DHS ignored civil-liberties lawyers’ warnings on report; Update: Senators demand data, explanation
posted at 10:56 am on April 17, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
The DHS pushed its report out on right-wingers in one hell of a hurry, according to the AP. Internal reviews of the document showed concerns over potential civil-liberties violations before its publication, but DHS ignored them in order to quickly make the document public. What was the rush?
Civil liberties officials at the Homeland Security Department flagged language in a controversial report on right-wing extremists, but the agency issued the report anyway. …
Homeland Security spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said the report was issued before officials resolved problems raised by the agency’s civil rights division about analysts’ definition of right-wing extremism.
In a footnote in the report, right-wing extremism was defined as hate-motivated groups and movements, such as hatred of certain religions, racial or ethnic groups. It went on to say, “It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”
This answers the rather absurd meme that has popped up on liberal blogs, that the Bush administration is responsible for this report. First, while the Bush administration might have wanted an assessment of right-wing extremist threats, it didn’t necessarily want one that painted returning veterans and conservative thought on abortion, illegal immigration, and federalism as extremist threats, nor did it want a threat assessment that couldn’t find a threat and had no data on actual, specific groups. Secondly, and most obviously, this report was dated April 7, 2009, almost 3 months after Bush left office.
Just when does the new administration take responsibility for reports they release? 2013? For people who thought Bush was such a dunce, they seem to give him remarkable powers to control government months after he’s retired to Crawford.
Now we see that this wasn’t just left lying around from the Bush administration. In fact, it was such a rush job that Janet Napolitano couldn’t wait to resolve the obvious civil-liberty concerns raised by her own lawyers before shoving it out the door. Napolitano would later have to backtrack on the exact same language flagged by the attorneys by claiming that she didn’t specifically approve the report issued by her office and that she would have changed the language in hindsight. She had the opportunity to fix it before its release, but the completely threadbare report was deemed such a high priority that it went out anyway.
Now, what could have triggered that? Anyone know of events occurring just after April 7, 2009, that such an assessment could have painted as radical, extremist, and threats to national security? Hmmm.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the FBI has tracked a few veterans for extremist activity, but because they joined extremist groups, not because they’re veterans:
Michael Ward, FBI deputy assistant director for counterterrorism, said in an interview Thursday that the portion of the operation focusing on the military related only to veterans who draw the attention of Defense Department officials for joining white-supremacist or other extremist groups.
“We’re not doing an investigation into the military, we’re not looking at former military members,” he said. “It would have to be something they were concerned about, or someone they’re concerned is involved” with extremist groups.
That’s the way it’s supposed to work — and that’s the way it did work in the Bush administration, whose assessment of left-wing extremists focused on groups with histories of violent actions and on actual data showing threats.
Update: Via Michelle, Senators Coburn, Brownback, DeMint, Burr, Murkowski, Inhofe, and Vitter sent the following letter to DHS Secretary Napolitano yesterday concerning the DHS report:
April 16, 2009
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Secretary
The Department of Homeland Security
310 7th street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20528-0150
VIA FASCMILLE
Dear Secretary Napolitano,
We write today concerning the release of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, of the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division.
While we agree that we must fight extremists who are both foreign and domestic we are troubled by some of the statements your department included as fact in the report titled above, without listing any statistical data to back up such claims.
First, your report states that “Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists…” without listing any data to support such a vile claim against our nation’s veterans.
Second, the report states that the millions of Americans who believe in the Second Amendment are a potential threat to our national security. Why? Do you have statistics to prove that law-abiding Americans who purchase a legal product are being recruited by so-called hate groups?
Thirdly, the report states that those that believe in issues such as pro-life legislation, limited government, and legal versus illegal immigration are potential terrorist threats. We can assure you that these beliefs are held by citizens of all races, party affiliation, male and female, and should not be listed as a factor in determining potential terror threats. A better word usage would be to describe them as practicing their First Amendment rights.
Also, you list those that bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability to China and India as being potential rightwing extremists. We would suggest that the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs in the manufacturing industry to foreign countries are not potential terror threats, but rather honest Americans worried about feeding their families and earning a paycheck.
In closing, we support the mission of DHS in protecting our country from terror attacks and are proud of the many DHS employees who make this possible in conjunction with our state and local law enforcement. We ask that DHS not use this report as a basis to unfairly target millions of Americans because of their beliefs and the rights afforded to them in the Constitution. We also ask that you provide us with the data that support the unfair claims listed in the report titled above and to present us with the matrix system used in collecting and analyzing this data?
