The Truth Finally Catches Up to an Ann Coulter Lie
In
Treason, her best-selling masturbatory salute to McCarthyism, Ann Coulter wrote,
"(Sheryl) Crow explained that the 'best way to solve problems is to not have enemies.' War solves that problem too: We won't have any enemies because we're going to kill them. Crow warned of 'huge karmic retributions that will follow.' She seemed not to understand that America going to war is huge karmic retribution. They killed three thousand Americans and now they're going to die." -- Ann Coulter, P. 248
Even the simple-minded (GW) agree that Iraq had nothing to do with the Criminal 9/11 attacks, but that didn’t stop Ann Coulter.
As evidenced in
Brainless by Joe Maguire, an Ann Coulter lie is as common as an
Adam's Apple joke. But, it is rare when we know the exact point that reality finally caught up to an Ann Coulter lie. It’s now. "They" (Iraq) finally killed three thousand Americans.
Name pending was # 3000. I doubt his family wins a prize for that distinction, but it must be a little better than being 2999 or 3001 (
Rich Smith).
Many Iraqis have already died. It appears that many more will before Bush’s War ends.
The score now is something like, "Ann Coulter Truth – 1/ AC Lie – bazillions", but who’s counting?
A Milestone... of sorts
As of today, more Americans have been killed in Iraq (
2979) than in the September 11th (2973) criminal attacks.
We still have a few to lose before there are more than the combined total of confirmed dead and missing (
2997)
We will wait until the celebration that should follow Ann Coulter actually losing one of her many lies. She said, “They killed 3000 Americans now they’re going to die!” in her version of “The reason de jour for going to war in Iraq”.
2969
We are almost at the magic number -
2997: the number killed or missing in the September 11th criminal attacks on the World Trade Center.
2969 men and women
have died in Iraq for Bush's War. Even George W. Bush
has admitted that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. But,
Cheney, Rice and Dubya have all used September Eleventh as an excuse to send our best and brightest to war.
Well, sooner or later, history will help them be right. In the next couple weeks, Iraq will have killed almost 3,000 Americans. Bush can say, "
See, I told ya!"
Katrina housing program on hold
After building up record deficits and using the veto pen once to
stop science, the Bush Administration finally gets around to cutting some spending...
Stash
MATT APUZZO AP
WASHINGTON - A federal appeals court told the Bush administration Friday that it does not need to immediately restart a housing program for thousands of Hurricane Katrina victims.
The ruling suspends an order by U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, who said last month that the Federal Emergency Management Agency violated the Constitution when it eliminated short-term housing assistance. Leon said the agency didn't explain its reasoning and provided victims only confusing computer-generated codes to explain its decision.
Under Leon's order, FEMA appeared on track to restore housing payments to families in Texas.
"Maybe we can get this thing jump-started and get these people a roof over their heads before Christmas," Leon said Monday.
The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit puts that on hold at least until March, when the court will hear arguments in the case.
Under Leon's order, FEMA told officials in Texas early this week to expect federal money for housing about 4,200 evacuees. After Friday's ruling, FEMA can now tell Texas that plans have changed.
"That's FEMA's Christmas present to the people of Texas and the United States," said Kevin Whelan, a spokesman for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, which brought the lawsuit. "They managed to appeal long enough to be able to deny housing funding."
More...
F#@K Virgil Goode and the horse he rode in on!
Here is some knuckle dragging Virginia Congressman's response to an email from a constituent:
December 7, 2006
Mr. John Cruickshank
7—— S—————————— Dr.
Earlysville, VA 22936
Dear Mr. Cruickshank:
Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.
The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.” Thank you again for your email and thoughts.
Sincerely yours,
Virgil H. Goode, Jr.
70 East Court Street
Suite 215
Rocky Mount, Virginia 24151
Now, one thing not mentioned earlier: the email being responded to had nothing to do with
Rep. Ellison. But, the good Rep. Goode thought it would be good to share his good thoughts anyway.
There is nothing in the Constitution that suggests any book for an oath. If Stash were to be elected,
Peter Pan would be used! What could be a better fairy-tale for Congress than, "If you sprinkle yourself with Pixie dust and think happy thoughts, you can fly!"
2950
As of December 18th, there were 2950
War Dead in Iraq.
With 2973 confirmed dead in the 9/11 attack (2997 if you count the 24 missing), we've almost lost as many in Bush's War as we did in Osama bin Laden's attack. Bin Laden is still on the loose. We still have American men and women fighting in a country that didn't attack us.
In
Brainless: The Lies and Lunacy of Ann Coulter, author Joe Maguire rehashed
The Slobber Goddess's false claim in
Treason that the Iraq War was karmic retribution for killing 3000 of our people on 9/11.
