit that you are lying.

The lizardoids responded with insults, but no counter-proof. And Charles had no response. The Nodrog: right again!

LGF Torture Three-Step Program

2008-07-25T16:24:00.001-07:00

On September 20, 2006, Johnson truly jumped the torture shark (talk about tortured metaphors, Nodrog!) with "ABC Investigation: Torture Horror Saved Lives." As I pointed out in #117, Johnson and LGF had finally found the third phase of their response to the whole shameful, disgraceful, "enhanced interrogation techniques" of the Bush Administration:

[quoting Johnson]Who could have guessed that the CIA’s relatively tame “torture” techniques actually work?

The Gestapo and the NKVD got some good information from their interrogation sessions too.

Any more straw men to throw up, alleged "American" Charles Johnson?

I followed up with my three-step analysis in #118:

Actually, I knew this would happen.

Step One in the Charles Johnson/LGF/right-wing torture apologist stance:

WE DIDN'T DO ANY OF IT!

Step Two:

WE DID STUFF, BUT IT'S WASN'T REALLY TORTURE!

Step Three:

WE TORTURED PEOPLE WHO DESERVED IT!

Charles, congratulations, you're onto step three, even with the scare quotes around "torture." But I've got news for you, the pro-torture right-wing crowd has already gotten to Step Three (see: Richard Lowry, Rannesh Ponnoru, etc.).

More brilliant analysis from the Nodrog, buried in the LGF archives, but now brought to light for many to see, marvel, and ponder!

Dog Bites Man - and Johnson Hypes Non-Story

2008-07-25T09:32:00.001-07:00

On September 14, 2006, Johnson thought he had a real scoop with "Who the Terror Apologists Support." He breathlessly linked to another blogger, who linked to a Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) "scorecard" for voters that ranked about 150 Democrats highly, but only a few Republicans. After what follows, it might be good to see the original story here. In #28, I started unraveling the story:

I took a closer look at the source material for the post Charles has linked to:[Link]

What kind of a rating system gives either 100's or 0's?

Then I went to CAIR's own site, and I can find no evidence there of a CAIR rating system - only legislation CAIR is watching. There are only a few bills listed.

I'm not ready to call "bullshit" on this yet - but someone needs to do a lot more explaining before trumpeting this as evidence of Democratic party treason.

Of course, "evidence" of Democratic party treason isn't needed on this site to send Charles and the Lizardoids off to spouting their nonsense and leaving their enraged spittle all over their computer screens.

Yes, it appeared that all the rankings from CAIR were either "100" or "0." An odd ranking system! Mike C. backed me up in #39, while Black George Bush in #40 gave the standard LGF answer - "don't confuse me with facts, I know it's true." LGF Genius JammieWearingFool gave Mike C. a link the same as that used by Charles, which I pointed out to the ignoramus in #53:

#43 JammieWearingFool: You've linked to the Vote Smart site that was used as a source by Say Anything. It's not the CAIR site.

I can't find anything like this rating system on the CAIR site. Can anybody else find the source material?

Also, a rating system that gives every single representative a 0 or a 100 is either based upon one or two actual votes, or is a lie.

I plaintively asked in #57:

Doesn't anyone other than MikeC care thtat this whole story might be a fraud?

Eventually the truth came out - the CAIR rating didn't come from them, but came from someone who converted CAIR's position on ONE vote, the Real ID act, into an all-or-nothing rating system! In #97 I commented:

Thank you, Ward and others, for doing the digging on this story.

It doesn't seem quite ready to be used in a Republican campaign ad. I will certainly acknowledge that a true CAIR scorecard would rate Democrats as a whole higher than Republicans.

And of course Charles is too graceless and insecure to acknowledge that I'm the one who first dug into the facts and questioned the story on this thread.

I followed up with #98:

Wow, this thread sure got abandoned fast.

On to the next chimera for Charles and the lizardoid legions.

And finally, in #99:

The lack of commenters makes it official.

THIS STORY IS A FRAUD!

A classic Johnson technique - hype a story and then abandon it without a trace once it's been proven fraudulent. Johnson did put a couple of lame "updates" to his original post, but never backed down from his absurd shill-like claims.

A Break from our Regular Programming - Gates of Vienna

2008-07-24T09:54:00.001-07:00

The Nodrog has graced the blog pages of Gates of Vienna. GoV is an anti-Islam blog pure and simple, run my two east-coast Americans, Baron Bodissey and Dymphna. It is on a much higher intellectual plane than LGF, and has some quite good posts and posters, who tend to propound at length and occasionally even back up their arguments with facts - a technique that has apparently been lost entirely on current LGF comment threads. This means that Charles has ostracized and condemned the blog and its owners, and has apparently orchestrated its banishment from Pajamas Media. The Nodrog enjoys being an intelligent contrarian on Gates of Vienna, although I'm not sure the enjoyment is reciprocated.

Anyway, the big news from a couple of days ago was the capture of Radovan Karadzic, former warlord of the murderous Bosnian Serb rogue state in the 1990's. He's headed for a war crimes trial at The Hague. Given the attention at Gates of Vienna to the menace of Islam from Bosniak, Kosovar, and Albanian Muslims (not to mention those dastardly Turks), I have this to report from Gates of Vienna on Karadzic's capture and the issues regarding Christianity vs. Islam it raises in the former Yugoslavia and the Balkans ...

(crickets)

Now back to our regular programming ...

The Prayer of St. Francis

2008-07-24T08:37:00.000-07:00

September 11 of every year is a special day for Johnson and the LGF gang. Ostensibly a day for "remembrance," the main remembrance accomplished is a fanning of the flames of hatred and paranoia that are an LGF hallmark. September 11, 2006 was no exception, as Johnson power-blogged on the subject, starting with a link to LGF house favorite James Lileks in "Lileks 9/11 Video." I had decided to try a different tack in response to the bilious sadness approaching in #2:

Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.

O, Lord,
grant that I may not so much seek
to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love;
for it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.

Amazingly, I got a couple of positive responses to this post, most notably ward cleaver in #9, realwest in #27 and Moonbatbane in #46.

But, being the Nodrog, I decided to push my luck. In "Refresher Course," a Johnson link to a Cox & Forkum cartoon, I repeated the prayer of St. Francis in post #61. This time, the "Hamas of America" crowd was less kind, as exemplified by Kenneth in #69 and widows'might in #77.

In "Arab and Iranian Reaction to 9/11" I repeated the prayer of St. Francis in #15 and added the Sermon on the Mount in #69. An increasingly hostile lizard nation was exemplified by the vile response of Jehu in #30. I repeated the Sermon on the Mount in post #42 on "Dedicated to the Victims of 9/11," to somewhat more tempered responses.

Finally, in "Conspiracists Defile WTC Site," the ____ hit the fan. In #112 I started out with a peace-making quote from Romans. After some back and forth with Ed the Weatherman and Karmic Inquisitor, the Grand LGF Inquisitor himself, Johnson, showed up in #198 with this to say: I almost never post to you, Gordon, but if you're trying to get me to ban you today, continuing to spam every thread with sneering Biblical quotes just might do it. Have some decency.

The Nodrog was ruining the desired mood on LGF, and Johnson would have none of it! Being threatened with banning for the Prayer of St. Francis - who'd a thunk it!

By the way, it turns out the "Prayer of St. Francis" was first published in a French journal in the early 20th century, and has no known connection to the 13th century saint, as I found out more than a year later.

Flames Flames Flames

2008-07-23T09:32:00.000-07:00

The Nodrog was in fine form on September 8, 2006 as Johnson continued his Khatami obsession with "Khatami Slams Bush, U.S. During Visit." Starting in #29, I decided to go for the contrarian gusto:

Since the left has been proven correct in its analysis of our lying incompetent President and his lying incompetent administration and their lying incompetent Iraq policy, perhaps it's good that we let Khatami speak.

After all, the truth hurts.

I followed up with more scalding detail in #42:

And not just the left are questioning our continued presence in Iraq. Read between the lines of Krauthammer's new piece. [Link] He's not "Pollyanna" Krauthammer any more when it comes to Iraq.

And, I know that in the blinkered parallel world of LGF Thomas Friedman qualifies as a treasonous, seditious leftist, but to any one with a sane sense of politics he is best described as a moderate. Here's what he has to say:

Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld told us we are in the fight of our lives against a new Islamic fascism, and let’s have an unprecedented wartime tax cut and shrink our armed forces. They told us we are in the fight of our lives against a new Islamic fascism, but let’s send just enough troops to topple Saddam — and never control Iraq’s borders, its ammo dumps or its looters. They told us we are in the fight of our lives against a new Islamic fascism, but rather than bring Democrats and Republicans together in a national unity war coalition, let’s use the war as a wedge issue to embarrass Democrats, frighten voters and win elections. They told us we are in the fight of our lives against a new Islamic fascism — which is financed by our own oil purchases — but let’s not do one serious thing about ending our oil addiction.

Oh, but I forgot: on that last point the 15 bazillion barrels of oil newly found under the Gulf of Mexico will allow us to continue to drive all those Hummers without shelling out $3 a gallon to Jihadis. Right, nam Grunt?

In response to the usual nonsense from Talkin' Kamel in #43, I gave out another broadside in #53:

Talkin' Kamel: Actually, since President Nutjob challenged President Lying Incompetent to a debate, perhaps President Lying Incompetent should offer to visit Iran for the debate, insist on a nationwide broadcast, insist on his own translator, and clean up the floor with President Nutjob.

I threw out some more unpalatable words for the illiterati in #63:

More proof that Khatami is right about our lying incompetent President and his lying incompetent administration: [Link]

Scheid said the planners continued to try "to write what was called Phase 4," or the piece of the plan that included post-invasion operations like occupation.

Even if the troops didn't stay, "at least we have to plan for it," Scheid said.

"I remember the secretary of defense saying that he would fire the next person that said that," Scheid said. "We would not do planning for Phase 4 operations, which would require all those additional troops that people talk about today.

"He said we will not do that because the American public will not back us if they think we are going over there for a long war."

In response to lizardoid non-responses and ad hominems, I had this to say in #87:

Well, I see that the LGF bloviating smear machine is out in full distortion mode today.

Khatami is right in his criticism that our President is a lying incompetent who has completely bungled matters in the Middle East.

He's not right about much of anything else.

But, since you will insist in twisting, distorting, and smearing my words to suit your shilling stupid purposes, don't let me stop you.

With any luck the American people will give you a bitch-slap into reality in November, both 2006 and 2008. And then you'll have to come up with a new set of conspiracy theories and lies to retake power.

I kept up the counter-abuse in #107:

And, once again, it's laughable the way Charles and LGF loserdom are trying to make hay about Khatami's visit - comparing him to Himmler and Goering (whatever happened to Godwin's law by the way, Charles? Hypocrite).

If anything, Khatami is probably more analogous to President Hindenburg. Not exactly a threat.

But, of course, in the LGF parallel universe, all Muslims are equally bad, and the entire religion must be eradicated, and its adherents exterminated like rats or converted.

Right, Kosovo-Manzikert?

The lizardoids thought they had me, with a claim that Khatami executed 8,000 people in one day (see Silhouette in #119). One problem - it happened in 1988 when Khatami wasn't President, but was a minor official in the Khomeini regime. I trenchantly pointed this out in #136:

Silhouette: So, let me get this straight, since Khatami was in the government when 8,000 people were massacred, he is personally responsible? He should have just gone up to the Ayatollah Khomeini and told him to knock it off?

Rabidfox in #142 suggested that the Republicans put up pictures of Khatami with a Democrat in their TV ads for the upcoming election. I trenchantly responded in #150:

rabidfox: You mean like when they put a picture of triple amputee Vietnam Veteran Senator next to Oxama bin Laden in a TV ad? And the redneck rubes of Georgia bought it?

In #165 Yank in the EU claimed that Khatami was in the Khomeini inner circle. I corrected him (and threw in some abuse) with #191:

Yank: The evidence is pretty overwhelming that Khatami was not an active member of the Khomeini/Nutjob hardline faction in Iran.

He was merely a weak-willed opponent. At worst he was a figurehead put up by the hardliners. More likely, he won representing a wave of change in Iran, and then was too spineless to defeat the hardliners, thus betraying his supporters.

In any case, he's no President Nutjob.

And either Charles and the LGFers are too stupid to realize this, or, in a more sinister vein, they don't want to admit any distinction between different levels of Islamic thought, because tehy want to get rid of all of it.

Then the Nodrog abuse started to make claims that I loved the jihadis. In response to one of them (#219) I had this to say in #233:

Former Corpsman: You can go ahead and sift through my over 2,000 posts on LGF over the years and you won't ever find a defense of the evils of Sharia or any thought of imposing it in the U.S., as is apparently being considered in other Western nations such as Canada.

My point, which you ignored, is that the Christianists and Talibaptists are equally eager to impose Sharia-type laws on us. The only thing that stops a Christianist or a Talibaptist from being as extreme or intolerant at a radical Muslim is that we have built a civil society and culture that keeps these people in check. The Islamic world is cursed by not having developed such civil societies to keep their Jihadists in check, and the result has been disastrous.

Hoo boy, comparing Jihadists to "Talibaptists" wasn't popular on LGF! Then Writermom in #228 brought up the "Nodrog is anti-semitic" blood libel. I responded to her in #239:

More lies from WriterMom in #228 (she'a an expert at lying).

The only Israelis I have ever criticized in any of my more than 2000 LGF posts are those who advocate "transfer" (in other words, slaughter) in the service of Eretz Israel relgiious fanaticism. In other words, the Jewish equivalents of the Jihadis, fortunately a very small minority in Israel.

If you will notice, I did not make a single negative post regarding Israel's invasion of Lebanon last month. I am disappointed that the Israelis were unable to completely root out Hizbullah from their lairs. I thanked Charles for hhis uncovering of the shameful fauxtography used by the MSM.

Any more lies, Writermom?

So now, in addition to the Talibaptists, Writermom and the Apartheid Queen were hounding me too. But I was up to the challenge. Dead Sea Squirrel in #252 pointed out that the original baptists were for the separation of Church and State. I noted the changes since then with #261:

Dead Sea Squirrel: You are absolutely right about the roots of Baptist and other evangelical thought. That's what's so sad - the whole movement has been perverted by talibaptists like Dobson and his Focus on the Family organization. They'd impose a theocracy on this country in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it.

I summed up the case against the Talibaptists in #288:

The Talibaptist agenda:

-Throw Doctors in prison who perform abortions
-Throw women who have abortions into prison
-Criminalize private homosexual conduct
-Completely outlaw abortions, resulting in the death of women due to no "save the life of the Mother" exception
-Outlaw stem cell research involving embryos, thus resulting in the death of thousands who could be saved by the medical research
-have the state take children away from gay parents
-foment hatred of homosexuals in school teaching
-inhibit science education by promoting scientifically illiterate theories regarding the origin of species
-Outlaw realistic sex education in schools, resulting in ignorance, disease, and ultimately death
- Ostracize non-believers with the aggressive pushing of religion into public schools and other forums
-Promoting needless pain and suffering by refusing to allow terminal individuals to get assistance to end their lives
-Promoting home school "madrassas" designed to indoctrinate children in ignorance and bigotry

Have I left anything out?

It's not a difference in kind from Jihadi nonsense. It's just a difference in degree.

A fine day of flaming for the Nodrog!

All Khatami, All the Time

2008-07-22T08:53:00.001-07:00

Charles was hopelessly obsessed with the visit by former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami to the U.S. in September, 2006. On September 7, 2006, he posted "Harvard Dean: We Need Dialog With Islamic Terrorists," condemning Harvard's invitation of Khatami to speak and calling him "morally blinkered" and "hopelessly naive." In #61 I answered Charles, with devastating effect:

If you ever need a one-sentence encapsulation of the morally blinkered, hopelessly naïve outlook of America’s higher education czars

And if you've ever needed a post (or a series of posts) showing the morally blinkered, bloodthirsty, "destroy our liberties in order to save them" caca emanating from Charles and LGF... the Khatami flap just about sums it up.

Later that same day, Charles roundly condemned the Episcopal Church for inviting Khatami to speak at the National Cathedral in Washington DC. Charles was so intemperate that I decided to mock him in #34:

Booga Booga! to you, Charles.

I hope no living being was in your presence as you typed this post. There's probably spittle flying everywhere.

Khatami isn't Ahminajehid. Never has been, never will be. And all of your fulminations won't make it so.

I summed up the LGF attitude toward Khatami and its rationale in #51:

The only reason to hate Khatami as much as you hate Ahminajehid is if you think all of Islam is a bunch of evil scum, indistinguishable from each other, and the whole religion must be eradicated and its adherents killed or converted.

I know many LGF irregulars think that. Now I know that Charles does too.

Meanwhile, the Christianist wing of LGF was fulminating about Episcopalians. Fine Mess in #33 started out by claiming they weren't Christians, to which I responded in #35:

Fine Mess: Episcopalians are much truer to the word of Christ than Chistianist talibaptists like you. The three dioceses you mention aren't in revolt about the gays, they're in revolt about women being ordained. I say go join the Catholics if you want to be that un-Christian as to claim women can't administer sacraments or preach the word of God.

In answering the slanders of deja vu in #50, I was blunter in #54:

You can take your Christianist Talibaptist slandering of the Episcopal Church and stick it where the Sun never shines.

I then had a dialogue of sorts with a member of the Israeli illiterati, BenZacharia, which can be summed up in #79, as I responded to his misreading of the Bible in #77:

BenZacharia

Well, now we know where you stand. You support to the letter all of the minute details of Deuteronomy, Numbers, and Leviticus - the books that Mohammed borrowed from to come up with some of his more ridiculous and cruel passages in the Koran.

Thanks for clarifying things.

There was to be one more Khatami battle between the Nodrog and all comers, and it was a real humdinger!

Campaign Season Again!

2008-07-21T09:44:00.001-07:00

Yes, it was already September 2006, and on September 1 of that year Rayra and his GCP core goons had been thrown under the bus and blocked by Charles after an intolerable outburst of misbehavior on a September 1 thread entitled "Hizballah Sets Up Shop in Venezuela." And the November 2006 elections were on Charles' plate. So the shilling began, as evidenced by Charles' September 7, 2006, hyperventilating bloviation entitled "Democratic Party Wants to Censor 'Path to 9/11'", about some silly documentary. I acerbically commented in #41:

Uh oh. It must be campaign season again.

And the Republicans are in trouble, what with the disaster in Iraq, secret CIA torture centers (now glorified rather than denied by the likes of Lowry and Ponnoru), not to mention the continued ballooning federal deficit and the botched attempt to privatize social security.

So Charles has obviously received his marching orders.

I have to admit, Charles, you make a good shill. Your puppetmasters are quite happy with their work.

But, I thought you had more pride than this - to be used by the Republicans like a wind-up doll (or maybe a blow-up doll).

I followed up with more brilliant acid in #54:

Oh, and I almost forgot:

The coddling of the Talibaptists, who want to remake our society into a Christianist imitation of Iran:

And the one sensible policy of the President's, on immigration reform. But that will be jettisoned in attetmpt to throw red meat to the know-nothing Tancredoistas.

Yep, the Republicans are in big trouble this fall. The Democrats don't even need to have a coherent response (and they most certainly don't) to win back the House, and maybe even the Senate.

So, Lizardoids, expect ever more desperate shilling from Charles, at the dirction of his Republican peppetmasters, during the next two months.

In #53 Just a Grunt presented a lame defense of the Republicans, which I fisked in #87:

Just a Grunt:

oppose wire tapping calls from terrorists

The Democrats want the President to follow the FISA law and not break the law. Breaking the law is not good for a President to do.

tracking financial transactions form terrorist organizations

The New York Times is not the Democratic party. There are lots of Democrats who don't object to this - probably a majority. The main objection to this is probably the fact that such tracking is being done by an administration which has such obvious contempt for the law that they can't be trusted not to start financial tracking on their political enemies.

interrogating Islamic fascists caught in the act of tryin to kill Americans

You mean TORTURING Islamic fascists, don't you? Yes, the Democratic party is opposed to torture by U.S. government agents. Unlike you, the Republicans (at least those who have sold their soul to the President), and alleged conservatives such as Lowry and Ponnoru (I thought Conservatives were opposed to big government and government agents with unfettered authority to abuse and torture. Silly me).

refuse to vote for any law requiring strengthing of the border

There is sensible legislation passed by the Senate which strengthens the border. It is currently being blocked by the House Republicans, in defiance of their own President, out of Tancredoist know-nothing idiocy. The Democrats are ready to pass such a bill when the REPUBLICANS stop blocking it.

continue to try and hurt the morale of our servicemembers in the field

Aside from this being utter bullshit, the morale of our servicement in Iraq is being sapped by the incompetency of the administration that put them there.

Next fisking, please?

The Nodrog, in fine form! According to the delusional rantings of Rayra and friends, I was actually Charles, or perhaps Charles' crazy older brother, which explained why I hadn't been banned and they had.

The real answer, of course, is that the Nodrog contributed to what Charles wanted on his site, a controversial, argumentative, INTELLIGENT contrarian/troll, as opposed to a loudmouth bully like Rayra.

By October 2007, Charles no longer wanted that atmosphere for his site - toadying and "yes-men" were all that became acceptable. So that's when I got the banning stick and joined Rayra in LGF outcast-land.

Taking Down Lawhawk (Again)

2008-07-18T08:33:00.001-07:00

On August 28, 2006, Charles indulged in some more Kofi Annan-hatred with his "Kofi Annan Springs Into Action." Among other epithets thrown by Charles Kofi's way was "Israel-hating," to which I responded in #114:

I thought Kofi Annan hated Israel?

[Link to an article detailing Kofi's demand that Hizbullah behave]

Another Charles Lie.

Lawhawk made the mistake of trying to throw some legal sophistry at me in #119. In #121 I demolished his arguments:

lawhawk: As a legally-trained mind, perhaps you will notice that you have made the wrong argument.

You have argued that Kofi is incompetent and inffective. You have also tarred him with personal responsibility for the negligent and even knowing conduct of his subordinates.

As an aside, lawhawk, that's like arguing that George Bush is personally responsible for Haditha, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo abuses and secret CIA torture camps in Eastern Europe. Only moonbats make that argument. So, lawhawk, are you too a moonbat?

Anyway, back to my main point, Charles didn't call Kofi "incompetent," or "ineffective," or "negligent." He called him "Israel-hating." That's a mighty big logical jump, the kind usually seen on sites like Kos. And, it's an adjective in search of hard evidence. Hard evidence which you have spectacularly failed to provide, lawhawk ol' buddy.

Did Lawhawk respond? Of course not. But second-raters stood in for him. In #122 buzzsawmonkey tried to belittle all claims of U.S. bad behavior in Iraq and the War on Terror. I easily demolished these arguments in #123:

In the face of the towering mountain of evidence, ever increasing, of the various U.S. abuses I have mentioned, there are still ostriches like buzzsawmonkey willing to shill and lie to absolve this administration of any possible misdeeds.

