Today on Blogcritics
Home » A good use for Ted Kennedy

A good use for Ted Kennedy

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

No, it’s not dogfood. I’m afraid his bile would poison the puppies. Plus, who knows what kind of nasty STD he’s carrying around to cause the unhinged nonsense that comes out of his mouth.

Kennedy continues to lead the left wingnut charge for throwing in the towel in Iraq, and basically immediately abandoning the country to jihadists and civil war. This idea is so ludicrous that brain infection from syphyllis seems the most likely explanation.

Still yet, God works in mysterious ways. It occurs to me that this might in a backwards way distinctly help President Bush’s negotiating position in Iraq. For starters, it tends to put some limits on how much foolishness that the new government forming in Iraq will be able to put on us. Hey, if our help isn’t desired or they start acting too stupid, it wouldn’t take much to convince the US citizenry to support our immediate withdrawal. After all, 48% of the voting public just pulled the lever for John Kerry.

In truth, pretty much anyone in any kind of touch with reality knows that somebody badly needed to deal with the Hussein regime. Jacques Chirac and various worthless UN jerks like to carry on about how bad it is for us to be in Iraq. Really though, does Kofi Anan want the kind of feces tsunami that would come from our premature withdrawal? A credible threat of such a thing might tend to soften them up a bit.

If US help is not appreciated, then as Winston Wolf would say, “I’m here to help. If my help’s not appreciated, lotsa luck gentlemen.”

About Gadfly

  • http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

    God. We got it – you don’t like him. Next time at least say something original and coherent. On, preferrably, a different subject.

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

    Proof reading couldn’t have hurt either – particularly the third graf.

  • http://www.morethings.com/senate Al Barger

    Temple, I humbly submit that you should consider the possibility that your reactionary left wing knee jerked, and caused you to miss the point. Again, the main point here is that perhaps this anti-war nonsense could in fact be a positive tool for the administration to use to get some co-operation.

    That seems like a pretty simple, coherent point- though there may well be good arguments against this analysis. Do you have any?

  • http://www.bigtimepatriot.com Big Time Patriot

    Ahh, the reverse psychology thing, just as George Bush’s “war on terror” has boosted Osama bin Laden’s support and recruiting 1000% percent since 9-11, talk of peace can help us with our war. Got it. Kind of like, letting our civil liberties erode with the patriot act will make us a freer country. Kind of like, the more we torture and abuse, the more we can fight the torturers and abusers. Got it…

    Good point…

  • Mroz

    Al must go. Thanks for contributing another useless peace of writing.

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    Boy, you people on the Right are getting pretty good at demonizing people on the Left.

    I hope all my allies on the Left just remember that when it comes time to compromise on things, when the majority party has run on the Platform of God, and demonized the opponent, there can be no compromise, because that would mean compromising with the Great Evil One. And how would that look?

    Jacques Chirac…like[s] to carry on about how bad it is for us to be in Iraq

    I love the French, but I do think Chirac is corrupt. Love the country but thinking the leadership is corrupt….I’ve had that feeling before.

    feces tsunami

    oh, no, no. That doesn’t even make sense. For over-the-top, flowery descriptions refer back to Dave’s list of inspirations (Hawthorne, Webster, etc.)

    For starters, it tends to put some limits on how much foolishness that the new government forming in Iraq will be able to put on us.

    Ted Kennedy speaking about an early withdrawal puts limits on what the Iraqi government can ask of us? No wonder ya’ll hate him so much. You’ve given him so much power.

    A credible threat of such a thing

    And now that the Right is going to ‘reach out’ to others, your suggestion on how to reach out is to threaten. Lovely.

  • Shark

    “A good use for Ted Kennedy: No, it’s not dogfood. I’m afraid his bile would poison the puppies. Plus, who knows what kind of nasty STD he’s carrying around to cause the unhinged nonsense that comes out of his mouth…”

    hah. hah. Funny. Brilliant. Original.

    zzzzzzzzzzzzz….

