The Reaction to the Bombing Near VP Cheney

could you source those comments? not being cynical here, just curious to who said it and do they represent anyone.

A serious incident but I believe security was not tight enough.

Strange how 14 people were killed and, since they were Iraqis and not Americans, we're supposed to be relieved. It's horrible every time it happens, no matter who is hurt.
By: maia on February 27, 2007 at 08:36am

The Huffington Post

Notice how the person is so filled with hate and rage that he does not know that Afghanistan is different than Iraq.

You will have to search the Google Cache. The Puffington Host deleted them. However, before they did, many sites did pick them up. Of course the MSM are not among those sites.

Michelle Malkin has a .pdf of the site.  But just go to the DU or any other leftist hangout and you will see the same mentality.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/2007_02.htm

so, a website that is commonly associated with the left, the far left even, didn't find them appropriate, nor has anyone "MSM"...the comments weren't made by "the left" they were made by kooks and bastards who happen to post there. have you considered that they were possibly written by right wingers and posted there to "paint the left" as rejoicing in america's pain and so forth? in this age of web annonymity, it's not all that hard, and i'm sure happens regularly.

there are kooks and a holes on both sides who say outlandish things every day. giving them more press, even tho they represent no one, in this case, not even the group you associate them with(the left)does no one any good, unless your goal is just to spread that hate.

I pointed no fingers, I merely stated facts. And WHEN is it the job of the MSM not to report on Kooks and clowns? I thought their job was to do just that. After all, they sure like to report on Falwell and Robertson.

Oh, wait! They are not liberal kooks and clowns! They are conservative ones!

No bias? Righttttt!!!!!!!! And I got a bridge in Brooklyn you want to buy.

o, a website that is commonly associated with the left, the far left even, didn't find them appropriate,

 

HuffPo has only started deleteing posts after people actually begin publicizing the crap that goes on over there. Jesus the Michelle Malkin rascist commentary before her trip to Iraq was so repellent that the outcry made the HuffPo start airbrushing the commentary.

Of course it is all a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy though right SC?

i didn't say it was or it wasn't. all i'm saying is that representing these comments as if they are a collective policy of any group is not accurate at all. they are from people with "screenames" on the web. we don't know who they are or what their actual agenda is. using it as some basis for what any larger group believes is quite silly, imho.

it would be like people basing conservative values on things ann coulter said like...

"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis... These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them... I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much." (in refferring to 9/11 widows)

"I don't know if [former U.S. President Bill Clinton is] gay. But [former U.S. Vice President] Al Gore - total fag."

need i go on?

Come on, Ann is paid to do that.  

We're talking rank & file leftist sentiment here.  

The left has a common pattern of remarks like this, it's nothing new.  This is the mentality of the left in regards to this administration and the war on terror.  Just go to any anti-Bush, I mean anti-war protest and this is the type of stuff you see and hear.

People do base conservative values on people like Coulter, and when I say people I mean the media in this country.  They rejoice when they can get a good sound bite from Coulter or Limbaugh, but the media totally ignores the kooks on the left.  The difference between people on the right and these kooks on the left is the right isn't cheering for the terrorists to complete a successful assasianation on the Vice President.

But the party of "compassion" sure has a blood lust.

and who knows if these people are or aren't? not to mention, ann gets paid thru royaties from her books, which means she gets paid by the right wing pundits who buy her trash and spew it out further,,,who is more dangerous?


no we're not. we don't even know who they are. but if they are, they are far less influential than the millions that are hurdling ann's messages of hate to a broader public.


oh puhleeeaasse. nonsense. inviduals do this, from all political leanings.





again...who knows what "party" these guys belong to? and even if they did belong to the democratic party, it still would mean nothing concerning them actually representing anyone...more nonsense.

When has the right hoped the VP was killed by terrorists, and were disappointed that the terrorists missed?  The point of this was the left has an irrational hatred that is common among liberals.  I'm not saying the right is perfect, but if you want to compare loons the left wins hands down. 

We have shown for years how the left bashes their own country, bashes their own military, and generally hope for bad things to happen to the U.S. 

Just to keep perspective on September 12 2001 leftist were crying about the attack. “Why couldn’t Al Qaeda have attacked when Bill was in office so we could show that we can be decisive.” I could not believe my ears when I heard this from a former Clinton staffer on CNN. Sure, the reason for the statement is for political reasons. Liberals are not known for love of the military since Vietnam, and have not shown competent use of the military since WWI. Liberals know this and want to change the image which sparked the comment. It is all political, what I mean to say is that everything the left does is based on political perception rather than doing what is best for the nation.
An example would be when Mr. Carter tricked the Soviets into invading Afghanistan in order to make the President look decisive at home. People died to make a president look good for his re-election bid. The sad part was that he failed at accomplishing his proposed goals, but I was shocked because I was in the military at the time and was shocked that he Soviets would invade a country they already controlled. It was not until last year did I find out Mr. Carter played a political trick on the Soviets.
Please don’t get me wrong, I don’t care about the Soviet Union and think it was a great idea done for the wrong reasons. It was not done because we were hated enemies, it was not done because communisms was a threat to the nation, it was done to save his political butt. It was ok to kill thousands on both sides but supporting the Shah of Iran was a bad thing? To justify abandoning an ally and friend by taking the supposed moral high ground but it’s okay to start a war between two nations to make you look good. This is what I mean by politics trumps doing the right thing.

Supposedly liberals hate all killing and death, yet people glibly blog that it was a shame that the VP was not killed, and hopes that the next attempt would be successful. 14 people died in the attempt and not one liberal shed a tear for them.

As much as Mr. Conners gets upset at stereotyping liberals and conservatives but the problem is that I have run into so many liberals that live up to the typecasting. When did conservatives make movies of the murder of a liberal president? Put out books that depict how to murder the liberal president. When did conservatives in leadership positions openly attack a democrat president on foreign policy outside the United States? When did conservatives go to our enemy’s nation to voice support for our enemy against our liberal president? Yet, two generations of democrats have done this. Once for Vietnam and again now in Iraq. It seems ok for Americans to die when liberals are the cause but when a conservative takes control it is bad that Americans die.

When you are posting on du.org, that question becomes moot. And I do not believe I said they represent anyone but themselves and their party. If you dont want to speak for your party, stay off party sites as the TOU for du.org clearly states that only democrats may post. No one said you were a democrat, least of all yourslef. Why are you so sensitive to criticism of the clowns in that party then? Unless you have lied about your party affiliation.