en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/318577 Comments by gekkobear http://www.komonews.com/news/local/121445219.html#IDComment150334497 Aw, we deported him (after committing crimes) and he succumbed to the crime culture (that he otherwise would have had no idea of, even though he was a habitual criminal) and now he's been forced to a life of crime and murder because we deport people? That seems to be the way the article was written. Lets try a different take though... because we fail to secure our border with Mexico, this guy has crossed the border multiple times, and has killed hundreds of people in his crimes; and we still don't take this sort of thing seriously enough to secure the border. Of course my overview doesn't have the benefit of trying to humanize and empathize with a psychotic mass-murderer; but I think it might be more valid. How many times does someone have to commit crimes before you realize they're a criminal, and will keep committing crimes (and generally worse ones as they go)? Apparently the answer is "several" for The State of Washington (they don't list how many crimes he committed before being deported), and "we'll never figure that out, what are you saying" for the AP reporters and editors. Mon, 9 May 2011 15:52:22 +0000 http://www.komonews.com/news/local/121445219.html#IDComment150334497 http://tv.breitbart.com/pelosi-republican-budget-will-force-seniors-into-starvation/#IDComment140276836 And all we need to do is to steal another couple trillion dollars from the next generation to pay for it. Tell your kids that they'll need to work harder, get less, and have no economic services from government because we spent it all; but we had to... for "compassion". that's why we robbed them blind. Or don't tell them; I'm sure they'll figure it out once interest payments on the debt becomes the largest single item the government has to pay for... yes, lets spend more than 150% of revenue. We must compassionately rob from the next generation. What will they do about the debt we load up on them? Screw them, we're worried about compassion NOW! Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:42:55 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/pelosi-republican-budget-will-force-seniors-into-starvation/#IDComment140276836 http://tv.breitbart.com/pelosi-republican-budget-will-force-seniors-into-starvation/#IDComment140276180 Ok, so the Christian thing to do is to steal another trillion dollars from the next generation to pay for stuff we can't afford now? You're looking to steal the earnings of children not old enough to vote; so they'll have nothing but we can live the good life now? the only "Christian" answer is to rob children blind so we can spend their future earnings now? Exactly what form of morality encourages stealing from children? I didn't realize taking candy from babies was a good thing that we should aspire to achieve... Why are you looking to borrow on the backs of the children rather than working to live within your own means? Do you do this with your family? Are you looking to die with as much debt as humanly possible to pass on to your own kids as well? What kind of sick freak works to steal from kids exactly? Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:39:37 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/pelosi-republican-budget-will-force-seniors-into-starvation/#IDComment140276180 http://tv.breitbart.com/pelosi-republican-budget-will-force-seniors-into-starvation/#IDComment140275311 So we can starve seniors, or we can steal trillions of dollars from the next generation and stave them instead. You have to choose. Do you save the old people, or do you save the children. Cut spending, get back to a fiscally responsible nation, quit spending more than we can afford. DO IT FOR THE CHILDREN!. Or is that slogan only acceptable to get more funding for extra 6-figure school administrators who will never actually work with kids? Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:35:07 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/pelosi-republican-budget-will-force-seniors-into-starvation/#IDComment140275311 http://biggovernment.com/jjmnolte/2011/03/17/20-days-of-left-wing-thuggery-in-wisconsin-when-will-obama-democrats-and-msm-call-for-civility/#IDComment136156097 Right, so the death threats are perfectly reasonable. If a conservative does something you don't like; vandalize his property and call for his death... does that work both ways? I guess calling for the death of your political opponents is ok now? Well it looks like we're on opposite sides of a political argument. Go ahead and call for my death... seeing as that's now reasonable (at least on your side of the political aisle). But the point here is clear. Don't call for the death of people who oppose you politically; then think calling for "civility" will mean a damn thing to anyone. The fact that you can't see this even when it's clearly