Of course, then there are the other LGF responders, who say, "yeah, it's true, and those Muslim scum deserved it and more!"

Better check with your fellow spinning shills, buzzsawmonkey, to get your story straight.

Minimizing these abuses is like claiming global warming doesn't exist. The evidence continues to mount to overwhelming levels the other way. But LGF'ers cling to their dogmas, just as the oil industry apologists cling to theirs.

Some nitwit named "bearster" also provided ineffective responses to the Nodrog, as to regular irregular Writermom, who also put her head in the sand on global warming. I finished the thread with a taunt at lawhawk in #133:

Yoo hoo! Lawhawk? Where are you?

I eviscerated your crummy arguing skills and you disappeared on me.

You just sent a bunch of insult-spewing second-raters in your place.

Quit hiding under the bed and argue with me! Or admit that you were called out and send up the white flag.

This pseudo-intellectual continues at LGF to this day.

There's Only One Kind of Iranian

2008-07-17T15:43:00.001-07:00

As there is only one kind of Muslim. Charles showed his (take your pick) ignorance or demagoguery when he posted "Radical Islamic Group Will Hold Dinner for Khatami" on August 24, 2006, of course denouncing the whole affair with his usual incendiary language. Maybe Charles confused "Khatami" with "Khomeini." But the Nodrog was there to shed some truth in #89:

Er, Charles, Khatami had a reputation as a moderate in Iran - he's definitely not a nutjob like the current President.

But all Muslims are the same, right?

And then in #90 I brought a new issue to the fore:

And, one more matter to discuss about Iran, Charles:

[Link to an article about the advanced Iranian stem cell research project]

The crazy, renegade, reactionary Mullahs of Iran endorse stem cell research.

But our "Christian" President vetoed it.

How are you going to spin this one, Charles?

As I suspected, the lizardoids attacked on two fronts - first, they riduculed the notion of Iranian stem cell research, as with JD in #101, whom I refuted with #141:

My point, J.D., is that the supposedly scientifically illiterate religious zealots who run Iran recognize the value of stem cell research. But our President and his Christianist followers don't.

To me, that's a bad sign. I've always assumed that we could best the Muslims because our society is geared toward human progress, while there's is geared toward human misery. This fact tends to say otherwise, and may be a sign that we are in big trouble, if ignorant Iranian Muslims can recognize the need for scientific progress better than our own Christian zealot community.

Second, they belittled and demonized the whole concept of stem cell research, as with Kevin Shook in #159, whom I rhetorically devastated in #161:

Kevin Shook: No, you are the idiot. You are taking a ridiculous religious view of "human life" to prevent research on EGGS that might prevent suffering and death among the real living.

Doesn't it feel unnerving to realize that you are more scientifically reactionary than the Grand Ayatollah of Iran?

Mich-again in #160 brought the specious "tax dollars" argument, which I demolished in #164, adding a little dig at Charles near the end:

mich-again: OK, now to dispose of that disingenuous argument.

Corporations pay for research when it will result in profits. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. But there are many scientific topics that don't foreseeably promise corporate profits, and that's where government sponsorship comes in.

Are you suggesting, for example, that the U.S. shouldn't have funded research on the atomic and hydrogen bombs, but rather let the private sector of the 1940's pay for it?

Clearly, stem-cell research needs a government boost of funding for it to "pay off" in lengthened lives for the living.

But our President, and people like you and Kevin Shook, are letting religious zealotry interfere with human progress. Something even the crazy Mullahs of Iran don't do.

Aren't you ashamed of yourselves?

And what is your thought on this topic, Charles?

Then code red 1 in #205 quoted Ann Coulter on the issue stem cell research, to which I gave the appropriate dismissal in #210:

code red 1: I will not dignify Ann Coulter's porno-Conservatism with a response. It would be like trying to refute Mein Kampf.

Jimmah Carter's Place in History

2008-07-17T08:48:00.000-07:00

In an otherwise sensible post about the idiocies of Jimmy Carter's Mideast policy on August 17, 2006 ("Carter: 'Historical Facts Can Be Ignored'"), Charles succumbed to hyperbole (a frequent ailment). In #92 I replied:

The worst President the United States ever had.

Tell me, o' fount of historical wisdom Charles Johnson, how you came to this conclusion, given the competition (Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Millard Fillmore, Andrew Johnson, U.S. Grant, Warren Harding, Richard Nixon et. al.)?

Cut out the hyperbolic crap, Charles.

As the lizardoid losers started lists to justify Charles' statement, I picked out one of them for critical scrutiny in #134:

#126 Kateca: Interesting that you bring up the Panama Canal. Yes, that turned out to be such a disaster, didn't it? What with the Canal now being closed due to Panamanian incompetence, after it was blown up by terrorists now that the U.S. doesn't protect it.

Wait a minute, the Canal is still open? Terrorists haven't blown it up? Who'd a thunk it?

William F. Buckley had it exactly right. Ronald Reagan wouldn't have won the Republican nomination in 1980 if he hadn't opposed the canal. And Ronald Reagan wouldn't have won the 1980 general election if his opposition to the Panama Canal had succeeded in derailing the treaty.

If we still held the Canal, 50,000 of the soldiers in Iraq would be in Panama defending it against Latin American terrorists and saboteurs.

So. score one positive mark for Jimmy Carter.

From another anti-Carter jeremiad, I cherry-picked a nugget of wisdom:

#131 Colorado Jim: Interesting that you bring up "stagflation." Stagflation started with the Arab oil embargo in 1973, four years before Jimmy Carter was inaugurated as the 39th President of the United States.

After three years of economic ineptitude, Jimmy hired Paul Volcker as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Volcker immediately started the painful but necessary course needed to squeeze inflation out of the economy by raising interest rates to stratospheric levels. By 1983, Volcker's sound monetary policies combined with Ronald Reagan's sound fiscal policies led to an economic rebirth that has never really let up. I chuckle when I hear people bemoaning the 6-7% unemployment rates of receont recessions - I remember the 10% rate of 1981.

So, there's a second positive mark for Jimmy Carter's Presidency.

I followed up in #142:

Oh, another point, Colorado Jim. Jimmy Carter had Volcker start squeezing the economy right as his reelection campaign was beginning. Surely a selfless act, don't you think?

Compare with Richard Nixon, who juiced the economy for his 1972 reelection run, an act which deepened the recession that followed.

A few more pathetic lizardoid arguments on the Panama Canal followed, easily refuted by the Nodrog. Triumph! (once again)

Flamin' 2006

2008-07-16T08:23:00.001-07:00

The antics of Debbie Schlussel provided the impetus for a great flamin' thread on August 14, 2006. It started when Charles posted "Palestinians Targeted Mackinac Bridge?," a breathless link to the breathless Great Lakes State Muslim hater extraordinairie Debbie Schlussel on the eponymous plot. I stirred things up with #71:

I'm glad to see that Ms. Schlussel is focused on real live plots and controversies, as opposed to smearing high school principals with the sins of their relatives.

I heard that Charles' fourth cousin twice removed served in the Waffen SS. Does that mean we must shun Charles and accuse him of being a Nazi?

I received immediate non-sequitur insults from Writermom (#78 and #80), Taxfreekiller (#79), and Zulubaby (#83). I decided to have some fun, first with taxfreekiller, who in #73 had posted Olmart ='s a weak LBJ. I responded with #89:

taxfreekiller = a pussy

After another feeble taxfreekiller insult in #93, I followed up with #99:

TFK, I was in that parking lot outside of "Spanky's Bar" in Fort Worth at 2 A.M. Saturday three weeks ago waiting for you. Were those your feet I saw sticking out from under that 1983 Ford Pinto in the back of the lot?

AmyC accused me of "picking on the disadvantaged" re: Taxfreekiller in #110. In #119 I gave my flippant reply:

I don't hold TFK's disability against him.

After all, some of my best friends are from Texas ...

In response to dear Zulubaby, I riposted with #94:

Schlussel says that the Dearborn High Principal and his wife have "relatives" in Hizbullah (no mention of how close these relatives allegedly are). So they must be fired and deported, obviously.

Gordon says that Zulubaby's "relative" was Hendrik Voerwoerd, notorious formulator of apartheid in South Africa. Therefore, Zulubaby is a fascist and should be banned from LGF.

Same logic, zulubaby. Maybe now you will get it.

Zulubaby penned a very dense response in #105, and I couldn't resist in #117: Are

you really that dense, zulubaby?

More repartee with the deranged taxfrekiller followed, then in #162 Michiganlander Ronnie Schreiber penned a defense for the much-maligned (on LGF anyway) Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm. I responded in #200:

ronnie schreiber: You're straying from LGF orthodoxy to apostasy there dude, so watch out! There are no good Democrats, except for Joe Lieberman, but only after he was defeated in the primary.

But I have to give the LGF world credit, it's not a complete Republican shill machine. After all, when George Bush advocated a sensible immigration policy that didn't result in 11 million people being thrown in jail, then deported, he was roundly pilloried by the LGF illiterati.

Meanwhile, Orson Buggy in #174 and jdamn in #194 listed my litany of sins and demanded that I be banned. In #205 I answered (with only a touch of megalomania):

j-damn: He's pretty much broken every "rule" that Charles has laid down right here in this thread.

I know. Voices of sanity and reason are generally not allowed on LGF threads. It's inexplicable, really.

And, by the way, I gave up being polite to most of you yo-yos long ago. There are a few poster who still deserve a civil response from me, but the majority of you deserve only the brilliantly written contempt I dish out.

And when dustoff slammed me in #244 for my correction in #239 that Lake Baikal, not Superior or Michigan, was the biggest freshwater lake in the world, I returned the abuse in #248:

dustoff: If you wanted an echo chamber, sorry to disappoint you.

I'm sure there is a right wing site that models itself after Kos and Der Sturmer that doesn't allow dissenting voices. Perhaps you would be more comfortable there.

About this time in #246, once sensible lizardoid Killgore Trout pointed out that the Coast Guard had thrown Madame Schlussel's story to the wolves and told the illiterati to stop using her as a news source. I responded with some devastating commentary in #249:

Killgore Trout: But, don't you understand? The LGF illiterati WANT to believe it, just SO SO much. And, if they believe it long enough, VOILA, it will come true!

The parallels with Kos-world are eerie. And pathetic.

and then #250:

But, of course, ol' Deb says it's all a big FBI secrecy conspiracy: [Link]

What a wanker. Or, in this case, wankerette. From the looks of it, Ms. Schlussel is going for the 2nd rate Ann Coulter award.

And it's hard to be second rate to someone who's a bottom-feeder, don't you think, Deb?

Ready to repudiate this story yet, Charles?

And get hep to this response from Killgore Trout in #251: Having recently been banned from Dkos for the crime of dissent, I can safely say we're nowhere near that level censorship. The only person here that can remove your posts here is Charles (unlike Dkos where there is a whole host of elites who can do it). Sure, there are people here who'd rather have an echo chamber but they'll never get it.

Monitor lizards, anyone?

By the way, I think this was REALLY my last joust with the Apartheid Queen. Really, honestly, truly!

Charles Hearts Debbie Schlussel

2008-07-15T09:35:00.001-07:00

In August 2006 Michigan paranoiac Debbie Schlussel made the news with a vicious smear attack on educators and students in Dearborn, Michigan (just coincidentally, the heart of the U.S. Arab-American community), and Charles salivated over the story (perhaps turned on by Schlussel's ridiculous attempt at a glamour photo on her website) in "Schlussel: Hizbollah High" on August 11, 2006. The Nodrog exposed the whole charade starting in #153:

When the Principal of Fordson High or his wife are found with 1000 cell phones, then I'll pay attention.

Until then, this is nothing but the most vicious smear and hatchet job by Schlussel.

Charles, you should be ashamed of yourself for republishing her garbage.

And again in #228:

For those of you too dim to realize it, tarring somebody with the sins of his or her relatives is the classic smear job. A classic hatchet job.

And that's exactly what Debbie Schlussel has done. And Charles apparently approves.

Note also, that the Principal is a "relative" of the Hizbullah dude. Is that brother? Or fifth cousin?

Smear. Hatchet. Schlussel.

The lizardoids evaded responses with insults, must notably the deranged taxfreekiller, who continued to blather on about the release of John Kerry's military records, almost two years after the election.

One More Joust With Zulubaby

2008-07-14T19:40:00.001-07:00

So I lied, Zulubaby and I had a little dustup on the July 18, 2006 thread "In the Cockpit," during Israel's attack on Hizbullah in Lebanon. In #109 I had my say:

In case anyone cares, I wholly support the Israeli attacks on Lebanon. It is unfortunate that Lebanese civilians have to suffer for the depredations of terrorists in their midst, but that is the nature of this war that Hizbullah has declared against Israel, and the ineffectiveness of the Lebanese government in stopping them.

If the Israeli government feels it is necessary, I hope they will not hesitate to take the further step of attacking the sources of Hizbullah terror in Syria and Iran. Those countries need a wake-up call that their actions cannot occur with impunity.

But classless Zulubaby struck in #119 with: In case anyone cares ... Um, no. It is unfortunate that Lebanese civilians have to suffer ... Do I have to say it?

I gave it back to her in #132:

Zulubaby: While I support the Israeli attacks, I'm glad my wife isn't a bloodthirsty witch like you.

I further explained the situation to other questioning (and newer) lizardoids in #133:

It's still just me. I got an unfair anti-Israel rap in the past because I didn't support the full Eretz Israel settler wet dream so beloved of Zulubaby and religious zealots.

But I support Israel's right to secure, defensible borders. And if it means destroying large swaths of southern Lebanon, or even destroying parts of Syria and Iran, then Israel has a right to do it. In fact, Israel's GOTTA do it.

I followed up with further explanation in #135:

I said some unkind things about the Hebron settlers in the past that caught Zulubaby's ire. In fact, I've said a lot of things that have caught her ire. Oh well ...

But I've always considered myself a steadfast supporter of Israel. I've always supported the Israeli defensive fence/wall, in the location where Ariel Sharon put it. I find it utterly incomprehensible that American leftists would support a bunch of reactionary misogynistic Arabs than the only functioning democratic regime in the Middle East which has the rule of law, not men.

But the apartheid queen was not assuaged, as she spitted out #137: Unfair? You're such a wanker. You compared Israelis to Hizballah terrorists. Now suddenly you support Israel? You're such a stinking liar. Always have been. Go f**k yourself. And so, for once, we will give Zulubaby the last word!

At least one more joust with the Apartheid Queen in coming attractions!

We don't need no stinkin' Geneva Convention!

2008-07-14T08:38:00.000-07:00

On July 12, 2006, Charles bemoaned the latest act of U.S. cowardice in "Terrorists Granted Rights and Privileges," under the dreaded Geneva Convention. The tenor of the "commentary" on the threads started out strong in #1 with We are not killing enough of them fast enough. In #133 the Nodrog entered the fray, throwing Charles' words into his face:

It’s a victory for those still living in a September 10th world.

You mean a world where the U.S. government doesn't torture people?

You mean a world where the U.S. government doesn't play disgraceful legal word games to justify its behavior?

You mean a world where the U.S. government doesn't want to destroy our liberties in order to save them?

What an idiot you are, Charles.

Amidst the generalized abuse, Occasional Reader in #135 and Bilgeman in #139 brought up alleged Clinton Presidency abuses. I disposed of the first in #144:

#135 Occaisional Reader:

Ah, you mean like "blowjob doesn't count as 'sex'?" That kind of thing?

Ah, another Clinton hater. It's of course much worse for a President to lie about his extra-marital sex life than it is for a President to recreate the Imperial Presidency, redefine torture, ignore or worm around our international treaty obligations, and generally do everything in his power to ensure that his unfaithful predecessor returns to the White House in 2009 as "first lady." Right, Occasional Reader?

Then I took down Bilgeman in #145:

#139 Bilgeman:

Remember what the children at Waco underwent at the hands of Janet Reno's FBI?
Ah, the Black Helicopter crowd rides again! Koresh was responsible for the deaths of the Branch Davidian children by an order of magnitude greater than the Federal Government's responsibility. But you McVeigh followers won't accept that, will you?

Quick, Gordon, what's the meaning of the word "IS"?

See response #144 above, demolishing this portion of your nonsense.

Like the US Government destroyed Randy Weaver's family in order to infringe on his Right to Keep and Bear Arms?

Black helicopter paranoia and second amendment absolutist crapola thrown in for good measure. Weaver was a loathsome white supremacist. The government mishandled the situation, but once again he bears primary responsibility for the death of his family by his actions.

Occasionally there was an intelligent (if wrong) LGF lizardoid, and Ringer proved to be that in #153. Compare and contrast with the moronic Rayra in #150, whom I answered in #156:

And then there's #150 rayra, who brings up the rear in quality of argument here on LGF. Even when I agree with you Rayra (which happens occasionally, believe it or not), I feel like I need a shower after reading your posts.

But Rayra's LGF days were getting VERY short - Charles was undoubtedly secretly cheering the abuse I heaped upon him.

Tax Free Killer Under His Truck

2008-07-13T12:12:00.001-07:00

On July 6, 2006, Charles continued his branching out into Mexican race-hatred with "Legitimizing La Raza," where he described the National Council of La Raza as a "Hispanic Supremacy Group," and noted some of the speakers at its convention, including noted far-left political operative Karl Rove. The lizardoids frothed as usual. Late in the thread, starting in #460, the Nodrog entered to the flourish of intellectual trumpets:

Charles, you're such an idiot.

Go to the site yourself - I don't see "Hispanic Supremacy." [Link]

What a paranoid twit you've become. I thought you were at least a bit enlightened on non-Islam issues. I guess I was wrong.

I followed up with #476:

After looking through some of the raving loon posts on this thread, I can see where Charles could be going wayward. He's been reading too many thread posts on his own site!

Rove is there for a simple reason - he, unlike the nitwits on this site, knows that Republicans need to keep some of the Hispanic vote to remain a majority party. He also knows that the California Republicans, about to become a majority in 1994, managed to throw away a decade of power by going raving loony on the immigration issue and becoming typecast as racist twits by the state's Hispanic residents. He doesn't want to let the Tancredoist know-nothings in Congress repeat the debacle on a national scale.

Yes, I know California now has a Republican governor. But the legislature remains a lock for the Democrats, and nationally the Republicans can't count on many more Gray Davises to make life easy for them.

Then a couple of lizardoids (ringo in #476 and jimmy the clam in #482) started claiming a spurious quote in Spanish for the La Raza Council. I asked for a link, and when it finally came, I noted a little problem in #494:

Looks like "Por La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada" is a slogan of MeCHa, not this bunch.

LGF nitwits wrong again.

Surprise, surprise...

Then Fjordman showed up with long-winded nonsense in #497. I dismissed him in #502: And

, right on cue, some pseudo-intellectual ca-ca from Fjordman. Racism dressed up in a cheap suit.

LGF just keeps getting "better and better" all the time!

Is that what you wanted in your blog, Charles? To be the Wally George of the blog world?

And then we get to Tax Free Killer, who in #537 had this to say: i TAXFREEKILLER have a copy of Lt. Kerrys form 180 and copies of his complete Navy Record, if you want a copy meet me at the "tatoo bar" in Arlington Texas this Sat. nite at closing time (2:00 am) in the rear parking lot,, I'll hand it to you there..........

The Border will be shut down, and Lt. Kerry will have his judgement at Captians Mast

see you Sat. nite

I had this to say to Tax Free Killer in #557:

#537 taxfreekiller:

If I were to actually show up, I would find you hiding under your car.

I know your kind.

I finished up with #573:

TFK: all talk, no action. I know his kind. Pretending to be a psycho ready to "go postal," but actually a meek little mouse.

This thread has been officially taken over by the Mexican-hating loons. Bigots and racists all, and for once the label is accurate.

A pretty disgusting thread. But exposing Tax Free Killer for what he is was worth it!

Torture, Torture, Torture

2008-07-11T16:41:00.001-07:00

Stories about U.S. torture of prisoners were becoming routine by June 2006, and Charles had lots of brushfires to put out. On June 22, 2006 he fulminated about an editorial cartoon from the Atlanta newspaper in "Luckovich Anti-Military Cartoon." In #148 I gave my commentary on the problems:

If you don't like the cartoon, you probably won't like this either:

The Intelligence services of the United Kingdom, Israel and the United States decided to have a competition. The contest was to capture a fox released into the forest, in the shortest time possible. The Mossad returned with their fox in 2 hours. MI6 returned in 4 hours.

After 12 hours a search was organized to locate the American team. They were found with a rabbit tied to a tree, beating it and yelling: "You're a fox!"

The joke was originally told with different nations involved. Thanks to the Bush gang, the U.S. is the butt of the joke now.

And the lizardoids were cheering on the torturers!

The Nodrog and Ann Dis LGF

2008-07-11T08:46:00.000-07:00

On June 20, 2006 Charles slammed into former ally Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper for having the temerity to support continued immigration into his country with "Canadian PM: The Answer is More of the Same." All sorts of depressing nonsense followed on this thread, including a lot from Charles new pet, Norwegian pseudo-intellectual "Fjordman." I expressed my utter disgust with the proceedings in #178:

Jehu - I officially declare you a loon.

I see that the know-nothing brigade has taken over another thread.

#168 Will: case in point: The current immigration debate is probably our last, or almost our last opportunity to beat back this effort. It's one of those cases where those who oppose must win the political battle again and again, but those who advocate open borders probably have to win only once.

Guess what, Will. We had open borders between 1790 and 1925, and somehow we managed to grow from a weak ex-colony to arguably the most powerful nation in the world, both economically and militarily, in that time. The only people turned away at Ellis Island were anarchists and tuberculars.

Another thing that hasn't changed is the chicken little nonsense from idiots like you and Jehu.

And now you have added a whiff of Pat Buchanan protectionism to the mix. Do the names Smoot and Hawley mean anything to you?

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different result. The know-nothing Buchananism expressed on this thread is Exhibit # 1.

I followed up with this scathing dismissal in #188:

Charles, your blog started out as a place for hope. Hope that our Western civilization could beat Islamofascism and once again make the values of democracy, capitalism and the rule of law triumphant throughout the world.

This thread has proven, via a gamut from the pseudo-intellectualism of Fjordman and the insane bigoted rants of Jehu, that LGF has degenerated into a place of fear, not hope. A place where dark forces such as racism, demagoguery, and xenophobia flourish.

A place where I don't want to be for a while. So I'm taking an LGF Vacation. I'll check back in a while to see if the know-nothings are still supreme here.