    Al, leave the satire to Shark. Or at least make me laugh. Otherwise, stick to something *you’re good at.

    *“On This Date: Ayn Rand had her first period!” — stuff like that.

    xxoo
    S

  • http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

    Al how can you label someone merely because they don’t like your writing about the same topic over and over and over again? On top of that, this time it was done without originality, humor or a point

    I look at the writing and I’ve praised you before (not that that’s worth a hill of anything but … ). The lede always matters in a piece and you started out with stupid – and that smell pervades the rest of the piece. Sorry, that’s how it goes. That’s how I read. I think the beginning of something written is going to be indicative of the rest. If you have a serious point, I suggest you start that way – as you’ve done before on some of your better pieces.

    But labels? They’re unoriginal, too.

  • http://www.morethings.com/senate Al Barger

    Temple, I don’t remember writing anything before about how the president could leverage domestic opposition to the war to his diplomatic benefit. When was that?

    Sorry you don’t like me dumping on Kennedy, but screw him. He’s a nasty little schmuck in ways that have nothing to do with policy viewpoints.

    Also, whining about being “labeled” isn’t much impressing me. Labels are appropriate if they are accurate. What, I described you as a “liberal?” That seems like a perfectly accurate and maybe only slightly perjorative term. It’s surely more accurate than the descriptions of “right wing” that get slapped on me constantly.

    Again, Temple there was in fact a point, a very simple and easy to understand point about how the president might use domestic opposition to the war to leverage co-operation. I stated it in a pretty straightforward manner.

    If you still can’t get that what my point was (right or wrong) after reading this, and my now repeated explanations, then the problem isn’t with me. Perhaps you could hook up with one of those Sylvan learning centers and get some remedial English classes. I strongly suspect, however, that you are simply doggedly determined not to get the point.

    It appears to me that you are getting pissy and making petty about my writing style when really your opposition is to my content. It’s just purely ideological.

    Look, if you don’t like me bad mouthing Ted Kennedy, tough noogies. Instead of bitching, how about you respond with your own column explaining how Ted Kennedy is the savior of the working man, and how we should be down on our knees thanking God for Teddy.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Steve. I wasn’t talking about this post. I was talking about the irrational hatred which completely dominates the mindset of the left.

    >>I’m telling you folks, no compromise. How can somebody compromise with you, when they believe that EVERYTHING you say stems from hate?<<

    This is exactly the problem. No one on the right is going to be willing to deal with the left when the perception is that their policies originate in nothing but pure hatred and demonization of Bush. This stance is not reasonable or sensible, it’s based on pure emotion and leaves no room for compromise or discussion.

    How many times have you seen Bush compared to Hitler this week? How many times have you seen his administration called Fascist or his policies compared to Nazism? I see these comparisons on every leftist website I go to. Who is going to work with the left when their entire approach to the president is disrespect, belittling, insulting and demonizing?

    And you DON’T see the same level of personal attack among those on the right. They may despise certain specific left wing leaders like Ted Kennedy, but not to the same uncompromising, irrational degree. Plus he’s not president. Even when Kerry was running he received far more respect from the right than Bush has ever gotten from the left.

    Like I said, when you call the leader of the opposition a new Hitler and call the opposition party a bunch of racists and bigots, you’re not laying the groundwork for compromise or any kind of working environment. You’ve placed your personal hatreds above the welfare of the nation.

    Dave

  • http://wisdomandmurder.blogspot.com Distorted Angel

    And you DON’T see the same level of personal attack among those on the right. They may despise certain specific left wing leaders like Ted Kennedy, but not to the same uncompromising, irrational degree. Plus he’s not president. Even when Kerry was running he received far more respect from the right than Bush has ever gotten from the left.

    Of course not, Dave. The right was a model of respect and civility when Clinton was President. I’m sure that personal hatred on the part of the right towards both of the Clintons never entered into any of the public discourse back then.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Look guys, the message fromt he Left is 100% hate all the time. That’s fine. That kind of an attitude just marginalizes them more and more and alienates most of the public. If they want to fall back on hate and obstructionism and bitterness as their main political tools, the best thing to do is ignore them. That kind of desperation is transparent to most voters.