She wrote,
"(Sheryl) Crow explained that the 'best way to solve problems is to not have enemies.' War solves that problem too: We won't have any enemies because we're going to kill them. Crow warned of 'huge karmic retributions that will follow.' She seemed not to understand that America going to war is huge karmic retribution. They killed three thousand Americans and now they're going to die." -- Ann Coulter, P. 248 Well, she will be almost right in a few more weeks. 3000 will have finally been killed because of Iraq or in Iraq. Even
George W. Bush knows it was clearly one of her many falsehoods when first spewed by The Slobber Goddess.
Florida and California Halt Death Penalty!
The Death Penalty is wrong. Solving the worst of our problems by killing is wrong. With no evidence that Capital Punishment decreases crime, the only reason to do it is revenge or the sick, gleeful, sadistic, satisfaction of watching someone die. They were able to watch
Angel Diaz writhe for 34 minutes.
Florida Governor, Jeb Bush, has
halted executions in Florida because of a horrendously botched killing of Angel N. Diaz.
The California Supreme Court
followed suit.
Death Watch 2006? or 2007?
Who will be the 3000th soldier to die in Bush's War?
Will there be a prize?
US Military Deaths in Bush's War
Can this week get any better?
Dennis Kusinich
announces and so does
Obama!
The Front Door of the Republican Idea Factory
In The Kos, doorguy
wondered if it was Katherine Harris holding the bag.
Prager showing ignorance by faulting Ellison for using Quran at oath
By
FREDERIC J. FROMMER
WASHINGTON -- Keith Ellison, who will become the first Muslim member of Congress next month, has offended some conservatives with his plan to use the Quran during his ceremonial swearing-in. The decision by Ellison, D-Minn., to use the Muslim holy book for the ceremony instead of the Bible triggered an angry column by Dennis Prager on the Web site Townhall.com this week.
Headlined, "America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on," Prager argued that using the Quran for the ceremony "undermines American civilization."
"Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible," he wrote. "If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress."
Conservative bloggers have picked up the criticism and run with it.
Ellison was unavailable for comment Friday, but his incoming chief of staff, Kari Moe, dismissed the brouhaha.
"I think the criticism is being flamed by the politics of division that were rejected in the '06 election cycle," said Moe, who worked for 10 years for the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn.
Moe, speaking in a telephone interview, noted that the tradition is for all members of Congress to be sworn in together on the House floor. It's in the photo-op ceremony that a Bible is used - or in Ellison's case, the Quran.
But Prager argued in a telephone interview that the ceremony was no less significant than the actual swearing-in.
"Oh, that's the whole point - it's exactly because it's ceremonial that it matters to me," he said. "Ceremonies matter. Ceremonies are exceedingly important. That is the way a society states what is most significant to it."
Prager argued that the issue wasn't about freedom of religion.
"I want Jews like myself to take the oath on the Bible, even though the New Testament is not our Bible," he said.
Asked if it would be a problem for a Jewish lawmaker to take the oath on a Bible that included only the Old Testament, Prager responded, "Yes, it would," because he said the point is to honor the "Bible of this country."
But despite writing that Ellison shouldn't serve in Congress if he doesn't take an oath with the Bible, Prager said he didn't think Ellison should be banned from serving.
"I don't think anything legal should be done about this," he said.
Moe said the issue was pretty straightforward.
"Religious freedom is a tradition in our country," she said.
Ellison won an open seat race to replace longtime Democratic Rep. Martin Sabo, who is retiring.
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
U.S. gov't terror ratings draw outrage
By
MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN, Associated Press Writer
A leader of the new Democratic Congress, business travelers and privacy advocates expressed outrage Friday over the unannounced assignment of terrorism risk assessments to American international travelers by a computerized system managed from an unmarked, two-story brick building in Northern Virginia.
Incoming Senate Judiciary Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont pledged greater scrutiny of such government database-mining projects after reading that during the past four years millions of Americans have been evaluated without their knowledge to assess the risks that they are terrorists or criminals.
"Data banks like this are overdue for oversight," said Leahy, who will take over Judiciary in January. "That is going to change in the new Congress."
The Associated Press reported Thursday that Americans and foreigners crossing U.S. borders since 2002 have been assessed by the Homeland Security Department's computerized Automated Targeting System, or ATS.
The travelers are not allowed to see or directly challenge these risk assessments, which the government intends to keep on file for 40 years. Some or all data in the system can be shared with state, local and foreign governments for use in hiring, contracting and licensing decisions. Courts and even some private contractors can obtain some of the data under certain circumstances.
"It is simply incredible that the Bush administration is willing to share this sensitive information with foreign governments and even private employers, while refusing to allow U.S. citizens to see or challenge their own terror scores," Leahy said. This system "highlights the danger of government use of technology to conduct widespread surveillance of our daily lives without proper safeguards for privacy."
More...