In #193 and #194 idiot Jehu celebrated my departure, and then in #195, a stunning reversal, Ann (Reaganite's wife) posted the following: Well said! LGF used to be a defiant, strong and positive place to be when the MSM fed us nothing but the negative. I find it, overall, a dark and defeated place now, too.
It's not just venting here. It's panic and fear. Sad.

Ann's LGF days were numbered, within two months, she was banned and is now part of the GCP "Heh"thers. As for Fjordman? He split ways with Charles in the Fall of 2007 over the Vlaams Blok debacle and is now primarily a Gates of Vienna loon.

Bernard Lewis

2008-07-10T16:24:00.001-07:00

Every once in a while Charles dipped his foot into a pond of intellectual discussion about Islam, as in June 7, 2006's "Bernard Lewis and Islam." The post consisted of a link to a long article by Andrew Bostum on Bernard Lewis on FrontPage. Given Bostum's views, the article made Lewis out to be a brilliant scholar who was unfortunately a "softie" on Islam compared to the stalwart Bat Ye'or and Bostum himself. In #29 the Nodrog opined:

Some observations on Bostum's article:

1. Both his quotes from Lewis and Bat Yeor and Goitein are conclusory summaries. Without the backup information, they don't provide much help in resolving this controversy.

2. I have no doubt that both Lewis and his opposites can provide numerous examples over the almost 1.400 year history of Islam and its dhimmis to justify their points of view. That suggests that they ARE BOTH RIGHT. At times, Muslims treated dhimmis humanely, and at other times savagely. When you are looking at 1/4 of the world's population over a 1,400 year period, you are bound to see a lot of variety in Muslim treatment of Christians and Jews in Muslim nations.

3. As for the Ottomans, perhaps if we want to figure out who was treating Jews best during the period of the Ottoman empire could be solved by looking at where Jews were moving to and from during this period. Given the fact that Sephardic Jews left Spain and moved into the Ottoman Empire instead of other Christian nations, there can be no doubt that the Ottoman Empire was treating Jews better than Christian nations were treating Jews at this time.

4. As for Christians, perhaps we should compare how Muslims were treated in Christian nations during the period of the Ottoman Empire, and then compare this treatment to the treatment of Christians in the Empire.

5. As a final point, I think we can easily state that today's Islam is an intolerant religion with a lot of reforming to do, without going back and trying to make out Islam is irredeemeably evil, even in comparison to other religious fairhs and systems, in the past 1,400 years.

An accolade from Ashtaroot, who earlier described herself as a Muslim woman, followed in #32.

Other than the Nodrog's brilliant insights, the most notable aspect of this thread was that Ashtaroot's comment #32 was the last one on this thread. This is WAY below the usual LGF numbers of the time - an indication to Charles that links to thoughtful, intellectual discussions, even those of Islamophobe Andrew Bostum, were well beyond the intellectual capabilities of the average lizardoids, or at least beneath their interest. It was a mistake that Charles has learned well not to make any more.

Border Fences

2008-07-10T09:48:00.001-07:00

On May 25, 2006, as the immigration issue heated up, Charles posted "Israeli Advice on the Mexico Fence." One bit of the advice, "be ruthless," led the notorious American Infidel to start advocating automatic machine gun fire along the border, starting in #38. She was fortunately pounced on by other lizardoids such as Mike C., along with the otherwise detestable Rayra, to the point where Charles in post #401 had to chastize her. Within a couple of months, she would be banned along with the foul Rayra and others in the Great Purge.

But meanwhile, the Nodrog entered the discussion in #187:

#158 Kevin: Our elites just don't get it.

What our elites have got that you obviously don't is a basic understanding of American history. They know that immigration has been the life blood of this nation for several centuries now, and that the know-nothing hysteria you are espousing has been proven wrong and wrong again, and will be again proven wrong regarding Mexican immigration.

[Link] Even among those who speak Spanish at home, 52% speak English very well or well.

[Link]92% of 2nd Generation Hispanics speak English proficiently. By the third generation 72% of Hispanics don't speak any Spanish.

Get a grip, Kevin. If past generations had followed your advice, you and I probably wouldn't be here, and the "cream of the crop" would be inbred Appalachians of Scotch-Irish descent, who tend to have the longest ancestral ties to the U.S.

I gave my proposed policy in #202:

By the way, I support stringent border security, including use of walls/fences. We need to keep real terrorists out of this country, and stop the coyotes from profiting from the death of their patrons in the desert.

But then, I would support generous legal immigration into this country, and a realistic program to resolve the status of 11 million illegal aliens in this country (declaring them all felons doesn't seem to be quite practical, don't you think?) And a guest worker program for legitimate labor needs, to be filled by people who want to go back to Mexico instead of permanently moving here.

Amidst the usual ignorant catcalls, Mike C. (#214) and Ringo the Gringo (#291) sensibly indicated agreement with the Nodrog. But sane voices on the immigration issue were soon to disappear on LGF.

More Lies From Charles

2008-07-08T19:35:00.001-07:00

May 19, 2006, was a doozy. In one day, Charles called Romano Prodi, President of Italy, a "Communist," then referred to his old nemesis the LA Times as "Pravda West,", then whined like a little baby when another blogger, Dean Esmay, called him on it in "Another Day, Another Smear." BabbaLouie in #1 immediately decided "this guy (Dean Esmay) must be Gordon!" In #5 I started the Nodrog offensive:

You actually have the chutzpah, Charles, to deny that you have a problem with "Islam and Muslims in General?"

Another lie. And this one is a lot bigger than calling Romano Prodi a Communist.

Peacekeeper in #12 insisted that Prodi was indeed a communist. A little fact checking from the Nodrog in #20 resulted:

Peacekeeper: [Link to wikipedia] Prodi was a member of the Christian Democratic party until it dissolved in the early 1990's.

Last time I checked, "Christian," and "Communist" were opposites.

Charles lied when he called Prodi a Communist.

I followed up with Peacekeeper in #34:

You are confused by the confusing nature of Italian politics. Prodi is the leader of the left-wing coaltion of many parties that includes Italy's ex-Communist party and its "refounded" communist party. But Prodi has never been a member of either party - he comes from the left-wing branch of the Christian Democratic party that used to dominate Italian politics until the 1990's.

Calling Prodi a Communist would be like calling Silvio Berlusconi a Fascist because his coalition includes the re-branded Fascist party descended from Mussolini.

But Charles wouldn't do that. He only lies about Communists, not Fascists.

Foreign Devil in #59 then actually chided me for not keeping a "civil tongue" and calling people liars. My riposte in #62 said it all:

Foreign Devil: I find it quite amusing that I am supposed to keep a "civil tongue" on LGF, a site where the blogmaster has proven himself a liar and the vilest pejorative crap emanates from the laughingstock thread posters.

In #70 I linked to Charles' later LA Times thread:

And Charles then has the chutzpah to complain about being smeared, when a few posts later he labels the Los Angeles Times "Pravda West!"

Charles is not only a liar. He's also a hypocrite.

I responded in #96 to a defense of Charles' methods from Lurking Faith in #84:

I'll certainly acknowledge that one key difference between LGF and Kos lies in the banning of dissenting viewpoints. Kudos to Charles on that one.

You are also correct about Charles' usual method. For instance, on another thread today I have mused that Charles probably is not a Tancredo-ist knoo-nothing knuckle-dragger on the issue of immigration, but he doesn't let his frothing lizardoid minions know that.

But this thread has exposed a few enormous chinks in Charles' armor. His claim not to have a problem with "Islam and Muslims in general" is belied by thread after thread over the past several years. To give a couple of examples, his use of scare quotes around "moderate" when describing Indonesia, and his claim that the Hajj pilgrimage is a form of human sacrifice. That goes WAY beyond a mere problem with "terrorists and anti-semites."

His title on this thread calls Esmay's charges a "smear." But then yesterday he lied and put the adjective "communist" in front of Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi's name. And today he has smeared the Los Angeles Times in a thread title as "Pravda West." Both SMEARS par excellence.

So much for the dissenting views! I summed up in #114:

No apology from Charles about his Romano Prodi lie.

No answer from Charles giving any real evidence he isn't an Islam hater to counteract the numerous examples IN HIS OWN POSTS (not even counting the genocidal rants among the thread posters).

No retraction from Charles regarding his smear of the Los Angeles Times, since he's suddenly an anti-smear guy.

No admission from Charles that maybe he is an ignoramus regarding the nation of Turkey.

Well Surprise, Surprise Surprise!

On the "Pravda West Caught in a Lie" thread (also May 19, 2006), the Nodrog struck again in #34:

Los Angeles Times lies about an immigration "activist."

Charles lies about Romano Prodi being a Communist.

And I thought the blogosphere was supposed to be different!

"This time it's different." Yeah right!

Josef Stalin's Press Secretary

2008-07-03T14:25:00.001-07:00

More revelations of Bush Administration violation of federal wiretapping law (and perhaps the 4th amendment) came out in May 2006. Charles' response? Accuse the MSM (and CIA employees) of treason in "USA Today Leaks More NSA Secrets" on May 11, 2006. And Charles really went into high dudgeon the same day when European leaders starting demanding uncomfortable answers from the Bush Administration about rendition torture on European soil, with his "Seething Euroweenies" thread. I had some choice comments on both threads, but the best was on the "Euroweenies" thread, at #35:

Wow, Charles, you're really spinning away today. First we get your "MSM are traitors" spin on illegal Bush administration wiretapping, and now we get your "Spineless Euroweenies" spin on Bush Administration sanctioned torture on European soil.

You would have made a great press secretary for Joseph Stalin, Charles.

Sounds like a great rotating title for LGF!

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

2008-07-02T16:55:00.000-07:00

Dutch MP, Islamic apostate, and Somali refugee Ayaan Hirsi Ali spoke at Harvard in May 2006. The courageous woman was the subject of well-deserved laudatory threads from Charles. The first which the Nodrog polluted was May 9, 2006's "Ayaan at Harvard," where I pointed out some LGF cognitive dissonance in #94:

Think about this one, Lizardoids:

If the know-nothing/minutemen/FAIR/Tancredo gang get their way, a person with the rare and shining qualities of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, one of the most important voices that needs to be heard in today's world, would be living in a hut in Somalia, because no Western nation would let her in.

After Zulubaby's pointless insult in #96 and Writermom's non-sequitur in #101, Moonbatbane in #102 argued that the Tancredo gang was only against ILLEGAL immigration. I set the lizardoids right in #106:

Actually, MoonBatBane, the gang I speak of wants to ratchet down, if not eliminate, legal immigration as well.

[Link] FAIR advocates a temporary moratorium on all immigration except spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens and a limited number of refugees.

Maybe Ayaan Hirsi Ali would have made it past the post as one of "a limited number of refugees." Chances are, as one of thousands of potential refugees from the hellhole known as Somalia, she wouldn't have.

Tom Tancredo and his know-nothing brigade in the House of Representatives sponsored a bill that would have made it much more difficult for Ayaan Hirsi Ali to enter the U.S.

[Link]H.R.946, Mass Immigration Reduction Act of 2003

Summary:
Mass Immigration Reduction Act of 2003 - Provides that during a specified immigration moratorium period: (1) employment-based immigrant visas shall be reduced, and family-sponsored and diversity immigrant visas shall be eliminated; (2) immigrant status shall be granted only to children and spouses of U.S. citizens or priority workers; (3) refugee admissions and asylee adjustments shall be limited to 25,000 per year; and (4) an alien shall be required to renounce citizenship or nationality of any other country in order to be naturalized as a U.S. citizen.

The U.S. has taken in from 32,000 to 127,000 asylum seekers each year through the 1990's.

The next day, in May 10, 2006's "Ayaan at Harvard, Tsai Auditorium," I commented in #49, adding the following to a repeat of my quotations from FAIR and Tancredo:

How many more Ayaan Hirsi Alis are there in places like Somalia, ready to come to the West and warn us about unreconstructed Islam and enrich our lives, that America's know-nothings would condemn to female circumcision, subjugation, and death?

In #53 I pointed out another problem with LGF nativism and FAIR:

Here's what FAIR thinks about asylum seekers like Ayaan Hirsi Ali:

[Link] Asylum is to be a temporary status; it is to allow persons to work here for positive political change back home.

So Ayaan Hirsi Ali should be required to go back to Somalia and "work for change," according to FAIR!

Later on May 10, 2006, Charles posted "Ayaan Hirsi Ali: Look at the Prophets Words and Deeds." In #26, I added some new damnation of FAIR:

According to FAIR:

The legal standards for asylum must be consistent with our international obligations. There should be some "State Action" at the core of the claim of persecution. The newly evolving standard that allows claims to be made on the basis of an alleged absence of state protection for entire classes of "social groups" is fraught with peril as unmanageable and an invitation to fraud.

Since Somalia has no state - the oppression Ayaan Hirsi Ali faced was from society at large - the next Ayaan Hirsi Ali will not qualify for asylum in the U.S.

As a practical matter, under our current system, adjudicating asylum claims often involves allegations of abuse that took place tens of thousands of miles away; objective evidence may be entirely lacking and the entire claim may rest on a subjective judgment of the Asylum Officer.

I guess Ayaan Hirsi Ali could have shown the judge evidence of her clitorectomy - perhaps even FAIR and Tom Tancredo would accept this evidence! But anything less, and the next Ayaan Hirsi Ali would be turned away as lacking "evidence" of her oppression.

This is what FAIR, Tancredo, and the anti-immigration crowd want as our national law. Keeping the next Ayaan Hirsi Ali to try to flee Somalia away from our pure shores.

I summed up in #52 in response to Amyc, who in #42 pointed out that Ayaan Hirsi Ali would qualify for refugee status under FAIR's proposed standards:

Amyc: I agree that Ayaan Hirsi Ali would qualify for asylum in the U.S. even under FAIR's and Tancredor's proposed restrictions.

However, she could never become a U.S. citizen under this plan, much less a Congresswoman. She would have to have her bags packed for a quick return to Somalia once peace, freedom, and equal rights for women blossoms in that land /sarc/

And I question whether Ayaan Hirsi Ali would have met the FAIR/Tancredo test when she first applied for asylum as a terrified and angry young woman. It would not have been easy to predict what a jewel to our Western Civilization she has become.

And there are thousands more like her, probably more than a few who could invigorate our culture and society with their brilliance. Just as past immigrants and their descendants have done. But under the FAIR/Tancredo approach, we will say "no" to most, if not all of them.

At this point the lizards knew they had lost, so they sent out house clowns Babbazee and Talkin' Kamel to engage the Nodrog. Sort of like Sir Lancelot facing the court jesters!

Outrage of the Day and Outrage of the Year

2008-07-02T08:38:00.001-07:00

On May 9, 2006, Charles posted "Outrage of the Day," seething over the fact that U.S. border patrol was informing the Mexican government where the vigilante Minutemen were deploying. I stepped in with #257:

The Minutemen are vigilantes, pure and simple, motivated in large part by race hatred and also in large part by xenophobia.

And since when does "informing the Mexican government" mean "informing the coyote smugglers?" Despite all of the yammering among know-nothings that Mexico actively conspires to send large numbers of its citizens across the border for a reconquista, there is no proof of active collusion between the government and the coyote smugglers. And all of the yammerings of the know-nothings can't obscure that FACT.

I followed up with #271:

Ah yes, the Mexican government told its own citizens wanting to cross the border, "Pay $1000 to a coyote and go across 100 miles of Sonoran Desert with a pint water jar! And don't forget to advocate for reconquista when you get there!"

I would like to see some proof of these allegations re: the Mexican government.

This isn't the outrage of the day. The minutemen are the outrage of the YEAR!

My outrage rising, I answered another spurious lizardoid claim in #401:

So the minutemen are a bunch of private property owners along the Mexican border fighting trespass onto their land?

Yeah, right!

The minutemen are primarily yahoo racist xenophobic trailer trash out to have a little fun with those brown-skinned Mexicans trying to make a better life for themselves.

Those Mexicans represent true American values more than any stinkin' minuteman does!

#330 Paul provided a link to a comic book put out by the Mexican government regarding illegal border crossing. I critiqued it (and the lizardoid claims about it) in #426:

Paul: Thank you for actually providing a link to the actual dreaded comic book.

The book does not encourage illegal immigration. The book warns about the dangers to Mexican citizens and how they can legally cope with those dangers. It advises taking legal action to enter the United States.

Sort of like high school sex education classes, which promote abstinence, but tell a young person what to do if they decide to go another direction. Of course the Christianists oppose this as well.

I suggest that everyone take a look at Paul's link and tell me that the Mexican government is encouraging a reconquista with it. And, if you do, take out the "deluded and paranoid" stamp and use it on your forehead.

In #421 I provided my comprehensive immigration reform plan:

By the way, my solution to the illegal immigration issue:

1. Put up a massively enhanced border security fence. If desperate Mexicans wanting to make a better life for themselves can get in, so can al qaeda terrorists. Our border needs to be secure.

2. To prevent future hiring of illegal aliens, start putting THEIR EMPLOYERS in jail. These people are as much "criminals" as are the illegal aliens.

3. For the illegal aliens already in the country, require that they register and request either "green card" status leading to citizenship, or "guest worker" status. If the latter, they would be allowed to work in this country, under certain conditions, for a certain number of years, before returning to Mexico. If, after investigation, the applicant was found to have a criminal record or other such problem, they would be deported.

4. Institute a guest worker program. Employers and Mexicans could each register for the program, with positions filled as necessary.

5. Have a generous allowance for legal imimgration from Mexico. These are the people who are the next great generation of American immigrants, joining the pantheon of English-Americans, German-Americans, Irish-Americans, Jewish-Americans, Italian-Americans (hello, Congressman Tancredo!), Chinese-Americans, Vietnamese-Americans, and yes, even Arab-Americans.

Nativist hysteria was making a comeback on LGF, aping the bad old Robert Brandjten days from 2003. There would be more battles to come between the Nodrog and the illiterati on this issue.

Little Green Nostradamus (and Caudillo Wannabe)

2008-07-01T09:11:00.001-07:00

As the Moussaoui trial ground on and ended with a life sentence instead of the death penalty, Charles, who advocated something else for Zacharias, posted "Little Green Nostradamus" on May 3, 2006, gloating over his 2002 prediction that if Moussaoui were tried as a civilian it would turn into a mess. Charles originally ended the post there, so I had to ask in #42:

And what, Charles, was your alternative?

And in a more pointed way in #50:

Some of the other options, Charles:

Quick court martial and execution.

Take him to a Egyptian or Saudi Arabian prison to be tortured to death or summarily shot in the basement.

Throw him off an airplane at 10,000 feet over water.

Take him and the Guantanamo gang to a soccer stadium and execute them all.

I'm going to assume that you probably wanted the first of these options. To the extent you thought about it at all.

A further followup in #53:

Of course, the counter-argument is that anything less than a fair trial and sentence would be such a betrayal of the American values we fight for that this course of action would make us the losers in this war.

But I wouldn't expect Charles or any of his LGF toadies to buy into that argument, now would I?

As a result, Charles was shamed into "updating" his thread with a further clarification of his position, which was (after some hemming and hawing) that Moussaoui should have received a military tribunal, and that Moussaoui should have been executed.

Meanwhile, idiot Rayra spouted off in #49. So I gave my two cents worth in #75 and I also took a swipe at Mr. Taco Short in #75:

Actually, I would prefer to see Moussaoui dead, for no other reason that as long as he remains alive some nimrods in the Middle East will probably try to take American hostages and demand his release.

But the American Criminal Justice System, with Jury Trials and all the procedures to protect innocent defendants, is one of the main ideals we fight for in the War on Terror. Imposing an ersatz LGF mirror imageversion of Sharia Law in the United States isn't my idea of War on Terror victory.

Any comments, Kept Man?

I made another interesting point in #82:

You know, for those who wanted a military trial, our military justice system is pretty evenhanded too. There'a a chance Moussaoui would have not been executed after a military trial either.

At which point, the LGF crowd and Charles would undoubtedly be advocating, er, HARSHER measures.

This, by the way, was my first real encounter with Killgore Trout, an interesting species of lizardoid, who has remained with the lizards and is now the object of vicious swipes from the GCP crowd, most notably Ed the Weatherman, who thinks Killgore has a "gay-man crush" on him! I didn't know hurricanes were such a turn-on, Ed!

The Spanish Star Spangled Banner

2008-06-30T09:27:00.001-07:00

It was May 2006, and the illegal (and legal) immigration debate was heating up, including bright idea of someone to translate the Star Spangled Banner into Spanish. Charles didn't approve, and his ally was Ted Kennedy, as he noted on May 1, 2006 in "A Sign of the Apocalypse." Except the Nodrog had something to say too, in #109:

I'm to the left of Ted Kennedy on this one.

I have no problem with the Star Spangled Banner being sung in Spanish. Patriotism for our great country doesn't have to be expressed only in English, and I for one am glad that those of our citizens who speak only Spanish or are bilingual are patriotic Americans too, and not patriotic Mexicans or Salvadorans or Panamanians who happen to live in the United States.

And we all know that to get ahead in this country you have to learn fluent English. The immigrants from Latin America certainly know this - by the third generation over 3/4 of them don't speak any Spanish at all. Only left-wing multiculturalists don't understand it.

But until they fully learn English, why not support patriotism for this great country in Spanish? I would like to see additional versions in Vietnamese, Tagalog, Arabic, Hindi, and any other language spoken by immigrants.

Agreement came from the more reasonable lizardoids Killgore Trout and Mike C. Ann in #136 ignorantly disagreed. But at least the lizardoids were thinking, for once!

Fool, or Genocidal Maniac?

2008-06-27T10:33:00.001-07:00

On April 24, 2006, Charles eagerly pounced on a storyline dear to his heart in "Malaysia Demolishes Hindu Temple." Of course he started out with his "moderate" Malaysia scare quote trick. The lizardoids took the cue, until the Nodrog in #55 put a stop to the carousel of insanity:

Your spinning of this unhappy tale as a result of rampant Islam, Charles, can only be described as evil.

On second thought, Charles, maybe you are just stupid and ignorant.

This is truly a case where "Malaysia" could be replaced with "China," or "Thailand," or "Singapore," or "Philippines," or any other East Asian state where western values of individuality do not prevail.

And the religious building targeted could be "Buddhist," or "Christian," or "Muslim," or "Confucianist."

You are rapidly going beyond the pale, Charles.

And, of course, as usual, you will not be responsible for the torrent of invective and hatred, your words unleash within your lizardoid minions.

Shame.

A further taunt in #56:

You try very hard, Charles, to demolish the "myth" of the moderate Muslim, don't you?

Is that because you want them all dead or converted?

Princess Bernie in #57 (now a GCP irregular) asked why I hadn't commented on another thread of the day. I responded in #58:

Princess Bernie: Unlike CAIR and the Islamic Thinkers Society, I don't discount that radical, murderous Islam stalks the world.