Finally, we look forward to your prompt reply and we offer our assistance to DHS in our shared effort to fight terrorism both home and abroad by using data that is accurate and independent of political persuasion.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 … 6 Next »
The DHS butchers everything they touch, just disband them already!
I also love how this is Bush’s fault, yeah that sure is some sound reasoning.
Cr4sh Dummy on April 17, 2009 at 11:32 AM
By the way, I don’t think I’ve heard mention of “another” terrorist excluding Timothy McVeigh.
What about John Allen Muhammad, the D.C. Sniper?
Hhhhmmmmm…What about Army and Islam? Naw, can’t put that in there, it might seem too….extreme!!! ok, just a bit of sarcasm there.
HarryStar on April 17, 2009 at 11:33 AM
But only imaginary threats are not being ignored. Actual threats – you know like lobbing missiles our way, restarting nuclear facilities,etc – are being ignored.
But let’s pay attention to some goof ball who is protesting government spending.
Makes total sense.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 11:33 AM
As a recent retired 21 year US Army Veteran we do not train to attack US Citizens, Terrorist yes but the use of military forces on US soil is rare and would come under way to much scrunity. Remember the military is about 90% Conservative, you would know about this.
sargentj on April 17, 2009 at 11:33 AM
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Ummm, no.
At best, this is a micharacterization of current military training.
We do receive “training” on OKC and McVeigh, only in the context of domestic terrorism – it does not specify a certain ideology.
Having sit through this kind of stuff for 22 years, the other PPT referenced is probably pure bunk. Military briefings, CBT’s and other trainings are presented in a politics and ideoology neutral context. this may be hard to believe but the military doesn’t give a rats ass about the ideology of an administration – we are under civilian control.
I find it funny you would find a post at Huffpo to be some kind of example of accurate and un-biased reporting, without the PPT’s referenced or linked to from official sites.
catmman on April 17, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Excellent point! We need to have a news conference explaining who are your targets… what does this means in real world politics.
Do they have spies waiting for some crazy words being said at the VA hospital? Are the names of doctors who refuse to perform abortions kept? What does this mean.
Democrats clearly cannot be trusted with this agency. It should be dissoved… when they start suppressing people’s politics thats the end of their usefulness.
petunia on April 17, 2009 at 11:34 AM
It’s a bad habit of mine too.
petefrt on April 17, 2009 at 11:34 AM
I have tried to educate getabrain; it’s your turn.
Obviously, its public school teachers were more interested in brainwashing than teaching anything useful.
Disturb the Universe on April 17, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Vain of the media, classifying all anti-MSM sentiment as anti-American. “No need to be antagonistic”–CNN.
They give every reason to return stipulation.
Facts debunk ObaMSM propaganda.
maverick muse on April 17, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Janet was so sure that the report was “accurate”, but not an accusation.
Now it comes out, she either ignorantly, or purposely ignored her staff and attorneys regarding suspect language and assertions.
I will ask againg…Where are the elected Republican’s, why are they not attacking, and why doesn’t the Republican’s have their attack dog…the dems a dozen on the payroll: Begalia, Carville, others that meet on a regular basis to discuss who to attack next.
right2bright on April 17, 2009 at 11:34 AM
So the skinny here is the Obamination owns this report. Chalk up another nail in the coffin of democrat politicians.
DannoJyd on April 17, 2009 at 11:35 AM
False.
As I understand your post, you are suggesting that the military would be used against domestic extremist groups.
Posse Comitatus Act precludes using the military in lieu of law enforcement.
moxie_neanderthal on April 17, 2009 at 11:35 AM
key words: leadership positions, reinvigorate
sesquipedalian on April 17, 2009 at 11:35 AM
don’t feed, no one is listening to her now, don’t you start.
right2bright on April 17, 2009 at 11:35 AM
2062 when the national archives open them 50 years after the administration has been out of office.
portlandon on April 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM
It’s fun. I feel sorry for getaclue. Having to come in here and defend stupidity for no other reason than to defend stupidity.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM
You will believe anything the ObaMasta tells you to believe.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM
You forget this fine fellow. On the eve on battle this coward attacked his own comrades and didn’t have the decency to die in the process. Rot in hell when you get there Akbar.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM
A good summation…Obama and Janet own this report, it is there, despite others who tried to get the wording changed.
right2bright on April 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Why is it that DHS (and getalife) can profile vets by pointing to McVeigh but when others profile Muslims by pointing to bin Laden or Muhammed Atta, they’re being racist and ignorant?
