I've come up with my word:

Fuck.

But I still believe
And I will rise up with fists!!

I think you mean "prayerful consideration." Eh?

No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.

The issue with Clinton wasn't the blowjob, it was lying under oath, which until two days ago was an extremely serious crime.

www.vastleft.com

Nudnik:

Though you repeat talking point endlessly repeated on the right, is simply not true.

Although the VRWC did, in fact, set a perjury trap for Clinton (with Starr communicating with the Jones defense through a backchannel), Clinton did not in fact commit perjury, for two reasons:

1. Through incompetence, the independent counsel used a bizarre definition of sex, which a blow job didn't fit under, and

2. Clinton's lie was not material to the Jones case, and therefore wasn't perjury.

Libby's lie was material, and was perjury. Or are you arguing for setting aside the jury verdict, nudie, just like you're arguing for setting aside the verdict of the Senate in the Clinton impeachment saga?

NOTE Hey, I forgot that Gingrich didn't believe that a blowjob was sex either.

No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.

www.vastleft.com

Nudnik is a closet commie. Beautiful sleuthing, lambert old boy!

(Actually, Mr. Lambert's comment somehow ended upon the wrong thread. Dee-lightful nonetheless.)

"The next time I tell you someone from Texas should not be president of the United States, please, pay attention." - Molly Ivins

What's the proper response?

www.vastleft.com

infanticide is a democratic value

Newt Gingrich has gotten away with it. Again.
Even after a South Carolina jury declared Susan Smith guilty of murdering her two sons, reporters are not pressing Gingrich about the Smith case. Many seem to have forgotten that nine months ago, he loudly proclaimed the infanticide to be a campaign issue.
Back in early November, the motor-mouthed Gingrich had much to say about the case -- offering a treatise so wrong-headed that it's almost laughable. Except there's nothing funny about the Susan Smith tragedy...or Gingrich's attempt to exploit it for election-eve advantage.
Here's what Gingrich said three days before last November's election -- in response to an Associated Press reporter who asked him how the campaign was going: "Slightly more moving our way. I think that the mother killing the two children in South Carolina vividly reminds every American how sick the society is getting and how much we need to change things."
Gingrich concluded, "The only way you get change is to vote Republican. That's the message for the last three days." Two days later, less than 24 hours before the polls opened, Gingrich defended his comments on the Smith case as no different than what he'd been saying for years -- that violence and related ills arise from a Democratic-controlled political system: "We need very deep change if we're going to turn this country around."
Asked if the change he was offering the country would stop killings like those in South Carolina, he replied, "Yes. In my judgment, there's no question."

i can't wait for him to run. we're going to crucify him with his own words. he hasn't really functioned in the post-intertubes political reality that much. he has no idea what is coming.

and that's just in the US. I wonder how Newt squares that wtih his hypothesis?

Jake

I came across this debate from a little over a week ago between Gingrich and Mario Cuomo. I didn't want to like him because I never did when he was Speaker but his ideas are something I think are really valuable.

http://www.scribemedia.org/2007/03/03/li...

Anything Newt says on the subject of the Civil War or related persons or events from that era should be taken with a grain of salt. I see this constantly while searching Google for Civil War news, Republican and right-wing (and outright nutcases, not to be redundant) always invoke Lincoln for whatever nonsense they are trying to promote at the moment. Never mind that the society, the events, the political structure, the parties and most of all the unique event that was the US Civil War make any such comparisons misleading at best and downright fraudulent in many cases.

And it is particularly egregious in Newt's case because he has "authored" (haven't read 'em personally so I don't know how much spectral help he had with the project) a series of alternate-history novels based on Confederate victory at Gettysburg and subsequent victory in the War. Therefore it is more than a little self-serving for him to claim expertise on the subject since this encourages people to buy his books.

That said I will give him points for some decent ideas in other areas. Awhile back anyway he was talking a lot on healthcare issues. Not that he's a leading light of Progressive thought mind you, but some of his work to promote things like electronic medical records and increase efficiency in medicine generally have some merit.

They need a lot of work in terms of privacy protection but I will give him credit for using his media access to put ideas out there.

Give the guy a break. Anyone that looks like a human version of the Pillsbury doughboy wearing a wig from the closet of Elton John will take just about anything on two legs that's willing. Marriage? Oh you mean that arrangement I had with my old roommate?

when the South wins the civil war, and the world is shaped by "noble" slave owners. sigh. i guess i just have to accept that for many republicans, no matter how many times they run into educated nonwhite people, to them, we will always be "meant for" slavery.

Eh?

No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.

in that particular fantasy. slavery is a degridation meant for nonwhites, or rather, those most obviously not white, whites with african blood who can pass get a pass. but as i read this sort of drivel, one key element is that slave owning plantation type "leaders" sustain and enforce white superiority, and construct metaphorical roles of "dignity' for those white who don't get to enjoy being part of the ruling class.

still...you're right. the bottom line is still combat against the notion that "one half of the poor is paid to kill the other half" by the rich. color never matters in that historical reality.

"We're all niggers now."

And to Our Betters, that's true of us DFH types.

Hippies are, after all, dirty, eh? And they Fuck.

And as the country develops, unless we can prevent it, a real Aristocracy, and class stratification gets even more frozen, "blood" is going to become more and more important as a class marker.

That's yet another subtext to the vile Civility meme.

No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.