Unlike Charles (and you?), I also don't think that all 1.2 billion Muslims, including those in places like Malaysia, are the equivalent of the Muslim Brotherhood, or Hamas, or Islamic Jihad. And unlike Charles (and you?), I don't put forward written venom designed to eradicate Islam from the face of the Earth.

I've come to the conclusion that Charles is either a fool or a genocidal maniac.

A good question. And a great blog thread title!

The Hamas of America

2008-06-26T09:47:00.001-07:00

Charles put up a "Tuesday Open Thread" on March 21, 2006 that allowed the Nodrog to take on all comers yet again - and win yet again. This thread featured a flamewar between the "thread bully" (Mike C.'s characterization of Rayra) and Mike C. over whether William F. Buckley, George Will, and Daniel Pipes were seditionist traitors or not... But meanwhile in #168 I linked to a New Yorker article about skullduggery over torture in the Bush White House. Ward Cleaver responded in #264 that the New Yorker was "an elitist, snobby, steaming pile of sh*t." This led to a new Nodrog tag line in #295:

Typical LGF response - ad hominem attack. Can't fault the story, so fault the storyteller. Things haven't changed in my absence, I see.

Too bad for all of you that the LGF thought process is headed down the toilet. You know its so when William F. Buckley, George Will, and Daniel Pipes are all derided as closet liberals.

LGF - the Hamas of America.

Meanwhile, American Infidel in #279 advocated "destroying Islam," and was called on it by Loppyd in #288. The Nodrog also called her (and the rest of LGF) on it in #309:

LoppyD: American Infidel might be nutty enough to admit it - a lot of others here on LGF will go back from the brink when you point out the ultimate result of their rhetoric, but most will just abuse you back in order to change the subject.

It's the LGF way. The Hamas of America.

Occasional Reader attacked back in #330, so he got the brunt of Nodrog's rejoinder in #342:

Bush is wrong about a lot of things, but he's right about quite a few too, so he's not Hitler.

But, on this VERY thread, we have had calls for the elimination of Islam, in other words, the genocide of Muslims who refuse to convert.

On this very thread, William F. Buckley, Daniel Pipes, and George Will, three of the most stalwart and thoughtful conservative voices in the U.S. today, have been derided as fools, backsliders, and liberals.

LGF. The Hamas of America.

In response to a feeble attack from Orson Buggy in #370, I had this to say in #627:

Orson Buggy: I notice that you never rant and rave over any of the attacks on innocent people world wide by your buddies in Al Q, Hamas or any of the number of islamo-whackjobs out there.

I don't comment when a dog bites a man. I comment when a man bites a dog.

I hold our soldiers and our generals and our politicians to a higher standard than the terrorists and insurgents of Iraq.

It's a shame you, and the LGF gang, don't.

LGF. The Hamas of America.

Vile yet feeble counterattacks from Rayra ensued, but the damage to LGF was done. Nodrog had hit upon a core truth - LGF, the Hamas of America.

More Breathless Saddam-Bin Laden Connections

2008-06-25T17:03:00.000-07:00

Charles wasn't giving up. On March 17, 2006 he posted "Iraq Documents Show Saddam Terror Connections," linking to the inimitable Michelle Malkin, who actually had an alleged "smoking gun" document on her hot little website. An utterly ridiculous thread resulted. In #86 I blew the whole thing up:

Translate this:

ArlesChay ashay anhay obsessionhay ithway yingtray otay ovepray atthay ehay ishay otnay ullfay ofhay itshay.

Not content with my demolition, I went thermonuclear in #88, mocking the "letter" on Michelle Malkin's website:

HOT OFF THE PRESSES, I'VE OBTAINED THIS NEW TRANSLATION OF ONE OF THE TREASURE TROVE OF SECRET DOCUMENTS

In the Name of God the Merciful
Presidency of the Republic
Intelligence Apparatus

To the respectful Mr. M.A.M

Subject: Information

Our source in Afghanistan Agent 86 (for information about him see my memo entitled "Uday's butt boy") provided us with information that that Indonesian Consul (editor's note: AHA, IT'S NOT A "MODERATE" MUSLIM COUNTRY! SEE, THEY'RE ALL EVIL!) Mr. Surayablaniphtnapasha (for information about him see my memo entitled "The Man Behind the Bali Bombings") told him the following:

1. That Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein sealed their partnership in a private ceremony where they shared bodily fluids.

2. That Iraq has 4,000 nuclear warheads ready to strike anywhere on the Globe.

3. That our long-time Iraqi secret agent John Kerry is about to get the nomination to be President of the United States.

4. That the Indonesian consul will channel the payment to Bill Clinton ($2,865,347.34) as a payoff for his intentional neglect of our evil plans.

5. That the United States is about to find out that our wars with Iran have been a sham and that we have been secretly plotting for the past 25 years to impose the Caliphate on the entire world, the solar system, and as much of the milky way as we can get at.

6. In light of this we suggest to write to the Commission of the above information.

Please view… Yours… With regards

Signature:……, Initials : A.M.M, 15/9/2001

Foot note: Immediately send to the Chairman of Commission

Signature:………….

The lizards were, for once, speechless! And this story has seemed to fade to nothing - oh, WAIT A MINUTE! THE MSM KILLED IT!

LGF Press Hypocrisy

2008-06-25T09:26:00.001-07:00

On February 16, 2006, Charles dusted off one of his favorite titles in "The Media Are the Enemy," [of Charles' MSM pretensions - ed.] It seems that Salon, the online magazine, had the temerity to defend republication of the notorious Abu
Ghraib photographs. Charles' complaints, in light of the recent Mohammed Cartoon controversy, justified some questions for the Lizard King, and who better than the Nodrog to ask them? In #41:

Salon publishes Abu Ghraib and refuses to publish the Muhammad cartoons.

Charles and LGF publish the Muhammad cartoons and don't publish (and harshly criticize those who do) the Abu Ghraib photos.

Justify your position in light of these facts, Charles. I dare you. Do you have the guts to answer me?

This gave Reaganite the opening he craved in #44 to wittily riposte (for about the 20th time): (Gordon) Cindy Sheehan: Charles will not meet with you. Try camping out at the Denver Airport. The rest of the lizardoids tried to change the subject, but the Nodrog brought them back to Earth with #66:

Nice derailment, LGF gang.

I wasn't comparing Abu Ghraib to Somalia 1993 or the actions of the terrorist scum in Iraq the MSM labels "insurgents."

I was comparing issues of press freedom. And I too am appalled at our gutless media which would flush its first amendment freedoms and responsibilities down the toilet to appease radical Islam.

But I'm just as appalled at the blatant hypocrisy of Charles and his LGF lock-steppers, who call out Salon, yet don't even think about the beam in their own eye on this issue.

And Charles, as usual, is too gutless to respond and justify his apparent hypocrisy. Whether its at the Denver Airport or on his own blog.

I added a devastating coda in #68:

And the other dirty little LGF truth is that a significant percentage of LGF posters don't have a problem showing Abu Ghraib photos because they APPROVE OF THE TORTURE.

FabioC, a responsible lizardoid, asked if Charles should publish the Abu Ghraib photos himself. I answered in #76:

#70 FabioC: Charles doesn't have to post the new Abu Ghraib photos.

He also shouldn't attack those who do, while lauding those who post or publish the Muhammed cartoons.

Press freedom cuts both ways.

The lizards' best riposte was to point out that Charles had actually linked to the Abu Ghraib photos. But the Nodrog's main point was still valid - press freedom cuts both ways, even if Charles Johnson and the lizardoid illiterati are too pig-headed to realize it.

LGF Cognitive Dissonance Again on Display

2008-06-24T16:47:00.001-07:00

On February 3, 2006, Charles was outraged with the U.S. State Department as he posted "Foggy Bottom: These Cartoons Are Indeed Offensive," (the Mohammed cartoons). I pointed out the cognitive dissonance starting in #10:

I just knew, Charles, that you would blame this on the State Department ("Foggy Bottom").

Guess what? The State Department is in the BUSH ADMINISTRATION. You know, beloved President Bush? I would be very surprised if this didn't go out without at least Condoleeza Rice's assent, if not Bush himself.

Maybe ol' George isn't so great after all. He's not a big fan of press freedom anyway.

Typical LGF cogent responses (e.g. Ward Cleaver in #29, "STFU." Mglazer in #21 tried to change the subject, but in #36 the Nodrog wouldn't let him:

mglazer: Bubba Clinton And Carter agree with the foggy bottom of jihadists appeasement

You mean, "Bubba Clinton and Carter agree with BUSH regarding jihadists appeasement.

This is the BUSH administration. Stop trying to claim otherwise. If "Foggy Bottom" had said this during the CLINTON administration, you wouldn't be making this distinction, and you know it!

Writermom in #68, among the lizardoid abusers, admitted that I actually had a point. I then rubbed it in with a response to Chief Airedale in #102: #

30: The Foggy Bottom wobblers do not speak for me.

You mean BUSH ADMINISTRATION wobblers do not speak for me?

And to Gmac in #45:

Gmac: Both the State Dept and the CIA are at odds with the Bush administration.

The State Department and the CIA ARE the Bush Administration! This is the OFFICIAL POSITION OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION! The BUSH ADMINISTRATION agrees that European and American newspapers should censor these pictures!

The lizardoids' distress came out in increasing invective, led by our old (dis)favorite Rayra. I started on him in #234:

#76 Rayra: I guess you are the Bush Administration's "kept man."[referring to Rayra's profile again]

Along with Charles, of course.

Then in #240:

Wow Rayra, I wrote my #234 before I read your Bush brown-nosing pile of typed doggy doo in #120. You really are either a fool or a knave.

And finally, the Rayra coup de grace in #241, in response to a direct threat from him in #125:

#125 Rayra: I'd bitchslap you into next week, for what you deliberately regularly attempt to do here, given the opportunity.

If I actually showed up at your door, you'd probably go hide on the potty with the bathroom door locked.

I summed up my position in #238, along with putting the final fork into the well-done Rayra:

By the way, I think the Mohammed cartoons should be published in EVERY newspaper in the United States.

I'm appalled that the BUSH ADMINISTRATION doesn't value the freedom of speech and the press that is a hallmark of Western Civilization. Muslim societies need to emulate us, not protest, riot, and God knows what else they will do.

And I'm happy to see that the LGF community also values freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Oops, Rayra doesn't. He wants to jail a lot of citizens and journalists for sedition and treason. Along with much of the rest of the LGF community.

Hypocrites.

Some days it was fun being the Nodrog!

The Mohammed Cartoons

2008-06-24T09:06:00.001-07:00

In late January 2006 the Mohammed Cartoons controversy popped up, as Muslims around the world protested and rioted over the supposedly blasphemous cartoons of Mohammed were printed in a Danish newspaper (the most famous of which had Mohammed with a turban/bomb on his head). LGF operative Zombie had put up a cartoon site, which Charles linked to in "Mohammed Image Mirror," (actually to a Danish mirror site because Zombie was being overloaded) on February 1, 2006. The Nodrog showed up in #39 to surprise a few people:

This may surprise a few LGF'ers, but I want to thank Zombie for showing us what free thought and speech are all about. If the Muslim world is offended by this, then the Muslim world needs to change, not us.

Immediate kudos came from Ed the Weatherman and Mike C. The Mohammed Cartoons needed to be published far and wide. And the Nodrog was (and is) for free speech for (almost) all, as opposed to the LGF sedition brigade.

Coulterclone - Worse than the Usual Lizardoid Illiteratus(a)

2008-06-23T21:07:00.000-07:00

Welcome to 2006! Less than two years left in the Saga of the Nodrog!

On January 31, 2006, Charles posted "RIP Coretta Scott King," on the death of MLK's long-time widow. Most lizardoids were respectful, but a few, glaringly, were not. Earth to Satan (#46), GMAC (#61) and Martel-Sobieski (#63) were respectfully condemnatory. And then there was Coulterclone, living up to it's namesake. She followed up with vileness in posts #69-#71 (the last a real doozy, hoping for the quick death of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens). So the Nodrog had to step in, with #72:

Coulterclone: Just another LGF a-hole pissing on someone's grave.

It tried to counterattack with snarkiness in #74, including a ludicrous statement among the bloviating which the Nodrog pounced on to finish the kill in #77: Coulterclone:

In #64 you did not "debate the question of the real effects of the Civil Rights movement and the impact of its leadership in the 60s." Instead, you brought up the following issues:

-Plagiarism in King's doctoral thesis
-King's extramarital affairs.
-Comments about "looking sad at funerals" where you managed to throw in a gratuitous Clinton insult
-Charges that the King family did the whole thing to make money.

That's not a debate on the real effects of the Civil Rights movement. That's pissing on a grave.

Feeble insulting counter-attacks continued. Coulterclone was truly one of the more despicable lizards. Just as Ann Coulter is THE most despicable "pundit" we are afflicted with in this nation today.

Based upon Charles' clampdown on the recent Ted Kennedy seizure/brain tumor threads, vileness like Coulterclone's would not be tolerated on today's LGF.

Unless she were an "oldtimer" like Iron Fist!

The Stab in the Back

2008-06-23T09:32:00.001-07:00

On December 24, 2005, Charles, in an otherwise unremarkable post on Iran's nuclear ambitions ("Iran's Nuclear Rights") added a deeply disturbing postscript to his quote from a speech by former President Khatami. Quoting him, I responded in #46:

Khatami also demonstrated how quickly the mullahs take advantage of the opportunities offered to them by Western media:

The opportunities, Charles, were provided by our armed forces at Abu Ghraib and our intelligence services at Guantanamo and the secret torture centers in Eastern Europe and other places.

You are becoming really repellent, Charles. You would throw away everything we stand for in the fight against Islamoterrorism.

Your attitude, and that of other lizardoids and far-right loonies, is eerily similar to that of the German right after World War I, with their "stab in the back" mythology against the German center and left. And we know what that led to.

This thread is typical of the nauseating laughingstock that LGF has become. Except there are too many people around with your loony ideas to really be a laughingstock. I just hope LGF isn't the American equivalent of the infamous Munich beer hall.

After typical lizardoid lies/ravings in response, I finished up with #62:

Of course, my comment said nothing about the original content of the article, because the Iranian regime is repugnant and must be stopped before it gets its hands on an operable nuclear weapon.

I was commenting on Charles' stab-in-the-back beer hall putsch mentality in glomming on to the rantings of an Iranian nutcase to make his usual case that the MSM is a bunch of traitors.

And that mentality is, frankly, more dangerous to this country than a bunch of Iranian nutcases with a nuclear weapon, which they are more likely to blow themselves up with by accident than us.

EE followed up with several more thoughtful lizard posts - he was a better species of lizardoid, long since gone from the LGF laughingstock brigade.

Reaganite Loses It

2008-06-21T23:03:00.001-07:00

On December 18, 2005, Charles posted "Let's Give 'em a State," his tag line for attempts to appease the Palestinians despite various outrageous acts perpetrated by them. What's interesting about this thread is not Charles' repetitive (if unfortunately true) meme, but rather the flame war that broke out between Maine's Michael and Reaganite. Maine's Michael had a bad habit of attacking the Bush Administration when they did not live up to his Eretz Israel fantasies, as he did here starting in #8. Reaganite immediately pounced, using his mastery of the strike-out feature to rename MM "Broken Record." (he similarly did this with me on an earlier thread, changing me to Cindy Sheehan) Reaganite was counter-attacked by other irregulars Zulubaby and Writermom, and Maine's Michael started making jokes about Reaganite being a drunk. The Nodrog entered the fray in #124, summarizing for all:

It's simple:

Maine's Michael is a stark raving mad bigelista.

Reaganite is a disgrace to his namesake. And I wonder if he really was a secret service agent - I would think with him in charge we would have had a few more successful assassinations.

And Zulubaby can just shut up, please.

Bigelista, of course, refers to the notorious "nuke 'em all" Bigel, by now banned from LGF.

Reaganite's days were becoming numbered on LGF. He soon stopped posting, and was banned anyway for the sins of Ann, his spouse.

TREASON!

2008-06-20T20:52:00.000-07:00

In December 2005 the New York Times published a story about how the Bush Administration ignored federal law to illegally wiretap U.S. phones. An uproar ensued. Charles' response? Accuse the New York Times of treason, of course (although he then backpedaled a bit, claiming he never used the word "treason") in "NYT Puts Sales Ahead of National Security" on December 16. 2005. I pointed out a gaping hole in his logic in #124:

Yes, Charles you are right, the New York Times is indeed absolutely shameless.

FOR WAITING A YEAR TO PUBLISH THIS STORY INSTEAD OF RELEASING IT LAST YEAR WHEN VOTERS COULD HAVE USED THE INFORMATION TO DECIDE WHETHER TO PUT ILLEGAL EAVESDROPPERS BACK IN THE WHITE HOUSE!

But, I have a feeling that's not what you meant ...

Shill-boy.

American Infidel was on hand to peddle her ranting nonsense in #120, to which I gave the smackdown in #126:

American Infidel:

Viacom/CBS/Simon & Schuster = LEFTIST ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

American Infidel = Paranoid Idiot. The firms you mention are as much a threat to America as Wal-mart is. Which is to say, none at all. Grow up.

Her response, starting in #129 and #133, was to use a vile epithet to describe me - she was rapidly becoming unhinged. I hastened the process with #135:

American Infidel: Rational response, as always ... (sarc, in case you're too stupid to figure it out)

You're the bozo at the head of the LGF Laughingstock parade.

Rayra starting posting his "treason" and "sedition" cries in #125. In #130 I started his smackdown:

rayra: Your crapola is far more treasonous to American values than any of the paranoid straw-men you raise. We're not fighting Islamofascism in order to impose the fascist Big Brother nonsense you espouse.

You were right on one issue recently: Israel. I guess two in a row from a kept "man" like you is a bit much to ask for?

I taunted Charles further in #140:

So Charles, what's your answer? If the NYT is shameless, why did they wait a year to release this damaging report instead of hitting Bush with it before the election?

Got an answer?

I asked Rayra the same in #145:

Rayra: I doubt Charles will answer my question, perhaps because he's afraid to engage me, but do you have an answer? Why did the NYT wait a year to publish this report if they could have released it and damaged Bush's reelection campaign?

And "they didn't because they were afraid Charles would unleash his 'dancing typefont analysis' on them" doesn't cut it as an answer.

In #149 Bulgar Wheat asked me for my explanation of the delay, which I provided in #156:

Bulgar Wheat: Because they respected the wishes of the White House, but finally decided that the story was sufficiently newsworthy and needed to get out, and that it didn't compromise national security.

In other words, they acted like responsible journalists. Which, for the most part, they are. (yes, yes, I know; Howell Raines, Jayson Blair, etc. - that's why I said "for the most part.")

I just find it an amazing display of cognitive dissonance for Charles to glom onto this story in the way he has.

What's your answer, Charles? Or are you still waiting for a return call from the Rove office with talking points on this subject?

Rayra kept up the abuse, asking me what my "American Values" were. He didn't like the answer I gave in #211:

Rayra: Here's an American value for you: [Link to famous Supreme Court case of U.S. v. Boyd]

The primary supreme court case upholding the rights of individuals to be free from government searches and wiretaps. These seditionists wrote this opinion in 1886.

In #240 Kenneth claimed that the 1886 Boyd case authorized unwarranted searches, and Rayra kept up his pointless abuse. In #267 I put both in their place:

Kenneth: Are you telling me that the landmark 1886 Boyd decision authorizes warrantless searches?

Go back to con law class, dude!

Rayra, the Boyd decision represents a core American value, one that has been enshrined in our Constitution and case law since 1787, in response to the tyrannous warrantless searches conducted by the British authorities.

A core American value that a Fascist like you would flush down the toilet for some fleeting chimera of protection from the Genghis Khan-like Muslim hordes of your fetid imagination.

I finished with a final dig at the laughingstock Rayra:

No answer from Rayra either. He's probably off getting kept.

It was touching to see mortal enemies American Infidel and Rayra agreeing on one thing - pointless Nodrog abuse.

By the way, it is a Rayra/GCP claim that American Infidel, banned from LGF in July 2006, has been reincarnated on LGF, as either "Sharmuta" or "Highrise." (I'm not sure which) Any comments?

A Real Ratbag of a Thread

2008-06-14T20:45:00.001-07:00

In early December 2005, after some alleged disturbances at a Sydney beach among Lebanese immigrants in Australia, the white Aussies counter-rioted, as Charles reported in "Aussie Rioting Spreads" on December 13, 2005. The police chief called the rioters "ratbags." Charles said nothing more, but the gleeful tone of the lizardoids was started in post #1 by Geoffrey with a "Go Aussies!" And Sarah D., now a GCP irregular, seconded the sentiment in #3. I spoiled the party in #47:

More red meat from Charles to his followers.

44 comments so far, and about 35 of them cheering on the carnage.

I think the ratbags are here on LGF.

Lizardoid outrage ensued. Bob the Builder advocated a race war in #48. Sarah D. made a gross anti-nodrog post in #52. I kept up the "ratbag" theme in my responses:

Bob the Builder (#48) wants a race war here.

Are you vying for the title of "Chief LGF Ratbag," Bob?

And: What a pleasant thing to write, Sarah D. (#52):

Your political ancestors undoubtedly were part of the Leo Frank lynch mob in 1915.

Are you vying for the title of Chief Female LGF Ratbag?

In response to Lizard by the Bay's attack in #56, I had this to say in #72:

Lizard: Yes, the Aussies must protect their cultural values from Muslim hordes.

By rioting themselves and forming vigilante posses.

Are those the same "Western Cultural Values" that you support in our country too? Do you think American "cultural values" are best represented by the Leo Frank lynch mob of 1915?

In response to a genocidal call in #57 from a creature named "Jemima," I responded in #79:

Attention Charles, cleanup on aisle 57: a call for genocide against Muslims from Jemima.

Better get your mop ready on this thread, Charles, your LGF wannabe lynch mob is out in force.

The lizards continued their ratbag behavior, throwing in frenzied Nodrog attacks too. I answered one of my more filthy haters in #102:

#87 'nam Grunt: Whassamatta? You upset that no one will join you in a ratbag vigilante posse in Beaumont?

400 posts later, the lizardoids were undeterred in their frothing Nodrog hatred and continued ratbag riot-loving behavior. So in a series of posts I put the coup de grace to the thread. #534: I

see that any attempt to use logic with the LGF hater crowd is useless.

Another laughingstock thread.

#535:

Charles, you've really picked up a mighty big rock with Little Green Footballs. And there's a lot of ugly bugs underneath hopping and scurrying onto the Laughingstock threads.

And, finally, #539:

And the funny/pathetic thing is that if Osama bin Laden and his gang actually showed up on your street, most of you would be hiding under your beds.

Especially the "hero" 'nam Grunt.