Troika37 on April 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Keywords “reject federal government for state and local authority”.
The constitution is the root cause of all our problems.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Shut up. That’s why.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 11:38 AM
catmman on April 17, 2009 at 11:33 AM
That vet leads a group for fighting for vets.
He does great work.
Yes, he is a dem but credible.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:38 AM
You asked a question. I gave you an expert answer from my own professional experience which refutes your assertion and I lost the argument how?
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:38 AM
Thus implying that other dems are not credible.
Hehe.
On this point, we agree.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 11:39 AM
who is keeping an eye on obama’s buddy Farrakhan and his organization’s leadership positions ? give me a break !
runner on April 17, 2009 at 11:39 AM
I hope this turns into a big, noisy fuss. I heard about the suit this morning. Great news as I will wear as a badge of honor the “right wing extremist” label.
BetseyRoss on April 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Disband it? Restructure it? I dunno, but now the intentions for this agency are clear, and something must be done ASAP to keep it from morphing into the Ministry of Homeland Compliance
petefrt on April 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Are you talking about the 2nd PowerPoint linked at HuffPo? It looked quite fake to me also. 9 years and I’ve never seen any ideologically charged brief.
BadgerHawk on April 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Defamation of character anyone? This kind of thing will make it harder for returning vets that are getting out of the service to find employment, much like the training video used by the college to paint the returning veterans as violent. Self-fulfilling prophecy?. Is there grounds for a lawsuit? SCoTUS?
canditaylor68 on April 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM
From my own observations,local law enforcement, at times bemused, was of great assistance during the Tea Parties, allowing even an impromptu march to the Mayor’s office following the one at International Park in Toledo.
But, that the Administration attempted to derail the Tea Parties before they got off the ground on Wednesday, and that Democrat leadership also wished to derail the effort, and the major media as well…the intent of this report is what is most important.
That few, if any, local law enforcement agencies followed the underlying suggestiveness of this report is a credit to them, not to DHS.
But, they were alerted by DHS to “right-wing” extremists exhibiting a litany of proclivities, to include being anti-abortion, being anti-government [sic] or otherwise being in opposition to the current Administration…and the fanatical well-trained veteran being singled out served only to try to amplify the alleged threat.
coldwarrior on April 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM
If Bush had done this before a planned code pink rally, getalife would be Freaking Out.
bridgetown on April 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Welcome to oxymoron theater.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Many progs are immune to cognitive dissonance. They get there by insisting, all the experience of reality aside, that people are basically good and altruistic. It’s a required axiom of prog thought. Their collectivist notions fall apart without it, so they must accept it.
This way they can hold the ideas “Bush the Evil Mastermind” and “Bush the (half) Trained Monkey” in their heads at the same time, using whichever is convenient for their arguments at the moment.
TheUnrepentantGeek on April 17, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Really, with getalife, “oxy” isn’t necessary at all.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Given that Napolitano’s Report is an updated version of Obama’s San Francisco behind-closed-doors revelation, there is no way that Obama or any government official will redact or retract this presidency’s abuses. They are all bought by anti-Constitutional forces; assimilating, they have made themselves anti-Constitutional forces. Assimilated, their “intent” is as obvious as the nose on The One face.
Moron cows, grow or tan your own hide.
maverick muse on April 17, 2009 at 11:41 AM
After the Gay College kid was killed, the Clinton Administration tried a bunch of “Soldier Training” that pretty much offended everyone.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Are you serious, Ed?
The department of homeland security says that hate groups are targeting vets, and it means they are accusing or keeping an eye on all vets?
But when the FBI releases a report that says hate groups are targeting vets for recruitment, it’s OK?
“White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel since 9/11″
http://cryptome.org/spy-whites.pdf
Talk about hypocrisy.
Tom_Shipley on April 17, 2009 at 11:43 AM
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM
The President has said nothing about this issue but if you research RW extremists, they have grown and there is a history of violence.
The DHS did a report on left wing extremists too but do avoid this so called outrage, perhaps an overall report on domestic terrorism will quell your outrage.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:43 AM
So you think that being against abortion or illegal immigration is a threat?
Your ObaMasta does.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 11:43 AM
iro*ny
carbon_footprint on April 17, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Now Obama’s proposal to have treatment for service-connected injuries charged to veterans’ private insurance plans makes sense. He wants vets angry so many more will fit the profile…
~sarc
moxie_neanderthal on April 17, 2009 at 11:44 AM
I think getalife needs to getlaided.