    Dave

  • JR

    Dave Nalle: I wasn’t talking about this post. I was talking about the irrational hatred which completely dominates the mindset of the left.

    Yes you were; you wrote “100%” and “all the time”. Or do you not understand the logical implications of those words?

    And you DON’T see the same level of personal attack among those on the right.

    Maybe you don’t. Or maybe you do and you’re just flat out lying. It’s hard to believe that anyone can be so divorced from reality as to believe let alone write a comment like that on this thread. I’m impressed at your audacity, if nothing else.

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    No one on the right is going to be willing to deal with the left when the perception is that their policies originate in nothing but pure hatred and demonization of Bush.

    And they get their perception from Rupert Murdoch, Focus on the Family, Rush Limbaugh, who tell the Right that the Left is 100% hatred.

    How many times have you seen Bush compared to Hitler this week?

    This week? Zero.

    How many times have you seen his administration called Fascist or his policies compared to Nazism?

    This week? Zero.

    I’ve been to Atrios, I’ve been to Kos, I’ve been to the Dean Blog, there’s nothing there, no references. Perhaps you find some Leftist who blogs from a cabin the woods and believe that he speaks for all.

    Like I said, when you call the leader of the opposition a new Hitler and call the opposition party a bunch of racists and bigots, you’re not laying the groundwork for compromise

    What democratic leader has done that Dave? So if you find a blog that compares Bush to Hitler, you can say ‘aha! We don’t have to compromise with the politicans because some Leftist on the web thinks of Hitler’. It’s all an excuse, you guys don’t intend on compromising anyway, so this is your way out.

  • Shark

    Dave, I don’t hate you or what you say; I hate how you say it.

    Jeesus gawd! Entertain me, motherfuckers!

  • 4Q2

    Edward Kennedy is a louse…always has been and always will be. Remember when the dems thought he would make a great president? Now that was funny! He typifies the confusion found in the democratic party.

  • http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

    I don’t know why you’re getting so worked up over defending such a lame post.

    I’ll just leave it at – you’re wrong again Al. And getting whiny in the process.

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    Dave, the message from the left is 100% hate all the time?

    This post is about Ted Kennedy wanting our troops to pullout.

    Where’s the hate man?

    Oh, yeah, it’s in the post, saying a politician has an STD and going on about poisoned puppies.

    And Ted is just asking for a troop withdrawal? And how do you read such information?…….

    Look guys, the message fromt he Left is 100% hate all the time

    okay, well, you’re wrong. There was no hate from the Left here. You just automatically label it upon us anyway though.

    I’m telling you folks, no compromise. How can somebody compromise with you, when they believe that EVERYTHING you say stems from hate?

    And read for yourself, right here folks, the hate is coming from the Right.

  • http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

    And, though he may have once had usefulness, Kennedy no longer does and probably hasn’t since Chappaquiddick.

    President Bush was more than willing to work with him on NCLB though so they must like each other to some extent.

  • 4Q2

    And, though he may have once had usefulness, Kennedy no longer does and probably hasn’t since Chappaquiddick.

    Hear Hear! and yet the people of mass still vote for him…what are they thinking!

  • http://www.markiscranky.org Mark Saleski

    i don’t live in mass but if i did my reasoning would be:

    “hey, the senate is our only check ‘n balance against the conservative tilt in the house”

  • 4Q2

    Between Mark & Temple, they typify the confusion of the democratic party. You guys go!

  • http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

    Labels again. Wrong. What’s wrong 4Q – shocked that you agreed with me? Thought it was Al with the Chappaquiddick observation?

    Labels. Wrong.

  • http://www.markiscranky.org Mark Saleski

    again, an example of the attempt to coopt the meaning of words.

    confused? not at all.

    the only confusion is on your part, in not understanding my point of view.