Amongst the continued lizardoid abuse, I would note #562 from Mrs. Reaganite, Ann: Do NOT even allude to the fact that 'Nam Grunt is any less than the real deal. We have met him, and he is among the most honest, down to earth, pleasant, selfless and ethical men that I have met. Yes, Gordon is threatened by real men. After the "Sooper Sekrit" blog smackdown do you still feel this way, Ann?

The Nodrog Takes Down Tom Tancredo

2008-06-13T11:00:00.000-07:00

On December 12, 2005, Charles posted "Dhimmi of the Year Awards Revealed," with a link to the awards bestowed by Robert Spencer. Incredibly, the allegedly intelligent Spencer bestowed his "Anti-Dhimmi" of the year award to racist nativist Tom Tancredo, Congressman from Colorado. In #42 I started the smackdown:

Tom Tancredo? He needs to win the racist pig - economic idiotarian award of the year for his "know nothing" viewpoints on immigration.

Does Robert Spencer really think that illegal Mexican immigrants coming here to work are the vanguard for al-qaeda?

I didn't know Robert Spencer was a "know-nothing" too. It puts the rest of his scholarly work on Islam in a more negative light.

As in anyone stupid enough to agree with Tom Tancredo on immigration issues is probably stupid in other fields of endeavor too.

I piled it on with a classic Nodrogian takedown in #46:

If Tom Tancredo had been in power in 1850, and your last name is O'Brien, your ancestors would have starved in a blighted Irish potato field.

If Tom Tancredo had been in power in 1890, and your last name is Rosen, your ancestors would have perished in a Nazi concentration camp, if a Russian pogrom didn't get them first.

If Tom Tancredo had been in power in 1910, and your last name is Scarlatti, your ancestors would still be in Sicily, probably dead from Mafia violence.

So let's hear it for Tom Tancredo!

I piled on more in #292 against those who stated that Tancredo was only against illegal immigrants:

Yeah right, Tom Tancredo doesn't want illegal immigation. He also doesn't want LEGAL immigration:
[Link in original] He's a know-nothing asswipe.

If Tom Tancredo had been in power in 1900 and your last name is Druktenis, your ancestors would have died in a Soviet gulag.

If Tom Tancredo has been in power in 1890 and your last name is Kastelic, your ancestors would have been killed in a Balkan civil war.

If Tom Tancredo had been in power in 1870 and your last name is Chang, your ancestors would have been buried alive in the Rape of Nanking, or perished of famine in the Great Leap Forward, or been bludgeoned to death during the Cultural Revolution. Or, if they had been in the U.S., they would have been strung up by a lynch mob. Led by a follower of Tom Tancredo.

I continued in #293 throwing dirt on the grave:

If Tom Tancredo had been in power in 1975 and your last name is Ng, you would have drowned in a refugee boat.

If Tom Tancredo had been in power in 1920 and your last name is Kelledjian, your ancestors would have been slaughtered by the Turks.

Yes, Tom Tancredo, anti-dhimmi.

And Robert Spencer, deluded fool or racist knave.

LGF was soon to be branching out into anti-immigrant hysteria. And the Nodrog was there to kick ass and take names!

A Final Joust With Zulubaby

2008-06-12T16:09:00.000-07:00

Pretty much my last joust with Zulubaby, a pale shadow of the former flame wars, occurred on December 2, 2005, in a thread entitled "Sami Al-Arian Acquitted," Charles and many lizardoids were of course appalled that the Florida radical Islamic professor wasn't just sent to Gitmo with a Koran smeared with poop. I summarized for the lizardoids in #131:

Is Al-Arian guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? I wasn't at the court for five months like the jurors, so I can't answer that question. From news reports, however, the government's case was in many ways circumstantial. The "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard is intentionally set high, and I am not surprised that the jorors did not think the prosecution's case made that standard.

Is Al-Arian thus exonerated? I hope not. He clearly is an Islamic extremist who deserves to be shunned by mainstream society, not employed teaching our children, and watched VERY closely.

Perhaps as a next step relatives of the victims of the bombings should sue al-Arian for civil wrongful death damages, as was done in the O.J. Simpson case. A "preoponderance of the evidence" is much easier to prove than "beyond a reasonable doubt."

This prompted the following reasoned reply from Zulubaby in #138: Shut up, Gordon. But Zulubaby showed a light-hearted streak with a subsequent reply in #164: LOL, just so you guys know, I didn't even read Gordon's post, but had to tell him to shut up. For old time's sake, you know ... ;-) I returned with a left-handed compliment in #207:

Hello, Zulubaby. I haven't seen you posting here for quite a while. Perhaps we are just posters passing in the night ...

I then added in #215, using the nifty LGF profiles available:

For those keeping a scorecard:

Zulubaby: 13,991 posts
Gordon: 2,110 posts.

Since I've been blocked, I can't update those numbers for you! More light-hearted banter followed. While there were a couple of minor "brief encounters" to follow, the Nodrog-Zulubaby wars were exhausted.

Meanwhile, the odious American Infidel was spouting off in #214. I brought her down in #321:

American Infidel:

All of your law books, all of our laws and our Constitution are not going to save this country against the islamocrazies.

Actually, they are what saves us, because they are what we fight for. And if we lose them, we aren't much better than the Islamocrazies.

Sarah D., Coulterclone, and Ann all seconded the Nodrog's sentiments! I suspect that hatred for American Infidel was behind some of it - the fissure in LGF's ranks was growing wider.

Charles Johnson - Republican Shill

2008-06-12T08:37:00.000-07:00

In late November 2005, San Diego Republican Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham tearfully resigned from the House of Representatives after pleading guilty to taking $2.5 million in bribes from defense contractors. Charles' reaction? On November 29, 2005 he took to task an evil AUSTRALIAN newspaper for presenting the story under the title "Corrupt Bush Ally Resigns in Shame." The title of the thread is "Biased Headline of the Day." This was almost too easy, as I showed starting out in #41:

Really getting your knickers in a twist, eh Charles? Let's look at the headline more closely:

CORRUPT: I'd say $2.5 million in bribes qualifies don't you?

RESIGNS: Yes, he resigned.

IN SHAME: He certainly sounded tearfully shameful in his resignation statement. So by both objective and subjective measures this one fits.

So we come to the all-key:

BUSH ALLY:
1) He's a republican; so is the President
2) He's a conservative; so is the President
3) As a former military man he is unreservedly in favor of a strong mili;tary and our adventure in Iraq; so is the President.
4) Not having the data in front of me, I would guess that his voting record on President Bush's agenda is pretty solid.

So what's the problem, Charles? Does the truth bother you?

This time I was joined by another, less frequent LGF contrarian, BPP. In #55 he spouted in language that was positively Nodrogian in its clarity and incisiveness: Here you have the most egregiously corrupt Congressman just resign his seat and all Charles can come up with by way of reference is an Australian newspaper headline that references the fact that Cunningham was a Bush ally. It's almost comical the way Charles avoids saying anything negative about Republicans, while often scraping the bottom of the barrel to slam Democrats. He's the mirror image of what he claims is so wrong about the media - ridiculous, over-the-top hypocritical bias. Now a blog doesn't operate the same way a newspaper does, but most blogs try not to operate as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Republican National Committee.

Meanwhile, Ed the Weatherman's only lame response was to bring up Ohio Democratic Congressman James Traficant, also recently bounced from the House for corruption. Others claimed, without basis, that Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha, House Democratic bigwigs, were under investigation. Others claimed that Bill Frist, Republican Senate leader, was the object of a witchhunt because of his HCA stock problems that were also in the news. In #62 I lauded BPP and chided Ed and the others:

BPP: BINGO! Prepare for incoming insults. It's all they can muster now. There certainly aren't many facts involved.

And "Trafficant was a Democrat!" doesn't qualify as a relevant fact.

Also, I was unaware that either Murtha or Pelosi were the subject of ethics investigations. Perhaps some lizardoids can enlighten me?

As for Frist, the fact that he seems to be following in the fatuous footsteps of Trent Lott is far more important than this HCA stock nonsense.

#63 Tenring then decided to compare Nixon and Clinton's impeachments. It was too much to pass up, so the Nodrog ended that discussion in #76:

Tenring:

1974 Again Nixon - who resigned from the presidency rather than put the country though an impeachment.
1998 Clinton does the opposite and bombs an aspirin factory

Apprently you are too dim to recognize the difference between covering up a large-scale criminal conspiracy of burglary vs. lying about a blow-job.

At this point, I decided to make a point of Charles' silence in #101:

Well Charles, Dirk Diggler called it; it's your blog. And you've let BPP and me call you out as a rank hypocrite.

Any comments? Or does your silence indicate you do indeed have a sense of shame?

BPP kept up the good fight in #113.

I seconded him in #154: BPP

But Charles rails almost every day about bias. Shouldn't one expect some level of neutrality or non-partisanship?

You're asking the Hypocrite-in-chief of LGF to be shamed by this? He has no shame.

Rayra then mindlessly attacked me in #134, to which I provided this eviscerating reply in #158 (notice the snide reference to Mr. Taco-short's "kept" status):

Rayra: If your point is that Clinton was sleazy and corrupt, I think the evidence is there - the pardons are some of the best evidence.

But, unlike you, I recognize that both the Democrats and Republicans have their share of corruption. You are too much of a stinking, rank kept hypocrite to acknowledge that.

Either that or you truly believe this delusion that Republicans are pure and honest. Which makes you delusional.

Utter nonsense from Ted in #136 resulted in an irrestible reply in #161:

ted:

Charles not in any manner embellish,bias or slant any headline,article or post in any manner.

A quick perusal of LGF headlines (which I assume are written by Charles and not a chimp with a typewriter) makes it clear that this is one of the stupidest, most ignorant things anyone has ever written on LGF.

The fun continued, and in #179 I called out Charles yet again:

C'mon Charles, it's time for you to wade in and defend your stupid thread here.

Or perhaps by this time you've decided it's indefensible.

And in #185 I give you Reaganite's clever reply: #179 Gordon (Cindy Sheehan)

Charles will not meet with you, try camping out at the Denver Airport. Do you get it? I certainly don't!

In #246 I put the coup de grace to this ridiculous thread:

Here's my "tip" for Charles:

STOP BEING A REPUBLICAN SHILL!

And it's still my tip for Charles, as we get going on full LGF "Smear Obama" Season. LGF's already pretty nauseatingly anti-Obama right now - and as is the LGF forte - the smears are all about personal stuff (e.g. Obama not a U.S. citizen ???????) instead of real issues.

LGF Takes on Chavez - and Poor People

2008-06-11T08:46:00.001-07:00

On November 22, 2005, Charles posted "Transnational Democrats Make Deal with Venezuelan Thug." It seems that Hugo Chavez offered cheap heating oil to poor Northeasterners in the Winter, and they had the temerity and gall to accept it! Mike C. and Killian Bundy argued against the usual Lizardoid cries of "treason," but I added the final Nodrogian touch later in the thread in #204:

Typical Charles and LGF response:

WE'LL FREEZE BEFORE WE TAKE CHEAP OIL FROM THAT THUG CHAVEZ!

Actually, it's "we'll let OTHER PEOPLE freeze before we take oil from that thug Chavez." It never gets too cold in Santa Monica, does it Charles?

Creep.

In #206 Roger joined the Nodrog/Mike C./Killian Bundy counter arguers, and I welcomed him in #207:

Roger: You have the right attitude on this issue, as opposed to Charles and all the other LGF warm weather chicken hawks.

Meanwhile, Silhouette in #197 posted nonsense outrageous for even LGF, which I quoted and mocked in #218:

Silhouette says:

Historically, the permanent poor (those poor from generation to generation, not just the very young moving through that income bracket) are not exactly grateful for assistance, but quickly see it as an entitlement

Yes, Silhouette, it is quite an "entitlement" not to freeze to death in your own home because you can't pay for your heating oil.

Jerk.

It's not surprising at all that Mike C. was banished from LGF - what is more surprising is that he remains perhaps the most sane and sensible member of the loony right Gulf Coast Pundit collective. He had some run-ins with taco-short bully Rayra in their common LGF days.

Rayra.net

2008-06-10T08:20:00.000-07:00

On November 21, 2005, Charles posted "A Veteran's Day to 'Honor' Our Troops." Most notable about the post was it's source, none other than "LGF Operative" RAYRA! How things have changed! There was a link to something called "Rayra.net," (still in shambolic existence, by the way). In #43 I had a little fun:

Wow, this is from RAYRA.NET! I was looking for the "kept man" feature (to see who is keeping him), but it doesn't seem to be there.

The "Essays" section is empty. Perhaps we should all be thankful for that!

The reference is to Rayra's self-description on his LGF profile as a "kept man." Zombie, creator of a REAL website, gallantly defended the indefensible Rayra in #45, to which I responded in #51:

Zombie: Don't worry, your site (linked to rayra.net) is much better - although I didn't go poking around too far because I didn't want to run into the "scrotum liberation" pictures from a while back ...

And you are also not a nasty vile barking inverse-moonbat like Rayra, at least not as openly.

To follow up, Rayra and Charles had a falling out in the Summer of 2006, and Rayra is now an embittered shell of his former self (which was a shell to begin with, so that makes him a shell of a shell!) on Gulf Coast Pundit which, unless you are blocked in a juvenile manner like I have been, can be found at www.gulfcoastpundit.com (go to the Forum section to see Rayra, Reaganite, Ed the Weatherman, and other Discarded Lizards in their full, foul glory).

Let the Smears Begin!

2008-06-09T16:57:00.001-07:00

On November 18, 2005, Charles posted "Friday Rolls Around," an open thread. About this time Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman John Murtha, a decorated Vietnam Marine, came out publicly against the war in Iraq. So the Nodrog decided to grace the open thread with this post in #102:

A story Charles hasn't seen fit to comment on yet: [Link to Murtha story]

Murtha does not appear to be a moonbat.

Are Charles and the LGF gang waiting for a Swift Boat-type Pearl Harbor job on Murtha's military service before they comment?

Because I would be surprised if someone ISN'T searching as we speak for shills to lie about Murtha's service record.

When 'nam Grunt called me a traitor (as usual) in #106, I responded in kind with #111:

'nam Grunt: Hopefully you won't be claiming that Murtha led the gang that poked you in the barracks that night in '68 ...

This started the vile creature known as coulterclone on an anti-Nodrog tirade in #115. But I would have none of it (for now), and kept on topic in #139:

If this Administation and the House Republicans had any sense, they would be talking to Congressman Murtha and trying to convince him that he is wrong, and why he is wrong, and what positive steps we are taking to pacify Iraq and turn over security matters to Iraqi forces.

Instead, the LGF illiterati cry "treason!" and "Michael Moore likes him, so he must be scum!" The House Republicans and the White House are only barely more civil.

When people like Murtha become "moonbats," the nation's policy in Iraq is in big trouble. This isn't Michael Moore or Cindy Sheehan we are talking about here.

coulterclone, however, kept up the ad hominem off-topic crudely sexual abuse, so in #158 I put her (it?) in her (it's?) place:

Coulterclone:

Gordon! Gordon dear! (Now I'm smitten) GORDON! Wanna trim my bushes? I need my roses pinched!

Funny, I have to pinch my nose whenever the stench of one of your posts floods my computer screen. Yes, I know, mixed metaphors ...

And that stench goes for your neamesake too. Unlike Reaganite, who is often a disgrace to his namesake, you and yours fit quite nicely

And then we get to Reaganite's intelligent reply in #163, one he used whenever he didn't have an argument against me (in other words, always): #158 Gordon Cindy Sheehan
Charles still won't talk to you. Try camping out at the Denver Airport. The Nodrog was a little bit clueless as to what exactly he was talking about (or perhaps what the Jack Daniels was talking about).

Back on topic, in #148 Prester John pointed out that serving honorably in combat did not make a politician always right. In #165 I agreed with him, but pointed out the next problem:

Prester John: You are correct. Unfortunately, our current rabid right won't stop and make this point. They'll find some shills to claim that Murtha was part of a barracks homosexual ring, or lied to get a service medal, or something along those lines.

It's just the way these people work these days.

The right never found anything on Murtha's service, not even a hint of a factoid to embellish! They just had to smear his political record as a Congressman.

French Riots Ghoulishness, and Havoc

2008-06-09T08:50:00.001-07:00

In early November 2005 French "youths" (Charles' mocking term for the primarily Islamic banlieu rioters) were rioting and torching cars in France. Charles kept a close eye on the situation, and typical of the crocodile tears he shed was November 16, 2005, "French Infitada Getting Better All the Time," commenting on the declining number of cars destroyed by stating "maybe they're just running out of cars." I tartly noted Charles' hypocrisy in #77:

Still ghoulishly enjoying the French agony, Charles? How you can justify your crocodile tears after tearing into the "celebrants" of the 2,000th American death in Iraq is beyond my comprehension.

But being chief lizard means never having to say you're sorry ...

Lizardoid abuse followed, most notably from a creature named Havoc in #110, who invited me, not for the first time, to "step outside." I shut this nonsense down quite quickly in #112:

Havoc: OOOOHHHHH! another invitation to "step outside" from macho man Havoc.

Maybe you're a macho man as defined by the Village People, and you really want to "step outside" to smooch.

No more threats from Havoc after that reply ...

The Truth About Cyprus

2008-06-06T16:39:00.001-07:00

And some LGF'ers even get it! But not Charles - on November 2, 2005 he posted "The Ghost City of Cyprus," about a former Greek enclave in the north of the island now deserted. No additional comments (for deniability), but Charles clearly saw this as a club to beat Turkey and Islam with. I provided some facts in #19:

The Turkish Army invaded in 1974 because the Greek rulers of Cyprus, who toppled the elected government of Archbishop Makarios in a military coup, tried to engineer "enosis," the union of Cyprus with Greece, then also ruled by a military junta/dictatorship. Once the Turkish army foiled the plans of the Greek dual dictators to join together, both military juntas were toppled, and Greece has been ruled as a democratic republic ever since.

I followed up with more modern history in #24:

In 2004, an internationally-brokered agreement was put to the voters of Cyprus. It became possible when the Turkish Cypriots (and their patrons in Turkey) finally came to their senses and ousted Rolf Denktash from power, who can best be described as the Ian Paisley of Cyprus.

The agreement was approved overwhelmingly in Turkish Cyprus. The agreement was rejected in Greek Cyprus, at the instigation of politicians who want to return to the era of Greek Cyprior supremacy briefly enjoyed in 1974 when Greek nationalists led a military coup to overthrow the Cypriot elected government.

So for 30 years responsibility for the ghost city could be mostly the responsibility of the Turkish Cypriots and Turkey. Now, this responsibility rests almost solely with the Greek Cypriots.

There were signs of other lizardoid sanity, as with Johninannarbor in #23, who agreed with me. Dirk Diggler had similar sentiments in #25, as did Joel starting in #35. Of course Spiny Norman decided to toe the usual lizardoid line of stupidity in #27, and he was joined in more breathtakingly genocidal fashion by Bobthebuilder in #49, Lady of Shalott in #53, and raving nutcase Jehu in #51. I summed them up in #66:

I see some of the usual LGF suspects insist on making this thread too a laughingstock of irrational Muslim-hatred.

Some of the lizards are almost pavlovian in their responses, which I once succinctly summed up as a variation of the sheep in Animal Farm: "Islam bad, four legs good!"

Amateur Sociology Meets Islamohatred on LGF

2008-06-06T08:14:00.000-07:00

In the wake of the 7/7/2005 horrific subway bombings in London, (a long wake) Charles posted "The Suicide Bombers Among Us," on November 1, 2005, linking to a mixture of sociological nonsense and pathologic Islamohatred authored by Brit Theodore Dalrymple. Song and Dance Man gave the expected lizardoid answer in #123 - he wanted to see them dead instead of "understanding" them. In #165 I started the quick fisking in reference to this post:

song and dance man: Charles wants you to "understand their issues" (although this pile of un-footnoted Dalrymple sociological crap wouldn't help a dog understand why he had fleas) so that you can come to the conclusion that they all must be expelled and then killed or forcibly converted.

Of course Charles will never come out and say that openly, now that he's a Pajama Media big shot and all - he has to watch his backside a little more.

He'll just let the LGF illiterati shout it for him. And, of course, they are not disappointing him.

But song and dance man had already gone further in #144, and so I went further in #168:

Wow, song and dance man, I wrote post #165 before I saw your response in post #144. Like Pavlov's dog, Charles' red meat has sent you slavering for Muslim death.

That's the LGF way. And it's why these threads are laughingstocks.

Lizard by the Bay demanded that I be banned in #171. Havoc defended Dalrymple in #174, also quoting from Thomas Sowell. In #178 I answered him:

Havoc: At least Thomas Sowell documents his assertions. As far as I can tell, Dalrymple's just making this stuff up. Maybe he didn't in his earlier book, but if someone told me that all Buddhist young men in South America had gold teeth as a show of unjust enrichment, I'd say "documentation, please."

It's telling that LGF loser-world doesn't ask for proof if any old assertion fits in with their prejudices.

Meanwhile, alleged economist Thomas Sowell has gone off the deep end in his hatred of immigrants, so I take back the nice things I said about him - the charitable explanation for his recent position on immigration is that he is senile.

Moral of the story - watch out, because the Nodrog will FACT CHECK YOUR ASS!

LGF Delusions Exemplified

2008-06-05T09:06:00.001-07:00

On October 14, 2005, Charles linked approvingly to some tripe from Victor Davis Hanson in "VDH: An American Debacle?" (answer, NO!). Hanson (and Charles) were deriding Zbigniew Brzezinski's analysis of the stupidity of American foreign policy under George Bush. In #50 I exposed the "analysis" for what it was:

I see that VDH has veered into ad hominem attack mode - anyone associated with the Carter Administration is automatically to be utterly discounted.

Unfortunately for VDH's addled analysis, Brezinski was one of the few voices of sanity in the Carter Administration. He was a resolute Cold Warrior.

And because he was a Cold Warrior, he knows the difference between a true world-wide threat to the interests of the United States, as was presented by the Nazis and the Soviets, vs. a band of terrorist thugs supported by inept, corrupt, and vicious rogue regimes.

Shame on VDH.

Lizardoid abuse was typified by rightasrain in #53, whom I rhetorically skewered in #70:

rightasrain:

If Brezinski or you (or any of the lunatic left) had two brain cells to rub together

More ignoramus LGF laughingstock thread material. Brzezinski is on the "lunatic left" only in your fevered type of mind.

rightasrain's response in #73? He used the word OR, not AND! Linguistic pettifoggery - one the last sanctuaries of LGF scoundreldom. rightasrain in #60 provided a foil once again for me in #76:

rightasrain

They appeased the Soviets like crazy when the world was in danger from the USSR. NOW they understand that the Soviets were bad.

Brzezinski's record clearly shows that he was not an appeaser of the Soviet Union. Too bad Carter didn't listen to his own foreign policy adviser more on this subject.