Old Hippie Vet on April 17, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Hmm, you might have missed this with all the ass-whooping you’re taking today. I post twice for your reading convenience.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:45 AM
You do not take losing well do you?
Big deal, you lost an argument.
Get over it .
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:45 AM
That’s not allowed in the assisted living facility.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:46 AM
It slept through the double negative grammar lesson; I’m sure it slept through the irony lesson, too. It only woke up when the lefty teacher said, “Bush lied; people died.”
Disturb the Universe on April 17, 2009 at 11:47 AM
I find Micheal Savage a bit too shrill for my taste but that suit he has filed says this:
I agree with this and I think on the basis of this report the DHS should be completely disbanded. This has become a political tool to attack positions opposed to the Obama administration and marginalize Obama’s political opponents. This is tyranny.
petunia on April 17, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Logic doesn’t work with liberals and statists. It’s not worth the effort.
It’s a well know fact that you cannot be liberal and rational at the same time.
tarpon on April 17, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Thanks, now I have to clean keyboard and desk.
Old Hippie Vet on April 17, 2009 at 11:48 AM
How did I lose. Because you said so? I gave my proof, you prove there’s an ongoing military operation or program, training soldiers to fight RW groups.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Of course the left has no history of bombings, shootings and assasinations….not in this country. Of course.
And as for all of those lynchings in the south…..party affiliation was never established.
moxie_neanderthal on April 17, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Don’t you know that all means of spelling are equally valid.
Besides, if they criticized his grammar, it might have damaged his self esteem.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 11:48 AM
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:38 AM
So? You made an assertion, stated it as fact and posted this guys “evidence” as corroboration.
I and others have refuted it. The guy may indeed do good worok and may indeed be a nice fellow. So either you are mischaracterizing his stance, or this guy (and by extension, you) are wrong.
You (and your source) stated the military receives training to counter, specifically, “right-wing extremists”. This is incorrect. At best, it is a mischaracterization.
We also receive training about Osama Bin Laden, other islamists groups and I even read some e-mails and saw some CBT’s at one time warning against former military guys giving training to criminal gans – Bloods, Crips, Latin Kings, etc. Does this make the military “left-wing extremists”, racists, or islamophobes?
I’ve received training that I shouldn’t smoke, does this make me a tool of “Big Tobacco”? I’ve received training on how the PT properly, does this make me a “fitness-extremist”?
catmman on April 17, 2009 at 11:49 AM
True. And in other news the only act of lefty righty extremist violence reported this week was the lefty college students breaking windows and attempting to silence Tancredo.
300,000+ right wing extremists(per the description in the report)=no violence.
25 leftist college students=violence.
I rest my case.
canditaylor68 on April 17, 2009 at 11:49 AM
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:48 AM
I posted proof of my argument and you had no rebuttal but attack the source and me.
That is losing loser.
Do not engage me until you can man up.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Like Obama cares what the law says.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Post where I said that.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Getalife, I used to think you sucked up needed oxygen here and was bad for Hot Air. But you are helping in training the Hot AIr troops with entry level troll threats.
Sort of like the mother cheetah knocking most of the dog piss out of a Wart Hog and then letting the cubs finish it off for the experience.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Desperation is a stinky perfume. You’re getting trounced today and it’s not pretty.
BadgerHawk on April 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM
This report was generated out of Left-Wing paranoia, fear, and most of all, unbridled resentment towards an opposing political philosophy. This admin needs to be watched very carefully, but we’re already doing that.
RepubChica on April 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Third, most of the, “causes” are recent events – Obama’s election, economic collapse, etc.
TheBigOldDog on April 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM
That sounds like a proposal of marriage. Is this a case of opposites attract?
By the way getalife, you lost. What if we take a vote? I’m pretty sure you lost. Although I bet you are the only one who thought you were even in the running.
petunia on April 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Let me see if I have this straight. Sesquatch is arguing that since one or two vets are involved with white supremacist groups, in a leadership position. All vets must be considered potential white supremacists. Even the non-white ones.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 11:54 AM
BadgerHawk on April 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM
I owned him and you know it.
Just not man enough to admit it.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:54 AM
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:43 AM
How many bank windows were busted in during the Tea Party protests the other day? Can the same be said for any protests lefties make, particularly during world economic forums?
