“Well, you know what they say - - give a terrorist a fish & he'll hate America today; teach a terrorist to fish & he'll hate America for a lifetime. Or something like that.”
wisechild on Jul 2, 2008 at 13:42:08
“i thought it was 'invade or occupy a terrorist's holy land to protect their oil and they'll hate you today' and 'occupy a terrorist's holy land to control their oil and they'll recruit their brothers, sisters and dogs and hate you forever'
All due respect, senator, but every time someone with a "Rep." or "Sen." in front of their name comes on this site to whine about their helplessness because of the big bad Republicans, it feels like a slap in the face. We're frustrated as hell! And those in a position to do something about it say they can't or won't. I understand that you may be an exception, but you're all in it together as far as I can see.
scooperss on Jun 12, 2008 at 16:17:56
“Thank you thank you That's exactly how I feel. As far as I can tell they're all in it together and they're covering for each other AND screwing the taxpayers.
Whining on Huffpo. Give me a break lady. Do your job or resign.”
“I agree. The only hope I'm left with is that when these criminals are out of office (and therefore have no power to pardon anyone) that charges will be brought. I'd love to see this thing played out in the Hague.”
“My silly, bigoted remarks were just sourced ably by JimMan35. The Pearl of Great Price is still in the canon of Mormon scripture. You really should take a second to breathe before you post knee-jerk comments.”
Redrover666 on May 28, 2008 at 15:20:55
“You really ought to take a breath and back up your derisive garbage with evidence rather than refer to some other nitwit's post. Provide some direct and verifiable evidence to support your insult of these fine people or keep that garbage with the rest of it... in your head.”
“I don't like bigotry either, JJK. But a couple of your assertions need to be corrected.
The FLDS regard mainstream Mormons as a heretical sect, and rightly so. It was the mainstream Mormons who abandoned polygamy as a matter of political expedience (so Utah could be admitted to the U.S.) - except they didn't really abandon it.
Polygamy continues to be a belief of the mainstream Mormon faith. In cases where a wife has died, they allow a man to be sealed in the temple to more than one woman. They continue the teaching that polygamy will be practiced in heaven, aka "the celestial kingdom."
That is, unless they've changed doctrine again. They do it every couple of years when something like this comes to light. Defenders of the Mormon faith on this thread make me laugh - it's like shooting fish in a barrel pointing out that FLDS and LDS are one and the same. The FLDS just have the "courage" to stick to the original teachings of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young et al.”
fincenMIB on May 29, 2008 at 03:34:45
“A well researched answer. Warren Jeffs uses the Book of Mormon 1976 or older per the revisions to the doctrine of the Negro race. The revere Brigham Young and Joseph Smith and live the literal law.
I have 550 of Warren Jeffs audios and 15 of the FLDS theology books. Any one who rejects the similiarities is doing so blindly without access to their copyrighted text!
There are a half dozen major differences, but they consider themselves the true Mormons and the LDS Church is the Apostasy Church, not them. They use the discourses and old text no longer found in Ward libraries. College libraries, yes!
Text From "In Light & Truth" Chapter 1 on polygamy
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse aanother, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have aten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.”
Redrover666 on May 28, 2008 at 13:26:05
“That's very interesting. While you're shooting fish in a barrel, could you take a moment or two to provide an impartial source to support your silly, bigoted remarks.”
kiddub on May 28, 2008 at 12:36:19
“I have many friends who are LDS that all denounce polygamy. Like all sects of christianity, there are divisions within this particular sect. Some Anglicans believe that homosexuality is a sin, others firmly believe that gays should be free to marry within the Anglican church. All that being said, I do not believe, from what I understand of the LDS faith that they in any way promote or support polygamy. My friends are ashamed of Jeffs and the FLDS church because they are tarred with the same filthy brush.”
MelKnee on May 28, 2008 at 12:16:27
“Thank you for pointing this out so eloquently.
I don't support these child-bride marriages one bit, but I have been looking at this situation through a "freedom of religion" lens. What makes one religion more valid than another?”
“Read the article again. It's satire, folks, calm down! Or maybe a parody of Roseanne Barr's piece.”
blog4um on May 27, 2008 at 10:41:36
“In 2000, Jill was a Co-Chair of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Finance Committee, which raised a record 29 million dollars. She also recently served as a Vice Chair of Senator Clinton’s 2006 Senate Finance Committee and is currently on the finance team for Senator Clinton’s Presidential Campaign.”
GregE on May 27, 2008 at 10:27:28
“Unfortunately it's not satire. That she managed the New York senatorial campaign of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton makes me doubt it.”
hartkid on May 27, 2008 at 10:27:10
“Really? I didn't catch that and I'm usually pretty good at that kind of thing. Reading again...”
“A picture is worth a thousand words, John. And the picture (video) of those cops brutally beating the shit out of those suspects outweighs your article. I've enjoyed and learned from your blogs in the past, but on this one I think you're on the wrong side. Sorry.”
hp blogger John Bruhns on May 20, 2008 at 18:01:51
I thank you for your honest comment. However, those who were beaten by police , were fleeing a scene where they shot three people, plenty of witnesses including officers. One of the victims was shot 4 times. My heart just doesn't bleed for them. The cops were indeed excessive , however, being a cop in philly is now a life or death situation. I support the cops.
“James, thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for this post. I used to check out blogs written by our elected officials on this site, mainly for the comment section where they would be handed their ass by commenters. Now I just groan, roll my eyes, and look for the Borowitz, Young, and Weber satire posts.”
You've only been commenting since 4/21/08, so I'll try to go easy on you. In case you were not aware, all one has to do is click "see profile" to see all the comments you've made.
For all your "I'm Green, I'd never vote for Hillary" schtick, you spend almost as much time defending her as you do bashing "Obamabots." For only posting a few weeks, you used the epithet "Obamabot" so much I lost count. What's your agenda? Are you simply a Hillary troll, or are you a Republican trying to stir things up? Whatever it is, your dishonesty is apparent, and you don't make your point well with constant insults.”
mickeyrat on May 6, 2008 at 13:02:40
“yes, this is all true. Because i've become extremely offended with the Obamabots. What could have been a civil campaign between Democrats has descended into some of the worst intraparty invicility I've ever seen--and it's come from the Obamabots. I haven't seen nearly the stuff coming from Hillary's supporters that you people are throwing out.
I realize you believe all the stuff that people say about Hillary. But PLEASE, try and read these comments and ask yourself, if you were a real su pporter of Hillary, could you support Obama? No, of course not.
You don't have to go easy on me, boss. I can handle myself. And you're not all that from what I've seen.
If you don't like being called an Obamabot, then for god's sake think for yourself.
And I'm neither Republican nor a Hillary supporter. ANother thing about you Obamabots that makes me sick is that you can't take criticism without accusing the other of doing so from nefarious motives.”
Apr 29, 2008 at 15:32:28
“Groan. Another nag on her soapbox telling us how we should feel about this non-issue. Christ, Bonnie, why aren't you publicly chastising Anne Geddes for her "sexualization" of infants? As many commenters have already said, this is a sexual image only if you are a pervert.