So your thesis as a whole is correct, but it is not correct regarding Brzezinski. In fact, Brzezinski's appreciation of the true menace of the Soviet Union in the 1970's undboubtedly influences his viewpoint of the relatively puny nature of the threat from Islamic fundamentalism and al qaeda terrorist scum.

In their anti-Islamic hysteria, the LGF illiterati (and, unfortunately, their more intelligent counterparts at Gates of Vienna) have completely forgotten (or, if young, never have studied) the true menace the West faced during the Cold War.

LGF - Proud Member of the Pro-Torture Right

2008-06-04T08:05:00.001-07:00

On September 29, 2005, Charles railed against the ordered release of more shameful Abu Ghraib photos in "Abu Ghraib: The Sequel." In #190 I quoted from Andrew Sullivan, a conservative who had come to detest what he calls the "pro-torture right.":

Here's what a conservative blogger WITH INTEGRITY has to say about this story (Andrew Sullivan):

I don't think most Americans are aware of what really went on at Abu Ghraib, and the depth and extent of the brutality. The reason is that the administration did everything it could to prevent the full record being made public; and its fawning acolytes in the right-wing media did all they could to protray what happened as "frat-house" hazing by "bad apples." That was patently untrue then; and is patently untrue now. Now, a judge, after months of government delays, has bravely upheld the release of the remainder. His argument? "My task is not to defer to our worst fears, but to interpret and apply the law, in this case, the Freedom of Information Act, which advances values important to our society, transparency and accountability in government." Maybe now, we will begin to get accountability for what has been done and is being done in our name in Iraq, with regard to abuse of detainees and violation of the Geneva Conventions.

I think 'FAWNING ACOLYTE" describes Charles pretty well on this issue ...

#195 not just neo conservative led the pack with his lucid three word reply: F*** off, Gordon. Havoc in #213 denied that Andrew Sullivan was a conservative (he must be a "small tent" Republican!). In #324 I further replied:

There are clearly two definitions of conservatism.

Andrew Sullivan is a conservative. A conservative who's views are skewed by the fact that he is gay, but a conservative nonetheless. Furthermore, his views on gay marriage and discrimination can clearly fall within the ambit of conservatism - libertarian version.

Charles is proving himself, along with much of the right-wing media and blogosphere to be an administration toady. If that's your definition of "not neo" conservatism, so be it.

It takes a pretty "unique" conservative to justify torture. The last real "conservatives" to do so were probably Spanish Inquisitionists.

Great company, eh LGF?

Crusader in #376 unloaded the f-bomb on me, so I gave it back to him in spades in #409:

It's been at least a month since I pointed out that LGF threads have become blog laughingstocks. Thank you for reminding me that this fact is still as true, if not truer, than ever.

LGF, proud member of the pro-torture right.

Katrina Flames Break Out

2008-06-03T09:18:00.001-07:00

On September 1, 2005, Charles broke his open Katrina threads withi "Playing Politics With a Major Disaster," an attack on Air America's Randi Rhodes. In #50 I pointed out another radio talk jock using Katrina-related gasoline price hikes for political fodder:

Sort of like Rush Limbaugh blaming gasoline shortages arising from Hurricane Katrina on "evironmentalist wackos" (terminology is from Paxnhymn, not Rush, but I'm sure Rush used some colorful language - since I can't listen to him without throwing up, I didn't hear the actual words he said).

In response to Ferny in #55 I did some further research and reported back in #62:

Ferny: The minutes from Rush Limbaugh's show today will be up on his website tomorrow. I will peruse them - of course even there they are still "hearsay" evidence in a technical sense.

Looking at Rush's site though, I see he is already starting the blame game, claiming that there aren't enough refineries because of environmental extremists, therefore not enough gasoline for emergencies.

Both extremes play this game. And Rush is on the extreme right, have no doubt about it.

The lizardoid response? Of course Rush was right!

In response to Iron Fist nonsense in #59 (parroting Rush), I responded sarcastically in #67:

Yeah, let's attack the left for playing political games with this disaster - AND THEN WE'LL PLAY THE SAME GAMES BLAMING ENVIRONMENTALISTS FOR THE DISASTER.

What a STINKING HYPOCRITE you are.

In response to ongoing lizardoid abuse, I provided more inconvenient truths in #109, from a source most lizardoids couldn't do anything but venerate:

From the American Petroleum Institute: [Link]

They give six reasons for low refining capacity right now. Notice the first two reasons: 1) intensive capital investmant; and 2) a return on investment for new refinery capacity of 5.5%, compared to the 12,7% national average.

Also, please remember that until several years ago the story was the OVER-capacity of the nation's refineries. Oil prices were much lower on inflation-adjusted bases than in 1973, BEFORE the first oil embargo.

The main reason there weren't any new refineries is that there wasn't much money to be made refining oil.

Now that there is more money to be made refining oil, we will have more refining capacity. But the situation didn't change until about five years ago.

And are there really lizards out there who would chuck out SENSIBLE environmental regulations on refineries, like Rush apparently would?

I threw it in Charles' face in #123:

Charles, are you going to comment on the disgusting prevalence on this thread and others of those who would blame "environmentalist wackos" for the scale of this disaster?

More calls for my banning, which I mocked in #262:

#212 and #250: Mommy, mommy, MAKE THEM STOP!

Typical LGF loonies, you can dish it out, but you can't take it.

Losers.

I summed up some more facts for the illiterati in #285:

Back to the refinery issue, what the industry, Rush Limbaugh, and many LGF posters characterize as "excessive costs of regulation," are, in fact, in large part, merely an attempt to make oil refineries pay for the external costs of pollution they cause, either through compensation to its victims or, more productively, by preventing or minimizing the pollution in the first place. The $50 million dollar hypothetical cost of, say air pollution control mechanisms may prevent more than $50 million in costs to public health, safety, and general welfare from the pollutants.

The problem, of course, happens when an industry is forced to pay $50 million to prevent $1 million in pollution costs.

This may indeed occur in cases where an endangered species is involved. But it doesn't occur in cases of massive air and water pollution, which has been the environmental legacy of the refining industry.

Then in #266 I started a new unlikely flame war:

Unless New Orleans is raised above the flood level like Galveston, Texas was done after the 1900 Hurricane, I think Dennis Hastert has hit the nail on the head.

In a similar vein, the beachfront homes along Mississippi's Gulf Coast should not be rebuilt, or should at least not be encouraged by the federal government to rebuild through FEMA programs.

The last paragraph was disputed by Cartman, and also none other than that golden GCP team, Ann and Reaganite! I was dumbfounded to find Ann actually advocating for government subsidy of rebuilding hurricane-prone beach houses in #313. I foolishly tried to explain it to dear Ann in #338:

Ann: How about if we all keep our tax money instead of spending it to subsidize rich people?

Have you ever had children? If so, when your kid smashed up his automobile driving recklessly, did you give him or her the money to get a new car?

If so, then I guess giving money to rich people to rebuild homes in hurricane zones is OK ...

#312 Dahweed: A government-backed low-interest loan is also a subsidy. The government is making up the difference to the market rate, and is also guaranteeing the loan in case of default.

And rich people DO occasionally default too ...

Reaganite then stepped in with ad hominem attacks - I'm surprised Ann didn't dump him long ago.

And they're the cream of GCP? Barf me out!

Hurricane Katrina Hits LGF

2008-06-02T15:51:00.001-07:00

At the end of August in 2005 Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. It also hit Little Green Footballs, as Charles and the lizardoids filled numerous threads on the topic. The first was August 30, 2005's "Hurricane Katrina: U.S. Worst Disaster," with Charles registering disgust on the comments of Robert Kennedy Jr. blaming the Republicans already. In #30 I agreed with Charles:

Using the deadly force of a hurricane to bash the Bush Administration is the height of left-wing moonbattery.

Even if an increase of hurricanes has something to do with global warming (I'm not convinced), and even if global warming is caused by human energy consumption (still debatable, despite the pronouncements of the scientific left and their followers), it's the height of callous bad taste to do as the junior Kennedy has done.

Shame.

The lizardoids lapped it up, pouring hosannas on lil' ol' Nodrog.

Charles and LGF eventually filled fourteen open threads on the disaster. In the midst of them, he posted "Daily Kos: Katrina 'Worse than 9/11'," on August 31, 2005, discussing his least favorite doppelganger on the left. I commented again with agreement in #138:

Kos may be right in at least a superficial way when he says that Katrina is worse than 9/11. Looked at purely from a property damage estimate, I suspect that Katrina is worse. We'll have to have the final grim tally before we know if it is worse from a lives lost standpoint.

From a more long-term perspective, in terms of impacts to the United States, Kos is, as usual, full of caca. Four years after 9/11, we're still "cleaning up" the damage, and we will be for many years to come.

And the gratuitous swipe at the President? At least Kos hasn't gone to the absurd lengths of baby RFK in blaming Bush. Small comfort. He'll undoubtedly get around to it soon enough.

Once again, surprised lizardoids praised the Nodrog to the skies.

In September 1, 2005 "Hurricane Katrina: Open Thread 9," Charles had a series of links, including one distasteful one: I commented in #66:

[from Charles' start]The creeps at the Guardian, predictably, are blaming the disaster on the War on Terror: Why city’s defences were down.

Don't be so dismissive, Charles.

Now isn't the time to debate these issues, but the Guardian, creeps that they are, are picking up a story from the New Orleans newspaper stating that the Administation cut funds for levee work. It's a legitimate story, but one that should be investigated once the emergency is over.

As for the more general problem with man-made re-engineering of the Mississippi Delta (the whole river system, in fact), this is DEFINITELY a long-term legitimate story. Should New Orleans be rebuilt at a spot below sea level, or should the city be abandoned, or perhaps, raised (like Galveston in 1900)?

Should the Mississippi be allowed to follow a new course to the Atlantic, the Atchfalaya River, as it would have by now under natural conditions?

What about the fact that Louisiana is slowly disappearing, because the natural silt deposits from the Mississippi are trapped upstream by dams and flood control structures?

Now is not the time to deal with these issues, and the Guardian is not the voice to raise tehse issues. But shoot the messenger, Charles, not the message.

Quark2 warned me not to just blame the current President for the problems, and I agreed in #109:

quark2: So let's not shoot the current president either Gordon.

This is a much bigger issue than any one administration and any one President. I don't agree with Paxnhymn, who thinks that President Clinton was the fount of all of our problems, just as I don't agree with the DU/Kos/baby RFK gang who blame everything on our current President.

Once things are under control on the ground, I hope our government and people will start answering the long-term questions with an answer other than "just put it back the way it was."

I got lucid responses, in addition to quark2, from Mike C. and Ed the Weatherman. Crazy paxnhymn, blaming "environmentalist wackos" for the disaster, was another case entirely.

Unfortunately, the Katrina-based LGF-Nodrog honeymoon was about to end ...

A Delicate Subject

2008-06-01T17:30:00.000-07:00

The Nodrog took advantage of Charles' August 29, 2005 "Monday Open Thread," to raise a sensitive topic, in #193:

In New York City:[Link to New York Times Story - a rabbi with sucked out the blood of a circumcision from the penis of a male infant had herpes, and the infant subsequent died of the disease]

How is this barbaric practice, already resulting in the death of one infant different in any way other than scale from the barbaric Islamic practice of female circumcision rightly denounced in other threads here?

I was immediately denounced for comparing the male circumcision of Jewish infants with the allegedly widespread Islamic practice of female genital mutilation. I followed up on one of the commenters (Lance Kates in #194) with #200:

Lancekates: I'm not talking about male circumcision generally (although that's an interesting discussion), I'm talking about the practice of rabbis sucking the blood out the intant's penis with their mouths during the procedure. One infant is already dead because his rabbi had herpes. The health risks to infants are obvious.

Why should this practice not be outlawed?

In response to another Lance Kates pathetic rebuttal in #202, I responded in #222:

lancekates: and you're cranky because 3 of them went bad, due to a rabbi who obviously wasn't following the laws that govern sexuality, or is married to someone who isn't, is that right?

Don't you think that in the history of Judaism there may have been more than three infants killed or diseased by this practice? Or that more than one rabbi has perhaps not followed the rules governing sexuality (or had a spouse not following those rules) ?

And yes, it's a tiny minority of circumsizers that still do this. Well, I would hazard a guess that tha vast majority of Muslim women don't undergo female circumcision either. Does that make Islam OK in your book too?

You have no good answer. So it's goodbye to you and your phony arguments.

Meanwhile, Mike C., a decidedly sane variety of lizardoid (naturally he is now banned, unnaturally he is now a member of the Borg, er, I mean Gulf Coast Pundit Collective) lauded in #218 the "sane" Gordon who had appeared. In #227 he backed me up further: No facts or links to back up my opinion [that female genital mutilation was not a prevalent Islamic practive], but I would guess that that statement is probably correct. I would further guess that that particular barbaric practice pre-dates islam where it is prevalent. What is a guy like this doing on GCP?

Meanwhile, I had thrown more logs on the fires of Nodrog-hatred with my erudite and profound observations in #215:

In comparing Islam and Judaism, it has become clear to me that Mohammed stole a lot of stuff for the Koran from the Hebrew Bible. More than just Moses-Musa and some of the stories.

-Mohammed clearly stole the story of the Hebrew conquest of Canaan and moved it onto a worldwide scale - the Arabic conquest of the world (or an attempt thereof). Infidels (Canaanites) are to be put to the sword, their children made into slaves, and their women made into sex booty. Mohammed added the dhimmi concept for Christians and Jews because of their status as "people of the book."

-Mohammed took a lot of the Koran's draconian legal punishments from the Books of Deuteronomy, Numbers, and Leviticus.

-Mohammed clearly makes himself out to be a prophet, much as Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc., except Mohammed becomes the "super-prophet."

-Bans of pork consumption.

-Male circumcision.

The problems for the rest of the world:

-The Jewish faith does not try to conquer the world, only the Holy Land. Thus it infinitely less dangerous to the rest of the world than Islam.

-Jewish thought has discarded literal reading of much of the Bible, such as the punishments prescribed by G-d aforementioned. Occasionally something like the sucking of blood from infant penises comes up, but rarely. Islamic clerics still insist on literal readings of their 7th century holy book and its mores.

In other words, thank you, Jews, for giving us Muslims!

By the way, we are now past the halfway mark chronologically in our epic saga of the Nodrog on LGF. We are well more than half past the mark in terms of posts - the Nodrog's later efforts on LGF were 1) a bit lazier, as I realized that the lizardoids were truly incorrigible, and 2) a bit duplicative of my coloratura earlier performances, on the same topics. But there are still many gems to be dug up in the LGF dungpile!

Payback's a Bitch, Baby!

2008-05-30T09:50:00.001-07:00

In August 2005 the Cindy Sheehan phenomenon swept the nation. Charles and the Lizardoids were appalled, and on August 18, 2005, in "A Grieving Mother's Words," Charles approvingly quoted from another dead soldier's Mom taking the opposite tack from Cindy. I threw a rhetorical stink bomb into the fray early with my #5:

Swift Boat Shills = lies and distortions from the right = effective media campaign = hysteria and gnashing of teeth from left-wing spinmeisters at the unfairness of it all.

Cindy Sheehan = lies and distortions from the left = effective media campaign = hysteria and gnashing of teeth from Charles and right-wing spinners at the unfairness of it all.

PAYBACK'S A BITCH, BABY!

One of the first tries to refute me unfortunately (for the lizard nation cause) came from the inimitable taxfreekiller in #12. I gave the appropriate response in #14:

You're one wobbly spinner, dude.

After more lizardoid outrage, I fanned the flames further with #81:

"Wah, Wah, Cindy Sheehan and the LLL are using the same disgraceful, naughty, and dishonest tactics used by the Swift Boat Shills to destroy John Kerry! And it's Working!

MOMMIE, MOMMIE, MAKE THEM STOP!"

-channeling Charles, right wing blogging intellectual hypocrites and LGF lizardoid whiners-

Lance Kates (recently banned from LGF, apparently, after a long-time lizardoid run) tried to elevate the discourse in #99. In #107 the Nodrog would have none of it:

Lancekates: We're conservatives. we're better than that.

Ho Ho HO! Can you say "Swift Boat Shills?"

I knew you could.

This site is 100% proof that the loony right is no better than the loony left at hurling insults and making ad hominem attacks.

It's one of the reasons LGF threads have become blog laughingstocks.

Can you say "laughingstock?"

I knew you could.

Another lizardoid creature named Kafira posted in #98 and #106. I skewered her in #109:

#106 Kafira:

As a mother who buried her daughter, I say to Cindy Sheehan:
Don't make such a spectacle of yourself. Carry yourself with dignity.

Meanwhile, #98 Kafira:

This hoe lost all my respect the day that she ordered the Israeli's to remove themselves from "palestine". Hoe bag. And, ugly to boot. And, I bet she smells pretty rank too. Kinda like mikey moore's arse. P. U.

And they say I'm a collective?!? Kafira is either a collective or a veritable SYBIL!

Can you say "laughingstock?" I KNEW YOU $%#@) COULD!

The "Nodrog collective" theory had been making the rounds again on LGF.

The lizardoid insults sputtered on for a while. But "Kafira" didn't appear much after this episode!

The Big Lie

2008-05-29T16:35:00.001-07:00

Things were heating up in Israel as the Sharon Gaza pullout neared its climax. On August 11, 2005 Charles, squarely on the side of the "no-pullout" bunch, posted "Huge Prayer Vigil in Jerusalem," as 100,000 Jewish zealots prayed against the pullout from Gaza (formerly known as "Philistia" in the days of King David). In #24 Hector voiced tentative approval for the Sharon position, noting its benefits, and wondered what the "big picture" was that others on LGF against the Gaza pullout were seeing. In #64 I answered him:

Hector: The "big picture" you're missing is that God gave His Chosen People all the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, and that includes Gaza. The inconvenient 1 million plus inhabitants of this miserable bit of desert can either be "transferred" (ethnic cleansing), reverse-dhimmified into an apartheid state, or, if necessary, killed, just like the Canaanites were when Joshua and the Israelis moved in three thousand years ago.

It's a very similar mentality to that held by the Jihadists, don't you think?

This started the flames, with Zulubaby in #69 opining Go to Hell, Gordon. Soon. SoCalJustice gave a real answer as to why the Gaza pullout was a bad idea, but then SoCalJustice was that very rare commodity, a thinking lizardoid. I answered him in #93 with a thoughtful reply:

SoCalJustice: I acknowledge that there are legitimate strategic arguments for holding on to the Gaza settlements at this time. I happen to agree with Ariel Sharon that they are outweighed by the benefits of withdrawal, but I acknowledge your counter-arguments.

But 100,000 people at the Western Wall in a prayer vigil are, I suspect, for the most part not interested in strategic political arguments. Many if not most are religious zealots.

Thank G-d they are a small minority in Israel, unlike the vast majority of Palestinians who endorse Jihadist fantasies.

For Zulubaby though, I had another kind of response in #94:

Zulubaby, you have perfected the "Big Lie" technique with your anti-Gordon vitriol. You really have nothing worthwhile to add to this thread.

In #98 Zulubaby, amidst her insults, said that right-wing Israelis were not "zealots," but "religious people." I zeroed in for the rhetorical kill in #99:

So they're not zealots, they're "religious people?" By that definition, Hamas consists of "religious people" too.

Zulubaby = Big Lie.

Starting in #112, crazy Vickie joined the "Gordon is an anti-semite" bandwagon with her usual stultifying illogic. I mathematically summed up the logic in #121:

Zulubaby and Vickie formula:

Lack of 100% support for Israeli annexation of occupied territories
=
Jew hater.

THE BIG LIE.

Taco-short Rayra chimed in with #148 advocating a bloodless transfer by providing food and water and a clear route to the South into Egypt, then force their wholesale migration. Then Yankev joined the anti-Gordon Big Lie party in #187 with his pseudo-rabbinical quasi-intellectual meanderings about the true essence of the Nodrog. #201 was a classic reworking of the Vicki-Zulubaby Big Lie material. I then had a back and forth with Yankev about what to do in Gaza, and he of course equivocated and continued calling me an anti-semite. So I summed up for him in #289:

Don't agree with Yankev = Anti-Semitism.

THE BIG LIE.

Further outrage about the Nodrog's incisive language commenced, with Zulubaby, Vickie, and Yankev attempting a three-on-one intellectual mugging. But the Nodrog was not easily beaten, as is shown by my witty retort in #312:

Did I miss something?

Did Charles put up some sort of warning such as "Only Jews or people who oppose the Gaza pullout may comment on any thread having to do with Israel"?

And as to what has actually happened in Gaza? It appears that SoCalJustice was right - the Palestinians have once again seized a chance to ruin a possibility for peace and a Palestinian state with their usual gusto. The Qassams falling on southern Israel are proof of that. But since the Jewish settlers are gone, I have no problem with Israel massively retaliating in Gaza to a level beyond what they have done to date.

Rayra Exposed (Again)

2008-05-29T07:46:00.001-07:00

On July 11, 2005, Charles marked a sad anniversary, ten years after the Srebrenicza massacre in Bosnia in 1995. No snarkiness about Muslims, either. For the most part the lizardoids behaved themselves with appropriate dignity, with one notable, but not suprising, exception. The Nodrog, at the end of the thread, exposed the malefactor:

It's highly amusing when posters like Rayra, who on other threads rightly deride the left-wing "root causes" analysis of world events, start blathering about centuries of Balkan bloodshed to minimize and even justify the slaughter the Bosnian Serbs perpetrated on Muslims in Srebrenicza.

Thanks for posting this Charles. We can see who the real Lizardoids with humanity are, such as Really Grumpy Big Dog Johnson, vs. the poseur assholes like Rayra.

And here's Rayra's measured response from #244, in its full glory (a few words truncated for decency's sake): Gordon, you're a pimple on the ass of Western Civ - where in my comments do you see single f***ing attempt to 'minimize' anything. No hand waving, you mendacious ass - a QUOTE.

And a HUGE topic chock-full of historical information and linkages, and THAT mewling crap is your chosen conntribution. You have a deeply f***ed-up psyche, you freak.

Unfortunately for Rayra, he had left quite a smelly electronic trail on the thread, which I promptly exposed in #245:

Among Rayra's comments on this thread:

DIVERT ATTENTION AND BLAME THE MSM: #16:

as soon as I saw it was Srebrenica I was F'N OUTRAGED that CNN would suck off Islam in this manner after all but IGNORING the London terror-bombings over the weekend.

THE MUSLIMS DESERVED IT: #18:

I mean really, TO HELL with their '10 Year Anniversary' - Islam has given us YET ANOTHER Anniversary Date to track (7/7)

BRING IRRELEVANT MIDDLE EAST STUFF IN: #52:

Yep. Mufti of Jerusalem, as a guest of Hitler, helped form a Balkan-Muslim SS Division late in the War.