I also didn’t notice the cops having to disperse crowds with tear gas or water cannosn the other day either.
This is starting to get redundant…
catmman on April 17, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Pretty impossible to do when you have a straitjacket on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01Mo3VNHg9Q
izoneguy on April 17, 2009 at 11:54 AM
If we demand reciprocity does that mean you will go away?
moxie_neanderthal on April 17, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Even if it were to be disbanded, some other agency would pick up the cudgel.
That’s how liberals operate, don’t expect them to let anything get in their way.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Hey, ACLU, you wanna know where the real threat is to civil liberties? Look to your left (or around you, as it were).
mankai on April 17, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Bush spent his time fighting bin Laden and AQ. Obama spends his time fighting Rush Limbaugh and “Right Wing Extremists” like veterans. How quickly the world can change.
TheBigOldDog on April 17, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Funny.
RepubChica on April 17, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Has getaclue been reduced to self parody now? It’s really sad.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Hey DHS…………
…………. how’s that Secure Border thingy coming along?
Seven Percent Solution on April 17, 2009 at 11:57 AM
This was CJ’s argument at LGF against the tea parties as well.
So to message has come down from on high. And is repeated by morons.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 11:57 AM
I answered by saying we are screened for affiliation to said groups and we don’t train against them. We win, you lose, go home.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Anyone else impressed that this 9 word sentence contains two double negatives? Has to be a record.
carbon_footprint on April 17, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Post where I said that.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Ummm…ok:
Our troops are trained about RW extremists and w wanted this report too.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:06 AM
catmman on April 17, 2009 at 11:58 AM
No, but grow up and leave the childish insults out of your arguments and get informed before you engage me. Man up.
Or I will embarrass you like I just did to hawkdriver.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:58 AM
That is pretty much how the argument goes, isn’t it?
Troika37 on April 17, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Nice and broad; the HotAir blog(groups) and its casual participants(individuals), members and visitors(individuals) and guest bloggers(individuals) are now on the radar as right-wing extremists. Trolls are included in this package – the obama asssss-kissing will not help. congrats.
runner on April 17, 2009 at 11:59 AM
catmman on April 17, 2009 at 11:58 AM
“about”.
Next.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Great observation and reminder. H/T to you.
TheBigOldDog on April 17, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Agreed. I think we should help Mexico out with the guns, drugs and money problem. Having served in 2nd ID in Korea I have some ideas about securing a fence. For some reason I don’t think my cards, letters and diagrams have been reaching the right people.
moxie_neanderthal on April 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM
getaclue is getting mad. longer sentences that make no sense. It’s better when it just posts things like “I won” or “the adults are in charge” and leaves it at that. Prolonged thinking doesn’t react well with this troll.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM
That’s true for the beat cop, and probably their immediate supervisors. But the leadership of almost all police agencies are political appointees. And they are the ones who set policies and priorities for the department.
The larger the city, the more true this is.
Then again large cities have been unfriendly territory for anyone to the right of Mao for many years.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Do they pay you by the post or something?
TheBigOldDog on April 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Weak.
Next.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 12:01 PM
FIFY
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 12:01 PM
No.
Next.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 12:01 PM
You obviously have a hate on for vets. This will be noted in your profile.
moxie_neanderthal on April 17, 2009 at 12:02 PM
That’s the troll I love. One word sentences are where you at your finest. No thinking involved. Perfectly suited to your talents.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 12:02 PM
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Childish and silly.
Next.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 12:02 PM
Janet is just another example of all that “vast executive experience” the elite Team Obama has brought to the current administration.
Got to be pissing them off, “the people” are obviously not buying the message.
GarandFan on April 17, 2009 at 12:02 PM
LOL Put a sock on it before someones rips one of your nipple rings off.
Old Hippie Vet on April 17, 2009 at 12:02 PM
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Now you fall back on The Parser Gambit?
You’re not Bill Clinton are you…?
catmman on April 17, 2009 at 12:02 PM
He must be paid by the post. Otherwise, why bother doing that so often?
TheBigOldDog on April 17, 2009 at 12:02 PM
This administration seems to be doing its best to incite some form of violent reaction so it can then push against our civil liberties. If is it is not their actual goal, they are doing a great job of ignorantly jabbing the Lion who is just awakening from a long sleep.
Least they forget, here is a line from the Declaration of Independence: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
So wake up yourself government, the governed are indeed waking up and that jabbing is becoming too painful.
amr on April 17, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 … 6 Next »