  • 4Q2

    Perfect! You two blathering about something unimportant both at the same time. I could’t have planned the confusion any better! You guys go!

  • http://www.markiscranky.org Mark Saleski

    hmmm….i thought today was groundhog’s day.

    as it turns out, it’s masturbating troll day.

    oh boy.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>And they get their perception from Rupert Murdoch, Focus on the Family, Rush Limbaugh, who tell the Right that the Left is 100% hatred.< <

    Well, I don't give any credibility to those souces and I managed to come to that conclusion all on my own.

    >>How many times have you seen Bush compared to Hitler this week?

    This week? Zero.< <

    You must not be trying very hard. Last night someone posted a link here to a flash animation depicting Bush as a Nazi and a Klan member.

    >>How many times have you seen his administration called Fascist or his policies compared to Nazism?

    This week? Zero.< <

    You aren't reading liberal blogs, obviously.

    >>I’ve been to Atrios, I’ve been to Kos, I’ve been to the Dean Blog, there’s nothing there, no references. Perhaps you find some Leftist who blogs from a cabin the woods and believe that he speaks for all.< <

    Try a seach on google for 'bush nazi' or 'bush hitler'. Both get over 1.2 million hits. If you search for 'kerry nazi' or 'kerry hitler' you only get about 400K hits.

    >>What democratic leader has done that Dave? < <

    Did I say a leader? I'm talking about people right here on blogcritics. I'm talking about tens of thousands of leftist bloggers. Or if you want a leader, how about Moveon.org with their Bush is Hitler TV commercial?

    >>So if you find a blog that compares Bush to Hitler, you can say ‘aha! We don’t have to compromise with the politicans because some Leftist on the web thinks of Hitler’. It’s all an excuse, you guys don’t intend on compromising anyway, so this is your way out.< <

    If it were one leftist crank I'd agree with you, but it's a huge number of people all over the web and in other forums

    Steve, this isn't something I'm making up to 'get' at liberals. It's a real, observable, quantifiable phenomenon.

    Perhaps this link to a page which compiles just some of the Bush is Hitler comparisons - many in the major media will help you understand:

    http://semiskimmed.net/bushhitler.html

    Dave

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    I think the key point of focus is Ted Kennedy’s timing. He came out with this speech on pulling 12000 troops out immediately and the rest by 2006 a day before a historic election result in Iraq.

    THEN, the day after that election, two Iraqi officials respond to the media that such a plan is “foolish.” So Ted Kennedy has made himself look hapless and ridiculous. President Bush’s job approval numbers are going to spike with the success of the Iraqi election, and if he can help broker a real peace between Israel and Palestine, it will strengthen his numbers even more.

    Lets hope Howard Dean can help pull the DNC back into some semblance of shape. They just can’t seem to do anything right these days.

    David

  • http://www.morethings.com/senate Al Barger

    Monsieur Flannagan, I have to say I’m not giving W real high odds on settling beef between Palestinians and Israelis. Allah and Yahweh are eventually going to have to get together and finish their own fight.

    I’d just be happy to see him get the Iraqis set up enough that we could get the hell out. If he manages to finish up and get us out by the end of his administration, that’d be doing pretty good.

    By the way, I wouldn’t say that I “hate” Ted Kennedy. I’m contemptuous of him, and may thus speak derisively or with honest disrespect. However, I’m not particularly emotionally invested in that dislike in any active way that would be described as “hating” him. My typical reaction to Kennedy is rolling of the eyes, rather than pounding the table in rage.

    Also, I suspect that Howard Dean might well make a surprisingly effective DNC chair. He’d be a great cheerleader to the faithful, and would probably be a little more controlled than we remember him in the sudden whirlwind of a presidential campaign.

    If he uses his head, he could be a pretty savvy opponent to the president. Dean’s certainly a far sharper tool than Kennedy.