A RAYRA DIVE INTO "ROOT CAUSES" ANALYSIS SO BELOVED OF SOFTIE CRIMINOLOGISTS AND LEFT-WING APOLOGISTS FOR THIRD-WORLD DICTATORS: #61:

I think I just answered your Quest. And yes, it goes back to the dawn of recorded history. Persian invasions of Macedonia. Turkic Jihad and the collapse of the Byzantine / Eastern Roman Empire. Turkic Jihad against the region for nearly 800 years, wiht a high-water mark like the rest of the last Major Jihad, about 1492. Al-Andulus in Iberia, Gates of Vienna, Balkans, the Muslim defeat / collapse / decline swept across the entire breadth of the region.

IT'S REALLY THE MUSLIMS' FAULT, ONCE AGAIN #69:

He [Milosevic] deserves the punishment he is staving off, but his butchery in the Balkans was a Serb-Croat war that spilled over into Bosnia and its mulism population. A muslim population that had been hosting and supporting Seperatist violence for the entire 20th Century.

MORE RECENT "ROOT CAUSES" ANALYSIS, MIXED IN WITH ATTACKS ON DOMESTIC POLITICAL FIGURES: #104:

Well said. When the Warsaw Pact fell apart in the wake of Berlin '89 and the Soviet collapse, the course in the Balkans was already set. And the Euro's inability to perform, coupled with our being occupied elsewhere in '90-'91 guaranteed the Escalation had time to build. Then the absence of strong International Direction by the USA in teh rest of the decade - even and especially discounting the LLLib-touted Military-Politico Mastery of General Presidential Candidate TV Commentator Wesley Clark and his Air Campaign - We have the MESS we still have, wherein female US Army MPs are fired upon and murdered by their "fellow" Jordanian UN "Peacekeepers"

Rayra the as***le, outed by his own words.

It's clear why Rayra didn't want me on GCP - the truth hurts!

Sandra Day O'Connor's Greatest Hits

2008-05-28T16:44:00.000-07:00

On July 1, 2005, Charles posted the terse "O'Connor Retiring." Sandy was one of my favorite all-time Supreme Court Justices, so I decided to give some snippets from her wisdom to the irregulars, starting in #203:

A tribute to Justice O'Connor - her words of wisdom in the Ten Commandments cases:

Reasonable minds can disagree about how to apply the Religion Clauses in a given case. But the goal of the Clauses is clear: to carry out the Founders' plan of preserving religious liberty to the fullest extent possible in a pluralistic society.

By enforcing the Clauses, we have kept religion a matter for the individual conscience, not for the prosecutor or bureaucrat.

At a time when we see around the world the violent consequences of the assumption of religious authority by government, Americans may count themselves fortunate: Our regard for constitutional boundaries has protected us from similar travails, while allowing private religious exercise to flourish.

The well-known statement that "[w]e are a religious people" has proved true. Americans attend their places of worship more often than do citizens of other developed nations, and describe religion as playing an especially important role in their lives.

Those who would renegotiate the boundaries between church and state must therefore answer a difficult question: Why would we trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly?

A dose of Arizona common sense.

Another in #296:

Another O'Connor greatest hit, from Hamdi v. Rumsfeld - where she rejected Hamdi's demand to be given a full trial, but also rejected the government's demand to hold a U.S. citizen incommunicado indefinitely:

Striking the proper constitutional balance here is of great importance to the Nation during this period of ongoing combat. But it is equally vital that our calculus not give short shrift to the values that this country holds dear or to the privilege that is American citizenship. It is during our most challenging and uncertain moments that our Nation's commitment to due process is most severely tested; and it is in those times that we must preserve our commitment at home to the principles for which we fight abroad.

Sandra Day O'Connor will go down in history as one of the greatest Supreme Court Justices ever - not an ideologue, just a practical interpreter of the Constitution.

Another in #333:

A more recent O'Connor greatest hit, her dissent in the Kelo v. New London case:

Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result. “[T]hat alone is a just government,” wrote James Madison, “which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.”

A great justice, a great lady, retiring to spend more time with her ailing husband.

This thread also contained some Nodrog vs. Babbazee/Albertanator flames, and also a weird flame war (an ominous portent for certain lizardoids) between Reaganite and Jheka and some "newcomers." But the "greatest hit" of this thread was still Sandra Day O'Connor.

The Real LLL's (not the pale Nodrog imitations)

2008-05-28T08:02:00.000-07:00

On June 27, 2005, Charles posted "Moronic Convergence in Istanbul," about a ridiculous gathering of international leftists to "try" the U.S., led by lead moonbat Arundhati Roy. I put my two cents in with #48:

I heard Arundhati Roy once on some "progressive" radio station. I couldn't turn it off - it was the aural equivalent of watching a train wreck. She is a complete loon - a female Indian Noam Chomski. Even the left wing of the Democratic Party doesn't even get close to her virulence.

Soon after, in #52, a poster advocating assassination of Ms. Roy. I commented in #56:

Charles, you really don't need crap like #52 polluting your threads. Roy deserves ridicule, not assassination. When she goes to Iraq and tries to blow up something, then Kafirus might have a case.

My disgust was echoed by Zombie, BabbaZee and Bubble Girl, and the offending thread was deleted. Bubble Girl noted in #55 that she also spoke against the UN and found that "unusual." I responded with some perspective in #61:

Bubble Girl: You'd be surprised. A lot of these people are so whacked out they think the UN is part of the vast right-wing American capitalist conspiracy.

It tells me that perhaps the UN isn't quite as bad as it's made out to be, but I suspect you don't agree with me on this point.

She responded in #74, but in a measured way for an LGF irregular. Peace was breaking out on an LGF thread!

Meanwhile, Tim K. claimed that Roy was exhibiting typical Muslim behavior. I corrected him in #77:

Arundhati Roy's psychosis is not related to being a Muslim:
[Link to Wikipedia biography]

A Christian Mother and a Hindu Father. Her psychosis relates to dhimmitude, not Jihad.

In #89 Reaganite showed some humor, and also revealed a split in the LGF united front: Hey, whatever meds you're on today, could you pass some to TFK please? After a humorous response from the Nodrog in #97, he came back in #103 with Okay, where's the real nodroG and what have you done with his body?

The Peace was, as always on LGF, temporary.

Still a Disgrace to His Namesake

2008-05-27T17:03:00.001-07:00

On June 24, 2005, Charles posted "The Reality of Gitmo," linking to a first-hand account from a soldier there who called the Guantanamo prisoners "the worst of the worst." In #44 I asked the obvious question:

Then why have many of them been released because of lack of evidence or mistake?

The lizardoids responded mostly with abuse, or, as our old grumpo friend Reaganite accomplished in #49, a mixture of counter-argument and abuse: You mean the ones who have killed again and have been caught again you asshat? I responded in kind (but with a few more facts) in #100:

Reaganite: 660 held at Guantanamo. 202 released, 146 freed outright, 56 transferred to custody in their native lands.

"At least 10" have returned to the fight against the U.S. Probably more, but who knows how many. My guess is a small fraction - representing DoD mistakes in figuring out whether they were dangerous or not.

This guy called ALL the Gitmo detainees the worst of the worst. Either he's wrong, or the DoD is making scores of mistakes by mistakenly believing that they are releasing innocent people.

And now for my gratuitous insult. You're a disgrace to your namesake.

At this point the lizardoids knew they had lost and gave up the counter-arguments to concentrate on the insults. Reaganite himself answered in #116: Coming from you, that is probably the best compliment I have ever received on LGF. I guess he had been asleep when I had used that line before. In response to Reaganite's charge in #128 that I wanted to release all the Gitmo prisoners, I responded in #146:

Reaganite: I didn't say "release them all." I said try the accused ones before an international court for war crimes. Let the ones go where there's no case.

The time to hold them indefinitely is over. Charge them or release them.

More sundry abuse followed, including some from the Reaganite spouse (Ann).

Little did I know that Reaganite's days on LGF were numbered, as we shall see!

Rayra and Taxfreekiller - Spot the Difference

2008-05-27T08:15:00.000-07:00

They're loony in very different ways. But one similarity - they disagreed with Charles on this thread (perhaps the beginning of the death spiral for Rayra's ignominious LGF career). On June 22, 2005, Charles posted "For So Many Good Reasons," coming out against a ban on flag burning, although his reasons (that way we can smoke 'em out!) were less than ideal.

Starting in #69, Rayra came out in violent opposition, to wit: F**king made-up crapola, just like "separation of Church and State". That phrase ISN'T in the Constitution, either. "Freedom of Expression" is yet another attempt to broaden and distort. The Flag isn't just a piece of cloth, and there is NOTHING noble about a sh**ty display of ignorant self-indulgence that includes its destruction as an exercise in "Freedom of Expression". Burn the Flag-Burners.

Then in #89, Rayra further vented his rage against those that agreed with Charles, when he flamed #78 Psyduck with the following: Nice try, moron. It is an issue of RESPECT. That you either don't see that, or deliberate try to place the two cases as equivalent tells me all I care to know about you. Go to hell. To Bob24 in #68 he had the following thoughtful words: Nice contortion. Shove it along with your remarks about a Bush Theocracy. And then in #326 the Nodrog weighed in with a little pith:

Wow, Charles, you almost got unanimity on this eminently sensible post. And then that degenerate moron Rayra had to post and ruin everything ...

And now we come to villain #2 of this peace, Taxfreekiller. I give you his response in #327:

RE #00 AKA TORDO 326 "POST TOASTED PERSON ABOVE' LOOKS LIKE THE SPIN MASTER YOU ALL HATE SO MUCH HAS TAKEN OFF THE GLOVES OVER YOUR LITTLE ASS WIPE DICKLESS DRUBIN , SEEMS HE WENT TO A "CONSERTIVE GROUP" AND TOLD THE TRUTH,, THAT THE DEMONS AND THE LIBERIALS CARE MORE ABOUT A FEW "NUT CASE TERRORIST AT GITMO" THAN THE AMERICANS THE TERRORIST ARE KILLING IN IRAQ AND AFGANISTAND NOW THAT THE LINE IN THE SAND,, FIND A WAY TO BE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE LINE NOW.. other than that,, Lt. Kerry, Jane Fondle me, and Dickless, Polelestme your congress something from Clif. are all the same,,,,,, usefull fools who do not know what they do but,, here I am to explaine it to them

That's every word, by the way. In #328 I gave the final, and only response to TFK, as he was affectionately called: And

people say I forgot to take MY meds ...

Wanna bet today's lizardoids would be in favor of flag-burning bans with Rayra and TFK? (unless Charles were to opine otherwise again)

Fissures in the LGF Monolith of Idiocy

2008-05-25T16:44:00.000-07:00

Cracks started to appear among the illiterati, as exemplified in this June 22, 2005 thread entitled "Wednesday Miscellaneous Stuff." In #84 I provided a link once again to the Kerry service records issue, pointing to an article by Kerry supporter and fellow vet Jim Rassman on the fact the records had been released. But the lizardoids continued to promote the big lie that there were still secrets out there. In #94 I answered a meaningless taunt from Paxnhymn in #94:

A fellow vet wrote the article - when you trash Kerry you trash all this country's vets who served honorably.

But then, you don't really care about our veterans anyway, when they get in the way of your political ideology, do you?

These are ALL of Kerry's records, the supposed "smoking gun." There isn't even a spitwad here, much less a gun. You, 'nam Grunt, all the Swift Boat Shill veterans, and chicken-hawks like Charles owe Kerry and the nation a big, fat apology.

Still waiting ...

(crickets)...

But then, a new development broke out. In #182 LGF extremist (and that's EXTREME!) USMC Recon posted "all liberals are traitors," a favorite Nodrog taunt. This earned him a blistering reply from ... REAGANITE! Starting in #203, he really got into it with USMC Recon and W-lover, among others. You see, Reaganite's brother was a decorated veteran AND a liberal, so Reaganite knows that all liberals aren't traitors. (Sort of like, "all gays are evil, but the guys that live next door are great neighbors) But USMC Recon and W-lover didn't give in, so a full-fledged flame war erupted between the two factions of irregulars. When American Infidel innocuously posted in #227, Reaganite replied in #264 by calling her a "pompous cow." Bad blood, anyone? In #419 the Nodrog butted in:

Charles, the exchange between Reaganite, one of your original lizardoids, and complete loons like w-lover and USMC Recon show how low your blog threads have gone.

The word "laughingstock" comes to mind.

In #667 neo with anguish questioned Reaganite about his sudden turn. I provided an explanation in #680:

neo: Maybe it took Reaganite a little while to realize the yawning chasm of stupidity and bile encased in that statement.

"Hey, that's my brother the war hero they're talkin' about!"

In #863 I further summed up:

The whole Reaganite-W Lover/RECON thing is rich, rich, rich.

I compare the situation to the Republican party, 1964-1998. Reaganite is Barry Goldwater, a founder of the Republican/LGF movement. A path setter. A ground breaker.

By 1998 when he died Barry Goldwater was a dangerous liberal in the Republican party. He was pro-choice. When Jerry Falwell stated that any good Christian should be concerned about the nomination of Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court he replied that "any good Christian ought to go and kick Falwell right in the ass." He so enraged the crazies who had taken over the Arizona Republican Party that they removed his name from their headquarters.

W-lover and Recon are the crazies.

What a great metaphor for LGF!

Meanwhile, Ed the Weatherman started up the question of "who (or what) is the Nodrog? in #615, hypothesizing that either Nodrog shared his LGF password with a few of his LLL friends, or he used a community computer at the community college he attends in Oregon to visit LGF, and had the "remember me" cookies selected. Lancekates offered an alternative theory in #686: I still think Charles is Gordon (and just has a sick sense of humor), posting here to encite us because his day job isn't stressful enough. I think Lancekates was joking, but don't tell 1389 that! Or Ann, apparently, the wife of Reaganite, who according to her hubby agreed with the Lancekates theory! Hey, maybe ANN and 1389 ARE ONE AND THE SAME! (1389, noted Serbian genocidaire wannabe, was peddling this theory at Gates of Vienna a few months ago when the Nodrog cleaned her intellectual clock)

LGF Ad Hominem Cowardice - a Textbook Example

2008-05-23T16:11:00.001-07:00

Charles provided a textbook example of the LGF avoidance of substance and luxurious wallowing in ad hominem smears with "Fighting Against the War on Terror," on June 16, 2005. The article consisted of an approving link to a smear of Guantanamo opponents as communists. In #97 I exposed the tactic;

The classic McCarthyism, as updated by Charles and the Autonomist:

1. My opponents have made a principled argument to close Guantanamo, which I don't agree with.

2. Refuting their argument with counter-arguments is possible, but it's a lot of work.

3. I'm too lazy to do that work.

4. So instead, I'll counter with an ad hominem attack on their motives and background.

5. After all, such tactics worked for George Bush and the Swift Boat Shills, so I'm sure they'll work here.

Banking on the stupidity of the American people is a dangerous game, Charles.

The lizardoids response? Lame replies, inane insults, and defences of McCarthyism. The Nodrog wins again!

'Nam Grunt and LGF Kapo Wannabes

2008-05-23T08:15:00.000-07:00

On June 15, 2005, Charles posted "Wednesday Miscellaneous Links." After a lot of inconsequential stuff, the Nodrog brought some life to the party with #683:

'nam Grunt and Paxnhymn: As veterans, I think the LGF world would like to hear your viewpoint on the issue of: effective military and gay and lesbian soldiers: [Link to an article on MSNBC about gay soldiers being cashiered despite a shortage of military personnel].

But did the Nodrog get an answer? Ha! Here was 'nam Grunt's response in #688: Shut up! I'm not interested in your sexual repartee' today, traitor to your Country and idiot! I responded to the fascistic Texan (is that redundant?) in #695:

A tad defensive today, aren't we?

This is a legitimate story. The military is having trouble keeping recruitment up, keeping qualified specialists in the forces, and one of the reasons is anti-homosexual bigotry.

Which do you choose, a strong military or a heterosexually pure military? That's the choice, and throwing insults around like monkey poo won't make the choice go away.

I threw some more flames on the fire in response to 'nam Grunt's continued insults in #775:

'nam Grunt: Of course, how foolish of me. Who needs gay Arabic language translators and combat engineers, when all we need to kill 1.2 billion Muslims is a new nukes and some bloodthirsty Nazi-like Kapos?

The lizardoids picked up on the the Nazi analogy bait like flies to ... American Soldier responded with a threat in #784: come visit me. I'm really not hard to find. You are in serious need of an ass-kicking. If need be, I can track you down. Dianna in #806 also wanted to beat me up, as my "kapo" comment had left her "breathless." I explained, for the sake of the innocent bystanders, in #822:

Our soldiers aren't kapos.

But some on LGF advocate policies involving extermination of 1.2 billion Muslims that would make them so, if implemented.

Shame on LGF.

The viewpoint of the lizardoids was truly frightening sometimes.

Changing the Goalposts on John Kerry

2008-05-22T08:02:00.000-07:00

In June 2005, John Kerry released his service record from Vietnam, disproving the lies told about him by the Swift Boat Shills. It took a couple of days for Charles and the right wing blogosphere to figure out an angle to wriggle out of this mess, and Charles' post on June 9, 2005, "Did Kerry Really Release Military Records?" showed that they had come up with a counter-strategy. Which I exposed for what it was in Post # 96:

Right wing bloggos, spin, spin, spin.

Charles, you and your pajama-boy buddies are starting to rival Clinton's flunkies in your spin-meistering.

Kerry's records don't say what they're supposed to, so there must still be a coverup.

No preconceived notions here. Just move along ...

I blistered the dead-enders further in #133:

Sorry, LGF dead-enders, the Jig is Up.

The Swift Boat Shills will go down in history along with:

The ad agency that produced the nuclear bomb ad for Lyndon Johnson; AND
The 1884 Republicans who coined the phrase, "Ma, Ma, Where's My Pa, Gone to the White House, Ha, Ha, Ha; AND
Lee Atwater and his 1988 Willie Horton smear; AND
The Republicans in 1928 who said Al Smith was going to build a palace for the Pope across the Potomac in Virginia, with a secret tunnel to the White House;

AS AMONG THE BIGGEST CRETINS TO EVER INFECT A UNITED STATES PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN WITH THEIR VERBAL PUS.

And LGF goes along for the ride. Shame. Laughingstock.

But you were expecting logic and Nodrogian ridicule to shame the illiterati? Ha! For the rest of my LGF tenure I was plagued by lizard nimrods asking for a link to John Kerry's COMPLETE AND REAL Vietnam service record, not the obviously doctored and expurgated version (because it didn't jibe with their shibboleths) released by the Pentagon. I generally ignored them for the ignoramuses they were (and are).

More Lizardoid Outrage - and More Nodrog Fun

2008-05-21T07:57:00.001-07:00

On June 7, 2005, Charles posted "Outrage of the Day." Apparently (shocka!) the City of New York was devoting significant space in the WTC memorial site to a liberal-oriented museum funded by (double shocka!) ACLU, radical Columbia University professors, and ... George Soros After reading lizardoid bilge, I sarcastically posted in #158:

A memorial to the 9/11 disaster contains a group dedicated to preserving the rule of law and the freedoms that the terrorists were trying to destroy on 9/11.

The horror! The horror!

More fun from the Nodrog in #165:

You would rather have a Focus on the Family headquarters in the memorial? A group dedicated to imposing a pale version of Christian Sharia on the United States?

Or perhaps a National Rifle Association headquarters? Admittedly, they are dedicated to preserving our constitutional freedoms too, even if it kills a few thousand Americans every year.

In response to fake-pious nonsense from V the K in #169, I gave my final contribution to this thread in #179:

Well, since it's in New York, let's see what New York's citizens think about it, not what the people of Alabama or Oklahoma think.

I can just see the switchboards now (yes, a bit old fashioned, but ...)

(Caller)
"Hi y'all, Ahm frum Wayco Texas, and Ah thank yew should git rid of that commie crap put in by the Ay-See-Ell-Yew at the Nane Eleven site!

(Switchboard operator)
F__k off, Cracker!

The lizardoids had no good answers for me - even those that actually tried, like Lawhawk in #200. This "outrage" continued for a while on LGF, and the Nodrog was to have more fun with the easily-offended Lizard Nation.

Nodrog Turns the Tables, and (ta da!) TAXFREEKILLER

2008-05-20T16:41:00.001-07:00

On June 6, 2005, Charles posted "Blind AP Bias," which, after taking to task the evil MSM, went on to decry the cheekiness of Palestinians forming a t-shirt company. The Lizardoids started making up their own slogans for tee-shirts. In #48 I commented:

I'm happy to see that this T-shirt story has generated lizardoid ridicule, and not the usual calls to expel all Muslims from the U.S.

I turned the tables on the illiterati in #82:

In the spirit of fun and ridicule, here are some sample LGF t-shirt messages:

"I Support the Swift Boat Shills"

"The Crusades Were Awesome!"

"Palestinians? I Don't Care What Happens to Them"

"Milosevic and Karadzic Had the Right Idea"

"100 Million Dead Muslims? It's a Start!"

In response to an attack from Abu Messerschmidt in #80, I threw some more fuel on the fire in #85:

Abu:

Florida was stolen in 2000! The Swiftboat Vets were liars! Republicans conspired to disnfranchise minorities.

Three out of three, pretty good, Abu! Only one clarification: we will never really know who won Florida in 2000, because Bush and the Supreme Court stole the whole nation's election in 2000.

Meanwhile, a new Nodrog detractor had appeared on the scene, the one and only TAX FREE KILLER! His only saving grace? - he drove Reaganite crazy! Here in #157 I give you an example of his cogent prose:

#00 tordo aka nodrog, aka gordon, aka,"hey YOU TALKING TO ME"
run, tordo, run its taxfreekilling words and phrases,, run, run. logic only has meaning for those who are real and can think for themselfs, your at risk of failing yourself real bad, take some "classes in the art of War" and go and get shot at for say, 6 months in Iquak, then come back and "bray somemore of the donkey "quotes", after a little close combat,could be you would be able to see the "hand of alla about to "smite" you "just because".

We have some more encounters with this creature coming up in the Greatest Hits.

Outing Genocide on LGF

2008-05-20T08:09:00.001-07:00

On June 3, 2005, Charles posted "VDH: Our Strange War," glowingly linking to another Victor Davis Hanson column, this time on the perhaps-fatal "softness" of the West when facing Islamo-fascism. But, once again, Charles didn't read all the fine print. I helped him out in #7:

From the article:

Still, most in the Middle East wish simply to embrace the human desire for prosperity, freedom, and security within the umbrella of traditional Muslim society — and will support American efforts if (a) these initiatives seem to be successful, and (b) are not seen as American.

