Spread the dread!

;)

Ted Rall is Johnny Walker Lindh with a pen and a paycheck.

Darleen on October 22, 2006 at 12:03 PM

I dunno if that’s a worse insult to Ted Rall or Johnny Walker Lindh.

LOVE that mohammed emoticon

I am so stealing that!

One more useful idiot for Imperialistic Islam to gaily behead should he and his witless kind ever inadvertantly help them take power.

Here’s what he dare not draw:

*~@):~{>

Wheezing crypto-coward that he is.

Where were all of his cartoons supporting the valiant memory of slaughtered satirist Theo Van Gogh ? Or bravely defending the Danish editorial cartoonists who mocked violent Mohammedanism and risked their lives? Or where were his india ink barbs excoriating Imperialistic Islam’s inhuman plan for intolerant global domination? Did he call Mahoud and the mad mullahs of Iran “psycho fascist morons”?

May the ghost of the Yellow Kid haunt him into wetting his bed night after soggy until he dares to read the Koran.

Yep.

You nailed it.

At least she’s several steps above Constantine, who seems to know only what his talking points memo tells him.

You’re a moonbat, a knee-jerk Bush-hater. I do not take what you say seriously.

I guess the rest of the world is too stupid and/or whiny to know just how funny and smart Rall is.

–Someday:Turnabout–

pathetic little man

And her motives aren’t questioned “without reason”… her motives are questioned because she has changed her story about meeting with Bush, because she has occasionally said some anti-semitic things and hangs out with anti-semitic groups (or openly anti-Israel, at the least), because she has publically fantasized about murdering the President, and any number of other things.

There’s a word for honora’s form of argument: “sophistry.” And while it’s a definite step up from name-calling-as-debate, it still leads to results that are ultimately about as satisfying as nailing jelly to a wall.

Spurius Ligustinus on October 20, 2006 at 4:03 PM

I can tell you with complete sincerity, sophistry will never, ever be something of which you will be accused. How’s that arm doing?

“Seems to me giving voice to that is anything but anti-troop.”
- honora on October 20, 2006 at 3:17 PM

So after all this time – through the willful denial (claiming that others are taking a supposedly anti-Bush Rall strip and somehow wrongly conflating it with an anti-military meaning), through the ostensible-if-grudging enlightenment (“awkwardly” reading the strip and taking the anti-military slur as only “gratuitous”), through the invocation of the “But the right calls people unpatriotic!” slogan/canard, to the “I’ve never heard of Ted Rall” claim … we finally come full circle.

There’s a word for honora’s form of argument: “sophistry.” And while it’s a definite step up from name-calling-as-debate, it still leads to results that are ultimately about as satisfying as nailing jelly to a wall.

before any libs lecture me on being civil towards Ted Rall Id urge them to give Rall a lecture on being less of a moron

Try The New Republic site.

honora on October 20, 2006 at 2:55 PM

Thanks Honora, I’ll give it a look and let you know what I think.

I remember at the beggining, they said “nothing we say here should imply that we don’t support the troops.” Which certainly was a relief, because they spent the next couple of hours pile-driving the troops.

Nothing but attrocities, and rapes and what not. They were all duped into joining. Etc.

No kidding. I wish this was exageration.

She sure hates the military. And if she likes or supports the troops, I didn’t hear it.

You mentioned her motives. I’m not a mind reader. I don’t know. I suspect she didn’t like the military before her son joined. I think she probably resented the military, and thought it was beneath her son.

So yeah, Cindy “supports” the troops. The ones who joined because they were lied to, or duped into joining, or those who opposed the war, or who deserted to Canada.

But I thought to myself, “What about the ones who don’t desert? Or weren’t “lied” to when they joined? Or who, God Forbid, re-enlist? What about the ones who re-enlist while they are in Iraq or Afghanistan? Do you support them?”

I don’t think she does. She can protest all she wants, saying that she’s only doing this because she supports and loves the trooops.

Color me unconvinced.

Yeah, she’s my Mrs. Robinson. Only add about three decades to Mrs. Robinson’s age and you’ll have this dance teacher.

EFG on October 20, 2006 at 2:50 PM

Sounds like a match made in heaven. I don’t think I take positions not my own, maybe? As I think I said, I have never heard of this guy before. I will take you at your word he is anti-military. It does seem to me odd that if that is the case, he would even give this guy any more exposure–after all, the significant part of the cartoon is the soldier’s statement re people not meeting his glance because they are guilty because they have not sacrificed a thing while others have made the ultimate sacrifice. Seems to me giving voice to that is anything but anti-troop.

We will never see eye to eye I fear. Say hi to Martha Graham/aka granny for me and have a nice weekend.

The “attention whore” you’re speaking of is a person who put herself out there for public display.

…and many conservative pundits choose to question her motives without any factual basis to do so, rather than deal morally and intellectually with the opinions she expresses.

Honora, One more question. Is there a liberal site where one can have a somewhat civilized debate like you can here?

I’m not being a smarta$$, just curious to see what the rational faction of the other half is thinking.

BacaDog on October 20, 2006 at 1:43 PM

Try The New Republic site.