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    Try a seach on google for ‘bush nazi’ or ‘bush hitler’. Both get over 1.2 million hits.

    yeah, and if you just type in Bush, guess what? You get porn sites too. I’m sure there’s a few Bush Nazi sites out there. AND…how many of those sites are just sites bitching about the use of Bush and Nazi showing up together?

    That is some very flawed logic, using google search results like that, to determine the pulse of liberals.

    Do you know why Dave, that SOME on the Left equate Bush with Hitler?

    We’ve seen a lot of examples of an openly stated desire to do away with liberalism, particularly by accusing liberals of treason and equating them with “the enemy,” in the past couple of years. This has been most notable in the field of conservative-movement book titles, ranging from Ann Coulter’s Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism to Sean Hannity’s Deliver Us From Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism and Liberalism to Michael Savage’s The Enemy Within: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on Our Schools, Faith, and Military. The crass intimidation inherent in these attacks cannot be clearer; and if you go to places like Savage’s Web site, “Your Gear for Liberals to Fear” is only a click away.

    These all may seem relatively minor when taken individually, until you calculate their widespread effect. The eliminationist message coming from movement conservatives isn’t relegated to the fringes, but is broadcast to millions of people. In the arena of mass politics, this can have a profound effect.

    Also consider, Republican poobah Grover Norquist, on more than one occasion, has made clear that he intends to ride the conservative movement to the transformation of America into a one-party state — and using any means necessary to achieve that end.

    There was, for instance, the time that the Denver Post reported the following from Norquist:

    “We are trying to change the tones in the state capitals — and turn them toward bitter nastiness and partisanship,” said Grover Norquist, a leading Republican strategist, who heads a group called Americans for Tax Reform.

    “Bipartisanship is another name for date rape,” Norquist, a onetime adviser to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, said, citing an axiom of House conservatives.

    In the same article, Norquist made clear that he saw Texas as a model for the rest of the country, as a place where Republicans would dominate the political scene in ruthless fashion. First to go, he said, were people like Rep. Charles Stenholm, a moderate Democrat:

    …”[I]t is exactly the Stenholms of the world who will disappear, … the moderate Democrats. They will go so that no Texan need grow up thinking that being a Democrat is acceptable behavior.”

    I just give you the quotes of one man here, I could give you pages from many. All with an eliminationist message. All I can tell you Dave, is that you see a lot of Bush = Hitler sites, but you haven’t given a shred of thought as to WHY that might be.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Steve S: Yeah, and if you just type in Bush, guess what? You get porn sites too. I’m sure there’s a few Bush Nazi sites out there. AND…how many of those sites are just sites bitching about the use of Bush and Nazi showing up together?

    Well, you see, I went to a lot of those sites. And guess what, aside from the link I quoted with a compendium of quotes equating Bush and Hitler they were mostly liberal sites which were making comparisons of Bush and Hitler.

    Steve S: Do you know why Dave, that SOME on the Left equate Bush with Hitler?

    Because they’re irrational bigots who use Hitlerian accusations to demonize their enemies?

    Steve S:We’ve seen a lot of examples of an openly stated desire to do away with liberalism, particularly by accusing liberals of treason and equating them with “the enemy,” in the past couple of years. This has been most notable in the field of conservative-movement book titles, ranging from Ann Coulter’s Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism to Sean Hannity’s Deliver Us From Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism and Liberalism to Michael Savage’s The Enemy Within: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on Our Schools, Faith, and Military. The crass intimidation inherent in these attacks cannot be clearer; and if you go to places like Savage’s Web site, “Your Gear for Liberals to Fear” is only a click away.

    There’s a huge difference between calling liberalism as a whole an undesirable, even ‘evil’ trend in general terms and specifically equating the president with Hitler. Surely even YOU can see the difference?

    Steve S: Also consider, Republican poobah Grover Norquist, on more than one occasion, has made clear that he intends to ride the conservative movement to the transformation of America into a one-party state — and using any means necessary to achieve that end.