I've just outed VDH. On LGF he would be a dangerous accommodationist. We all, of course, know that his formula is impossible because ISLAM IS A DEATH CULT/PAGAN MOON WORSHIPPING/HUMAN SACRIFICING/CHILD RAPING monstrosity. And all Muslims, from Morocco to Indonesia, must be killed or converted.

I expect LGF dead-ender attacks on VDH to begin forthwith.

The lizardoid's response was two-fold. One one hand, idiots like greenmamba (#14) and Joel (#39) took my capitalized formulation and proclaimed it as truth! On the other hand, Yank in the EU claimed that LGF'ers didn't advocate genocide. In #22 I answered Yank:

The most recent notable outburst of genocide against Muslims advocacy on LGF: [Link to Post #158 from Iron Fist on the June 2, 2005 thread "Amnesty International Defends Gulag Absurdity"]

Get back with me after we kill 3 million of them. In all seriousness, people like you are rapidly convincing me that this plastic fist in a velvet glove in a silk glove approach is a complete waste of time.

Iron glove over hand of steel. Outlaw Islam, then erradicate it. That, I guarentee will end Islamic terror, and you are going to think badly about us no matter what we do. If you and Am-nasty International are going to consider us as bad as the Soviets, well, why not go ahead and be as bad?

Especially as killing all of them guarentees victory. Besides, you don't mind when the Chinese run slave-labor camps. Come to think of it, neither does Am-nasty.

Only Americans are evil. Everyone else is merely misunderstood.

Poitiers-Lepanto then stepped into it with #25: Muslim troll: muslims are not a race, a GENOS, so there can't be any advocacy for GENOcide. If I say: KILL ALL THE FASCISTS I am not talking about a genocide, I am talking about a war. Troll: ignorant and muslim, what a surprise! My response in #26 should have shut him up:

#25 Kosovo-Manzikert: OK, I agree, killing 1.2 billion people is not genocide. I guess that means the Holocaust wasn't genocide either, since Hitler was after a religious group.

Moron.

Meanwhile, Yank in the EU conceded at least some of my argument in #31. But others backed up Poitiers-Lepanto - claiming that since Hitler had targeted Jews as a RACE, it wasn't the same. Tell that to any Jewish converts who happened to end up at Auschwitz (assuming they survived). More ominously, by LGF logic, since Muslims would be killed because of their religion, not their race, that was OK. Sick, Sick, Sick.

Charles has clamped down on open calls for genocide on LGF - since Poitiers-Lepanto and Iron Fist are still posting on LGF, it can be assumed that they, unlike stubborn goons like Rayra, have decided to clean up their act.

LGF: Proud Member of the Pro-Torture Right

2008-05-19T16:42:00.000-07:00

On June 2, 2005, Charles slammed Amnesty International with "Amnesty International Defends 'Gulag' Absurdity." More and more revelations were coming out about the bad behavior of American troops. This thread once again showed the schizophrenic nature of the LGF response to this issue. I called out Charles in #13:

And you have no problem, Charles, trivializing and ignoring a real problem in your attempts to keep your ideological blinders on.

A mature understanding of Guantanamo would be that its operation in its current form causes:

a. An irresistible urge among some to abuse its detainees, because they have been given no rights under law.

b. A dis-service to the ideals we are fighting for, which say that all, even suspected terrorists, are entitled to rights under law.

Are YOU committed to the rule of law, Charles? Or do you think we have to fight dirty to win this one?

Quite a rogues gallery came out against the Nodrog in this one, starting with Paxnhymn in #29, who enthusiastically endorsed torture. I responded in #38:

Pax: So it's "La Torture" for you, eh Pax, baby? (Read "A Savage War of Peace" by Alistair Horne to get the reference, if you can put down your copy of Soldier of Fortune and your comic books)

The next victim of the Nodrog's rapier-sharp keyboard was Rayra, who posted his drivel in #235. I immediately responded in #236:

Rayra: Ad hominem attacks, the last refuge of scoundrels. Especially when everything else written by you is nothing but drivel. But I guess that's an ad hominem attack too...:)

In #246 I got back to facts:

How convenient for Lizard Nation to have Amnesty International to rag on for using hyperbolic language.

It allows Charles and Lizardoids to ignore or minimize the real problems.[Link]

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld yesterday defended the military's handling of detained terrorism suspects while acknowledging that some have been mistreated, ''sometimes grievously."

'Yes, there have been instances where detainees have been mistreated while in US custody, sometimes grievously, but consider these facts," Rumsfeld said yesterday. ''To date there have been approximately 370 criminal investigations into the charges of misconduct involving detainees" since Sept. 11, 2001. About 130 military personnel have been punished as a result of the investigations.

Any comment, Lizard nation? (Other than, "too bad we haven't abused more of them")

Back to Paxnhymn, who in #260 asked "Why do you hate the United States so much?" That was easy, as I showed in #266:

I love the United States. I don't particularly like idiots like you who are leading it in the wrong direction. But I don't hate even you.

Question for you:

Why does anyone who doesn't agree with your nonsensical views automatically "hate the United States?"

I then torqued off 'nam Grunt, who in #254 started demanding that Charles ban me, and followed up in #271 with a claim that Charles was losing advertising because of me! I gave it back to him in #280:

Nam Grunt: Charles my Texas dumba$$ mind works in good ways

Wrong.

do you think that the prospective advertisers would like to see folks like gordon pissing everyone off?

That's just what the blogosphere needs, a right-wing version of Daily Kos where contrary viewpoints get summarily deleted and their posters banned. Is that what you want?

I guess the answer to my last question is, "Yes, that's what I want. I want to remain in the cocoon of my own out-sized East Texas ignorance." You and Molly Ivins, mirror images.

Lizardoids, led my 'nam grunt, and including a new and almost completely incoherent lizardoid known as taxfreekiller, continued the barrage of abuse. But the Nodrog had gone on. I think I explained myself best in the following two posts, first in #273, responding to Athos:

#265 Athos: But instead of accepting that - you attempt to moralize and marginalize the efforts of the US Military

No, what I am marginalizing is the attitude of LGF wankery, which is a combination of the following two, rather divergent strains of thought.

"The MSM can't back up some of its facts, and Amnesty International uses hyperbolic language, so this problem doesn't really exist in any meaningful way." This is the view expressed repetitively by Charles and many LGF thread posters.

"The Muslims deserve it and more." This is a sentiment not expressed by Charles, but expressed freely by thread posters on any relevant thread, and I don't see Charles refuting or rebutting it in any way.

The abuse issues are a scandal. They are not anywhere near the magnitude Amnesty International implies when it uses the word "gulag," but they are a scandal nonetheless. I believe Rumsfeld when he says the DOD is investigating and prosecuting. I believe the majority of U.S. Army prison guards are behaving ethically and morally.

During World War II the U.S. knew that the Japanese were torturing and mistreating our POW's. But we didn't do the same to the Japanese POW's we captured. We were better than them. We held ourselves to higher standards. And we should hold ourselves to higher standards now and release or charge the Guantanamo prisoners.

And, on a more succinct and upbeat note, in #331:

#326 Fatal: I hold my nation to an almost infinitely higher standard of conduct than I do our terrorist enemies.

And I think we can still win this fight.

When it comes right down to it, the LGF brigade, and those they represent, are fundamentally pessimistic of the U.S., scared of the unknown, and willing to do anything, say anything, to protect their way of life, a way of life they clearly do not understand at all.

The Nodrog Picks on Poor Lil' Ol' Babbalouie

2008-05-19T08:08:00.000-07:00

Otherwise known as BabbaZee, the Outraged Spleen of Zion, apparent creator of a psychedelically psychotic website, and long-time proud member of the LGF lizardoid illiterati.

On May 19, 2005 Charles decided to whip up some anti-German outrage among a key segment of the illiterati with "Dresden Bombing is to be Regretted Enormously," reporting on an interview the German magazine Der Spiegel had with a British historian who had written a book on the subject. Charles got things spectacularly wrong in his interpretation, probably because he didn't bother to read the actual contents of the interview. After lizardoids fulminated for a while, I weighed in with #318 to stir the pot a bit:

So Charles, I guess you think the people of Dresden are to be condemned for not rejoicing, "Thank you, Allied Bombers, for turning my entire family into crispy critters! I really appreciate it!"

Do you think the relatives of Holocaust victims should also show appreciation?

Quark2 jumped all over me immediately, and I responded in #324:

But put it this way, quark2 (and other LGF'ers who care to think about it):

If I am an average German (not an active Nazi), and my entire family is incinerated at Dresden, or Hamburg, or wherever, by an allied bombing raid, should I feel any different than a Jew whose entire family is murdered at Auschwitz, or Treblinka, or any of the other death camps?

Babbazee (whom I affectionately refer to as Babbalouie) went ballistic (see #325 through #327, which read as follows: First you have to learn how to feel. You moral equivocating jew hating piece of s**t. Did the jews form an army and invade ? Did they try to take over the world? What f***ing planet do you come from as***le? I didn't give any ground, further using my poking stick with #328:

Babbazee: Well, I know your answer.

"Thank you, Allies for incinerating my family, three months before the war ended when we knew Germany was toast! It's just that ... when I said "toast," I didn't mean for you to take me literally."

Babbazee continued in the same vein in #330 and #331, so I dashed off #334 in response:

So who do you want to kill first, all the Arabs, or all the Germans?

And in #345 I asked once again:

And, I repeat my question. If you were an ordinary non-Nazi German in February, 1945, having left Dresden for some reason or ano0ther, and returned to find your entire extended family burned to a crisp, would you be happy that the Allies were liberating you from Nazi tyranny?

buzzsawmonkey in #343 answered with the "collective guilt" mantra about Germany, so I came back in #348:

buzzsawmonkey: 60 million Germans were "monsters?" Then perhaps we should have just killed them all.

I have also read a lot about the Nazi era in Germany, and in addition I have directly communicated with many individuals who lived through that period. "Enthusiastic support" is not what most Germans gave their Nazi government. They gave their government the minimum obedience necessary to prevent the Gestapo from knocking on their doors.

So, if I were asking about the reaction of a senior Nazi Minister of Propaganda official, or a member of an SS Einsatzgruppen battalion, my question would indeed be an obscenity. But I wasn't.

I summed up in #349:

As usual, my words have been twisted by the LGF dead-ender brigade. I don't condemn the Dresden bombing. But I don't celebrate it either. I think this British historian has the story just about right.

Roach took my side in #350, and I gave him kudos (and slammed the rest of LGF) with my #356:

Roach: Don't you see? If you can glorify the mass slaughter of tens of thousands of Germans because of what they did to others, then you can justify the mass slaughter of hundreds of millions of Muslims because of what al qaeda and Hamas have done.

That's the LGF way, baby.

And now things got maudlin. In #365 Babbazee reverted from being the "outraged spleen of Zion" to being the poor picked on ghetto Jew - a shameless post, really. I responded, gently under the circumstances, in #370:

I am not targeting you, any more than I target anyone on LGF who decides to insult me instead of engage in argumentative dialogue.

You may not have openly spouted Islamo-genocide like some on LGF do, but you are part of the amen chorus.

Babbazee, nee Babbalouie, has now banned me from her site. Her loss, not mine.

Another LGF Chappaquiddick Feeding Frenzy

2008-05-16T09:06:00.001-07:00

As Captain Kirk said about Khan in "Star Trek II," "I'll say this for him: he's onsistent." On May 16, 2005, Charles posted "The Profile in Courage Award," noting that the Kennedy Library had given its annual award to the soldier who revealed the first Abu Ghraib photos to military investigators. A long a depressing extended lizardoid diatribe ensued, with a few acid contrary potshots from the Nodrog thrown in. In #381 I acidly and succinctly summed up this thread:

And, to get back to my original post, this thread is a classic LGF laugher. Lots of comments about Ted Kennedy's Chappaquidick tragedy, and the only question of the day is whether Sgt. Darby is himself a traitor is merely a dupe of MSM traitors.

Pathetic.

In response to the usual Reaganite trash in #383, I replied in #388:

Reaganite: Read the whole thread, nauseous post by nauseous post.

That is, if you're literate.

It certainly was a tragedy for Mary Jo Kopechne and her family. It wasn't enough of a tragedy for Kennedy, since he wasn't prosecuted, but it did destroy his chances to be President of the United States.

And, of course, it's completely irrelevant to the issue Charles posted about on this thread. But that doesn't stop the Kennedy-haters from bilging up their vile verbal vomit.

And then, this classic summary from the golden keyboard of the one and only Nodrog in #405:

Typical LGF:

A thread about an award given to the Abu Ghraib Sgt. who did his duty.

Half the LGF yo-yos say he is a traitor.

The other half say he is a tool of MSM traitors.

And the name "Kennedy" in the award brings out the Chappaquidick ad hominem LGF attack dogs again. Never mind that the name "Edward Kennedy" does not appear in the original article.

And then someone (me) calls this thread for what it is. BOO HOO! MOMMY MAKE THEM STOP IT!

LGF was (and still is) pretty predictable!

LGF's Upset Because Muslims are Upset

2008-05-15T16:56:00.001-07:00

On May 11, 2005, Charles posted "Muslims Upset Over Maryland School Calendar" because it didn't include any Muslim holidays as days off, like Christmas and Yom Kippur. According to Charles, Muslims were "seething and demanding special treatment." I succinctly demolished his argument in #3:

If there are more Muslims than Jews in the Baltimore City schools, and the schools close for Yom Kippur, then they should close for the Muslim Holidays too.

Christmas doesn't count because it is during the winter holiday season anyway.

The Lizardoids went nuts - but the iron-clad logic was hard to wriggle out of. Titus in #21 tried a pointless insult. Owl in #53 riffed on "the Muslims are coming! The Muslims are Coming!" Westoner in #65 replied that Islam wasn't a religion, it was a death cult, and should be outlawed. Note one of the first appearences of the excrescence known as "Jammie Wearing Fool," spouting nonsense in #66. I finally responded in #303, with more words of wisdom:

This whole flap shows the problem with entangling church and state, and it's why we have the establishment clause of the First Amendment. James Madison and the gang saw this coming.

The replies didn't get any better. A new and proud member of the illiterati named Jehu made a blood-curdling reply in #308. #312 ktindavie replied that of course America was, and should be, a Christian state. I replied to him in #318:

ktindavie - meet James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, numbnuts.

And if you want a Christian state, go to Great Britain and your taxes will go toward paying the Archbishop of Canterbury's salary.

We don't want your kind running this country. Never have. Never will.

What a combination, Islamohatred and Christian fundamentalism. But while the later was just a portion of the LGF coalition, the former was (and is) the uniting theme.

LGF to Muslims: Heads I win, Tails you lose

2008-05-15T08:10:00.001-07:00

On May 9, 2005, Charles displayed a new Islamohating trick when he posted "Robot Camel Jockeys." Apparently in a little known Muslim depredation, young boys were forced to race camels in the Arab Emirates - after criticism, the Emirs proposed to replace the boys with robots. But Charles didn't give any plaudits for this move. I expressed by initial revulsion in #23:

Is this the best you can do to spin your foul Arab-hatred, Charles?

Spitloads of vitriol spewed from the illiterati, claiming I supported child abuse of the camel jockeys among other unpleasantries, and the lizardoids got off into one of their existential anti-Nodrog sessions once again. I explained myself further in #154, supplying the essence of Charles' tricks:

Well, well, well, I guess my little post in #23 has spawned quite a Gordo-hatred thread here. And they say I derail threads?

My point, if you are at all interested, is that the story consists of the United Arab Emirates ENDING this practice of child abuse.

Charles then nastily says, "they aren't doing this because of their consciences, they're doing it because of foreign criticism."

Charles, if the emirate residents had no consciences, they would be impervious to foreign criticism. They would tell the world to go take a hike. But they didn't. So they have at least some consciences, which were obviously pricked by the legitimate criticism of their abusive behavior.

By your logic Charles, if Saudi Arabia becomes a democratic state in the near future, it's because of foreign criticism, not because the House of Saud has any conscience at all.

That's a nice setup, Charles and LGF Loser Lizardoids. Condemn a barbarous Arab/Muslim practice, and then when it's rectified, claim they only did it because of foreign pressure and they're still scum.

Sounds like an excuse to eventually nuke Mecca to me.

Sometimes, LGF makes me sick to my stomach.

Lizardoid slams continued, so I finished them off, using #170 USA as a convenient foil, with #186:

USA:Let me get this straight:

Persian Gulf nations engage in barbarous child abuse.

World outrage commences.

Persian Gulf nations promise to end barbarous child abuse.

World outrage continues, because the practice continues.

Persian Gulf nations agree to completely end barbarous child abuse through the use of robot jockeys.

And the LGF response? Condemnation.

A couple of nights ago I watched Hotel Rwanda. Thirty years of vicious, virulent anti-Tutsi propaganda led to the most time-concentrated genocide in world history.

I see the same kind of virulent hatred on this site.

Anti-nodrog outrage continued. The lizardoids still didn't get it.

Nodrog v. Yankev

2008-05-14T16:22:00.000-07:00

No, it's not a famous Supreme Court case, it's the battle of the intellectual giant Nodrog against someone with at least a modicum of intellectual counter-firepower, the one and only Yankev.

On May 8, 2005, Charles posted "Everybody Loses in Sharon's Gaza Plan," pointing out that, in addition to 6,000 angry settlers, the Palestinians would lose economically as well (true enough). But soon a flamewar broke out between Octopus and Zulubaby and her anti-semite screamers. In #184 I indicated whose side I was on:

Don't worry, Octopus. I have no idea whether you are really an anti-semite or not (based upon my limited reading of your posts I doubt it), but if you don't toe the line on LGF as a Muslim-hater, and recognize the right of Israel to colonize from the Jordan to the Sea, reverse-dhimming, transferring or ? all of the non-Jews within this area, then you, too are a Jew-hater, according to the expert, Zulubaby, and her minions such as Ploome Heinie. Yankev is much more intellectual in his putdowns, but he's sort of a Jewish Benedict XVI, only with harder edges.

Yes, Yankev, a Jewish bigot, but one with a brain, unlike banshees Zulubaby and Ploome and BabbaZee. But before we get to the prime attraction of this thread, a little sum-up common sense from the Nodrog in #188:

Back on topic: When the Palestinians of Gaza welcome back Israeli settlers to help them run plants, create jobs and economic wealth, and make for a prosperous Gaza, then we'll know the Palestinians have come to their senses.

Unfortunately, we have a LONG wait ahead of us.

But the Nodrog was in the building, so the off-topic attacks began. Yankev replied in an erudite sarcastic manner in #189: Why thank you, Gordon. I'm glad you think that I want to be true to the teachings of my religion instead of twisting it for the convenience of those who do not believe in it.Although unlike the Pope, I make no claim to infallibility. I can see where you and Octopus have a lot in common; you both think you know more about what the Jewish religion believes than the believers in that religion do.

And Zulubaby was true to form in #191: Gordon is here to hump octopus' leg. Charming. In #197 she demanded that Charles bring back Bigel and ban me in his place!

But Yankev is the topic of this post. He answered Octopus in #223, and I replied to him in #234:

Yankev: You acknowledge (thankfully) that parts of the Biblical text are basically ignored. That's something people coming from a fundamentalist Christian perspective cannot understand. They have been taught that every word of the Bible is inerrant truth, rather than the imperfect writing (and translating over the millenia) of God's commands, thoughts, wishes, actions, by fallible human beings.

And it always gets me when LGF numbskulls quote all the nasty, and ridiculous passages from the Koran, and then argue that this makes Islam irredeemably bad. Just as the vile punishments suggested in Deuteronomy, the Canaanite genocide in Joshua, do not mean Judaism is a "gutter religion," the same goes for the Koran and Islam.

And, yes, too many Islamic zealots truly follow all the nasty and ridiculous passages from the Koran (or, more accurately, from the Hadiths and derivative documents). Islam is a much younger religion, and its adherents are still "working a lot of things out," just as Jewish rabbinical scholars did over centuries and centuries. Unfortunately, we have to kill of lot of Islam's proponents who are "working things out" on the rest of the world, but when we're done, Islam will be a respectable world religion just like Christianity and Judaism.

While Zulubaby and Babbazee kept up the inane abuse, Yankev pontificated on a higher level. In #361 I pounced on one of his statements:

Yankev: there is no such thing as a woman rabbi in Torah Judaism. See, you ARE a Jewish Benedict XVI!

In response to Yankev's #379, I pointed out some problems with his faith in #387:

Yankev: The term lady of the house has become unfashionable. The Hebrew term is more instructive, as is often the case -- akares habayis -- the ESSENCE (or essential or matter of primary importance) of the house.

All of your erudition and learning cannot hide the fact that you, like Pope Benedict XVI and most Muslim clergy, are a misogynist. The idea that complete and detailed study of 73 volumes of Talmud can tell you that women cannot be rabbis means either that the Talmud is a product of fundamentally misogynistic scholars, or that you are misreading the texts. Given the fact that reform Judaism ordains (or whatever it is called) female rabbis tells me that your interpretation of the Talmud is mistaken.

BabbaZee opined in her own unique (and fortunately not replicable) way in #391: So-called reform Judaism is not Judaism. It is Boca Raton, bagels, the upper west side, JAPS and Seinfeld. FEH I responded to her in #410:

BabbaLouie: As a liberal Christian, I'm used to the fulminations of Bible Belters telling me I'm going to rot in Hell for not following their camped and often ridiculous version of what Christianity is truly about.

It's always both refreshing but ultimately disheartening to know that such nonsense afflicts other world religions as well.

I shut her down further in #412: #392

Babbababble:Ever see an Islamic woman run one of their countries? I thought not.

Megawati Sukarnoputri in Indonesia
Hasina and Begum in Bangladesh
Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan.

Boy, are you IGNORANT.

And, in case you are literate, please peruse my previous post when I stated that most Islamic clergy suffer from misogyny. It is disheartening to see their brutal suppression of women mirrored in a pale, weakened light, by the the intellectual pontifications of Yankev and Pope Benedict XVI.

Yankev kept up the intellectual attacks throughout, and I caught him in #414:

#393 Yankev:

But that's okay, Gordon. You have your stereotypes of Jews and Judaism, and far be it from me to disturb them. To you, Judaism is a bloody, misogynistic, tribal gutter religion, and the only good Jews are the ones who abandon it for the modern god of liberalism. Well, you are in good company.

And I thought PATRIOTISM was the last refuge of scoundrels. On LGF, it's anti-semitism. If you can't distinguish my thoughts and words from those of an anti-semite, I seriously doubt the validity of any insight you may have gained from any spiritual text of any sort.

Yankev was a persistent arguer - he continued, but he eventually reached the intellectual dead end that all erudite religious bigots eventually reach. But, despite my disagreements with him, he was a worthy opponent for THE NODROG!