shown to you does say something... but I don't think you need to die simply for being wrong. Sorry for my shameful thinking that you don't need to die for having a differing political opinion from mine. Sun, 20 Mar 2011 02:17:17 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jjmnolte/2011/03/17/20-days-of-left-wing-thuggery-in-wisconsin-when-will-obama-democrats-and-msm-call-for-civility/#IDComment136156097 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/02/21/university-of-wisconsin-medical-school-launches-investigation-of-doctors-fake-sick-notes/#IDComment129691301 Set me up a prescription for Percocets for my "Walker Pneumonia"... it's a pretty serious case, I may need a refill. Why not? The "Doctors" here have basically admitted they'll commit fraud for political gain; I'm assuming for minimal financial gain they'll commit more fraud... why would I assume otherwise? Mon, 21 Feb 2011 21:42:06 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/02/21/university-of-wisconsin-medical-school-launches-investigation-of-doctors-fake-sick-notes/#IDComment129691301 http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/politics/lugar-to-tea-party:-%22get-real.%22#IDComment126984208 Right, giving up missile defense technology is a good thing; we don't want any defense against future attacks. Or is that "from ignorance"? I got that from the interpretation of the treaty by the Russian Parliament... are they ignorant of the treaty they signed? Or did we just sign away any right to defense with anyone in return for a limited reduction treaty with one nation? Hey, doesn't Israel do this on a regular basis? Have a treaty with Hamas, then get attacked by the PLO; have a treaty with the PLO and get attacked by Hamas... I guess it's just my ignorance that I consider there a possibility that our next serious war might not be against Russia... weird that allowing for a circumstance aside from this one is ignorance, and being intelligent is having all your eggs in one basket with no contingency plans. And I guess if you don't want your home robbed; you should get a big sign clarifying that you don't own any guns, won't defend yourself, and will accede the wishes of any threat... go ahead and try that if you like; I'll try a different method. Wed, 9 Feb 2011 21:18:21 +0000 http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/politics/lugar-to-tea-party:-%22get-real.%22#IDComment126984208 http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/politics/lugar-to-tea-party:-%22get-real.%22#IDComment126983284 So, what does the START treaty do? Reduce Nuclear weapons? Not according to Russia's interpretation. They've clarified they're below the "target" in their eyes. So the treaty is to reduce US nuclear weapons unilaterally while allowing Russia to build a larger stockpile if they choose to do so... and we needed already to force our hand while doing nothing to Russia. Why do we need a treaty to limit only our actions? We're destroying no missiles aimed at us, reducing Russia's stockpile by 0, allowing them to build more missiles if they choose to do so; and limiting our military capabilities. Good plan. "[I'm] trying to take warheads of Russia [out of circulation] so they won't hit Indiana." Well, given the Russian interpretation of the treaty you worked so hard on, you failed miserably and handed over a concession for no gain whatsoever on your goals. Either you have different goals and are lying; or you're incompetent at achieving even a minimal partial success on your solitary goal. Any guesses which it is? Is he successful in a plan designed to damage the US while not limiting Russia? Or is he an incompetent failure? And if we keep working toward a missile shield or anti-missile technology we'll be in breach of the treaty. So let Russia get more missiles, limit ours, and stop trying to defend against missiles at all. That is how Lugar wants to defend us. Hey, lets try that on home defense. Give the criminals more guns; limit the guns of cops, take all guns away form homeowners to prevent any sort of "shield" there and we'll be safer... right? I mean arming your opponent, while limiting your armaments and defense is a good strategic plan for defense now; why don't we do this everywhere. Maybe do this to the security of Congress and Congressional Representatives first, since their defense is so important we'd want to focus on this critical bit of safety... wouldn't we? Wed, 9 Feb 2011 21:11:56 +0000 http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/politics/lugar-to-tea-party:-%22get-real.