    That’s not exactly what Norquist is all about, but even if it were true, that makes him the Republican equivalent of James Carville. He’s a lobbyist, head of a PAC, an activist and very outspoken on his beliefs, which BTW mostly center on government accountability and trimming federal spending, which I approve of.

    Steve S:I just give you the quotes of one man here, I could give you pages from many. All with an eliminationist message. All I can tell you Dave, is that you see a lot of Bush = Hitler sites, but you haven’t given a shred of thought as to WHY that might be.

    Well, my conclusion is that it’s because there are an awful lot of small-minded, loud-mouthed fools in the liberal camp. Certainly no other explanation makes any sense.

    Dave

  • http://www.myspace.com/welcometobrookhollow Scott

    I wonder how many times this week Dave has called some left-leaning person a socialist or a communist. Isn’t that also being an irrational bigot and demonizing someone? Or are you simply “exposing their demonic nature”?

    “Republican poobah Grover Norquist, on more than one occasion, has made clear that he intends to ride the conservative movement to the transformation of America into a one-party state”

    “That’s not exactly what Norquist is all about”

    Perhaps not, but it is what Karl Rove is all about.

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    There’s a huge difference between calling liberalism as a whole an undesirable, even ‘evil’ trend in general terms and specifically equating the president with Hitler. Surely even YOU can see the difference?

    There are a lot of similiar concepts and perceptions brought up, when equating Liberalism with an Enemy of the States that must be defeated like terrorism, as there would be with equating the conservative party with Nazism. Surely you can see the parallels?

    The difference is that your side is not primarily limited to webpages.

    Now, before you hold the number of anti-Bush webpages as reason to condemn bipartisianship, you should provide evidence showing how many of those are from Americans.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Scott: I wonder how many times this week Dave has called some left-leaning person a socialist or a communist. Isn’t that also being an irrational bigot and demonizing someone? Or are you simply “exposing their demonic nature”?

    Woah, Scott. Are you saying that Socialists and Communists are demonic? Actually, I almost never call anyone a communist and I only call people socialists when it’s accurate. And it is both an accurate description of most American liberals today and it is NOT necessarily a perjorative term. It’s descriptive. Is Nazi an accurate descriptive term for Republicans?

    Steve S:There are a lot of similiar concepts and perceptions brought up, when equating Liberalism with an Enemy of the States that must be defeated like terrorism, as there would be with equating the conservative party with Nazism. Surely you can see the parallels?

    Actually I don’t. Liberals have actively aided and supported terrorists either directly or at least tacitly. When was the last time any notable Republican said that Hitler was a cool guy and that we could use some new death camps?

    Steve S:The difference is that your side is not primarily limited to webpages.

    Ah, ok. You’re delusional. Never mind.

    Steve S: Now, before you hold the number of anti-Bush webpages as reason to condemn bipartisianship, you should provide evidence showing how many of those are from Americans.

    Not going to go through over a million pages to figure this out, but I’m sure some are from other countries. Neoliberal Socialism is an international movement. All I can tell you is that the dozen or so I visited were from the US.

    Dave

  • 4Q2

    Mark-if you want to typify the democratic party try….1) putting your dick back in your pants and quit acting like your confused. ok????

  • http://notesfromnancy.blogspot.com NancyGail

    Ted may not be a favored son, but Kennedys are hear to stay. So many people are chatting that I am no longer sure who wrote the original post. (Dave?) May I inquire if the poster is from Mass.?

  • http://www.morethings.com/senate Al Barger

    Miss Nancy, I’m the original author, and I am definitely not from Massachusetts. I hail from the great state of Indiana, from which I recently sought to join Kennedy in the US Senate.

    I’ll note that I did actually meet Senator Kennedy very briefly ten or twelve years ago when he was in Indianapolis with President Clinton dedicating a memorial to Bobby Kennedy and MLK. At the time, I had hair most of the way down to my ass, and I was wearing my now late and lamented Homey the Clown t-shirt. “Homey don’t play that!”

    He shook my hand by automated muscular reflex, but I don’t think I registered in his consciousness whatsoever. Good times!