%22#IDComment126983284 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/19/blood-libel-left-wing-conspiracy-theories/#IDComment122366001 <quoted section from other news sites> But Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) took the debate to a new level late Tuesday night, suggesting to an empty House floor that Republican rhetoric around health care reform is akin to Nazi propaganda that fed anti-Semitism during World War II. “They say it’s a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels,” Cohen said, referring to a Nazi propagandist. “You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That’s the same kind of thing.” <endquote> From today... any bets whether Rep. Cohen gets attacked for using "Blood Libel" by all these talking heads? You think MSNBC is going to call this guy out? Or will they somehow miss a very public usage by an elected official of this most horrific term that cannot be used? Wed, 19 Jan 2011 21:23:33 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/19/blood-libel-left-wing-conspiracy-theories/#IDComment122366001 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a03843bc6289f00ba74faca28ff52cf9.1e1&show_article=1#IDComment116206541 Finally my work can proceed. Thank goodness Obama has lifted the bans on my important scientific work. Anyone who wants to see my progress should look into coming out to the island here in a couple years. - Sincerely, Doctor Moreau. ... Although my work will likely be done sooner; as I have fewer hurdles to clear, and an assistant that can help me out with procurement and some of the tricky parts. - Doctor Victor Frankenstein ... In all seriousness; does anyone think this will end well? Thu, 16 Dec 2010 17:21:26 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a03843bc6289f00ba74faca28ff52cf9.1e1&show_article=1#IDComment116206541 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9IBTU000&show_article=1#IDComment100108032 Clearly the Republican Leadership should decide that voters don't count, primaries are useless, the "smart backroom deal types" pick the candidates, and therefore support her... Doesn't that sound like a good strategy to go with during an election cycle where the anti-Government force is strong, the populace dislikes incumbents, and the disdain for the "political elite" making decisions that overrule popular opinion is at an all time high? Murkowski should definitely run on a platform of complaining that some elected Representatives are still listening to the people they're elected to represent; instead of grabbing power for the elite as she thinks they should. She'll win in a landslide with this sort of proactive, forward-thinking agenda. Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:04:37 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9IBTU000&show_article=1#IDComment100108032 http://biggovernment.com/jhoft/2010/07/08/caught-on-tape-racist-naacp-leader-says-kenneth-gladney-not-black-enough-to-protect-hes-an-uncle-tom-video/#IDComment86514958 Ok, so a black man being friends with a "European" is inappropriate and wrong? For the good of the African-Americans I know and are friends with, I should ostracize them and inform them to "keep to their own kind" otherwise they're an "Uncle Tom"? See then it isn't that I don't like black people; I just don't hang out with any of them ever and avoid them to avoid making them look bad by being with me... wait, what? Why is it that acting as this man wants is apparently both the correct response per the NAACP, and one of the most blatantly racist things I could think of doing? Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:43:23 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jhoft/2010/07/08/caught-on-tape-racist-naacp-leader-says-kenneth-gladney-not-black-enough-to-protect-hes-an-uncle-tom-video/#IDComment86514958 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9GMV7EG0&show_article=1#IDComment84272079 Manufacturing sales? Down Private sector jobs? Down. Percentage of the country working or looking for work? Down. GDP? Down. Consumer confidence? Down How are things going? They're looking UP... right? This is the right direction? I guess if we can get all of those things to hit zero we'll be there... Fri, 2 Jul 2010 17:35:00 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9GMV7EG0&show_article=1#IDComment84272079 http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/supreme-courts-gun-ruling-was-good-for-democrats/#IDComment83504264 Well, that's one issue down; but they've got more easy targets they could hit. If they secure the border they'll have another one down. Reform Social Security and medicare they'll have another one. Spending cuts to get debt and deficits back under control they'll clear yet another one. Hey they can get a lot of these issues off the table. Think how big a win for the Dems it would be if they'd just do the ones listed above... it'd be huge. What? Sure this post sounds absurd, but it follows the logic of the ruling helping Dems... I'm just looking for ways to "help dems" a little bit more. Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:17:04 +0000 http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/supreme-courts-gun-ruling-was-good-for-democrats/#IDComment83504264 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.0513d49acfc29bc63d3ee39de8bd3b71.dc1&show_article=1#IDComment77354526 I'm not sure why anyone would think differently. Who has ever heard of using military troops to defend a country? That's just a crazy plan that would never work. Thu, 27 May 2010 17:33:31 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.0513d49acfc29bc63d3ee39de8bd3b71.dc1&show_article=1#IDComment77354526 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9FQDVU02&show_article=1#IDComment76418723 Ok, so I have 10 employees avg. $25,000 and I get the max. for health care premium benefits. If I give someone a raise, or hire a new employee, I not only have to pay more; but I lose the tax cut taking even more from my bottom line. Giving more raises or hiring more people after that punishes me further. How exactly does the economy benefit from a tax cut designed to encourage small employers to avoid any new hires or raises? Or am I supposed to ignore the added cost of giving any raises or doing any hiring? Is the assumption that people running small businesses can't do math, or that they don't like money? Thu, 20 May 2010 20:22:55 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9FQDVU02&show_article=1#IDComment76418723 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9ENAG1O0&show_article=1#IDComment64545500 "Conservative columnist Andrew Breitbart disputed accounts that tea party activists in Washington shouted racial epithets at black members of Congress amid the health care debate, although he didn't provide any evidence. " So, Person A claims X occurred. Person B claims it didn't. The burden of proof is on Person B to PROVE that something didn't happen? Really? Either prove a negative or shut up and let us call all of you RACIST! Well there's some beautiful unbiased journalism... roughly the quality I've come to expect from the major media outlets. MICHAEL R. BLOOD Once said the most hateful racist and inappropriate thing I've ever heard... and unless he can prove that this didn't occur (and I'm not giving any more details) then he's a racist. that's how it works, right? Hope you've got audio or videotape for your entire life Michael, otherwise you can't disprove my statement; and you're now branded a racist for all time. Unless you'd like a different form of logic to be required for proof? Mon, 29 Mar 2010 03:27:50 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9ENAG1O0&show_article=1#IDComment64545500 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9EMDLA81&show_article=1#IDComment64238753 "Obama will end the sway of the capitalists..." Um, you meant "capitalism". He's looking at the economic genius of North Korea and Zimbabwe where everyone is equal in their misery, suffering, starvation and death (except the ruling class of course). Brilliant plan, but didn't he run on being fiscally responsible, lowering the deficits, and tax cuts for 95% of the country? Sure he was lying; but are we supposed to assume the entire country knew he was lying? Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:35:30 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9EMDLA81&show_article=1#IDComment64238753 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9EMDLA81&show_article=1#IDComment64238249 Are you seriously comfortable with deciding the Constitution doesn't mean what it clearly says, you can just ignore it, and the writing in it is useless. If you want to Amend the Constitution to change the rules, that would be the correct way to have done this. Are you sure you're a Libertarian, or was your posting name chosen to be ironic? Maybe in your world you decide "Congress shall make no law ... abridging freedom of speech" , means that Congress must make laws abridging the speech of others so you can be heard; and if Congress doens't make laws abridging the speech of others it would be awful. Most people don't live in opposite world. Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:31:39 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9EMDLA81&show_article=1#IDComment64238249 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9DAMEQ80&show_article=1#IDComment52800292 "Former President Bill Clinton urged House Democrats last week to do a better job of telling voters how the legislation would help them" Yes, but still work to reconcile, write, and pass the bill in complete and utter secrecy. Nobody may see the specific details of the bill, or the debate adding in the new bribes to get it passed... you'll find out what is in the bill when your political betters want you to know, and not before. Weird that people aren't thrilled with a secret bill being passed behind closed doors that will directly affect their health care. You'd think being controlled by shadowy figures driven by graft and corruption would be more popular. Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:39:48 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9DAMEQ80&show_article=1#IDComment52800292