Wednesday, November 17, 2004


Kerry Posted by Hello

28 comments:

leaddog2 said...

Suha Arafat is HIV positive anyway, so she is a death-trap. Does Kerry care?

Michael said...

You're assuming they'd had sex since the minimum necessary to produce his children. Reports were she hadn't even visited him in three years.

the House of Payne said...

Great minds think alike.

Y.H.N. said...

Why assume the daughter is his at all? That would account for Arafat's unwillingness to be anywhere near either of them.

Anonymous said...

Who says he would have "relations" with her, anyway? All he's after is the money...

Anonymous said...

I just thought he was dreaming of a day when he might play Suha to TeRAYsa's Yassir...

Anonymous said...

Kerry would play the "hyeana" to Suha's "tiger".

DovBear said...

So now you're calling Kerry a potential murderer? What are you? Swift Boat Vetrans? And I bet there was plenty of crying from this meery band of kerry-hating commenters when the Guardian suggested that someone kill GWB. What a bunch of heaving pukes.

::nod of hello to Miriam::

quark2 said...

LOL!
What would you call the combination of a Kerry and a Suha?

richard mcenroe said...

Applesweet — Redundant.

Anonymous said...

"What would you call the combination of a Kerry and a Suha?"

It would be difficult to differentiate which one was the gold-digger and which one the politcal whore.

Snake Eater said...

Gee, DovBear, I didn't see anyone call Kerry a "potential killer". Frankly, he doesn't have the balls.

And your swipe at the Swift Boat Veterans is way off base. They were there, you weren't. Just because you disagree with them doesn't make the feelings of some 250 people invalid.

And despite your utter inability to spell, there was no crying when "The Guardian" suggested that someone should kill GWB, only righteous outrage at such a suggestion, made worse by the fact that a foreign publication should deign to know more about our own politics than we do.

Can't wait to post your breathless, misspelled missive on my weblog just to show that the left only poses as intellectual and tolerant.

DovBear said...

The 250 Swift Boat Veternas went in Vietnam, but nowhere near John Kerry, and you know it. Or maybe you don't. Which would prove a few more things about the right.

And it's typical that you're making a meal out of my spelling and not my point. Pick on the irrelvancies and not the substance.

Was that the only thing you saw about my post that was wrong? And by all means put me on your horrid little blog. Let me raise the level of discoure there, as I've raised the level of discourse here.

richard mcenroe said...

DovBear — That's an amazingly ignorant or dishonest statement. The Swift Boat veterans served in the same unit, on the same missions with Kerry. Many of them were in the same actions he claims to his credit. At least one of them actually served on his boat. Shame on you.

DovBear said...

FALSE:

The Swiftvets served with Kerry only in the sense that they manned other boats in Vietnam. It's a bit like saying you spent the night with Bill Clinton because you were on Martha's Vineyard, too.

The whole horrible, dishonest swift-boat campaign is debunked here: http://slate.com/id/2105353

You're the one who should be ashamed: for accepting their slander.

M. Simon said...

DovBear,

As I understand it Kerry's 'Nam exploits weren't enough to win him the election.

In any case I would think that being on an adjacent vessel might allow at least some of the Swifties to see JFnnK in action.

BTW do you think JFnnnK committed a war crime?

Did the Marine that Sites video'd commit a war crime?

I'm just askin.

DovBear said...

I think it shows a lack of character to slander a veteran and a US Senator.

I, for one, am angry at a president - who can't account for his own service in the National Guard - and a vice president - who got every deferment in the world and decided he had better things to do - criticizing somebody who showed up and served.

HA HA HA said...

DovBear, if criticising a veteran demonstrates a lack of character, how much less character does it take for you to slander 250 other veterans? Or is it okay to slander them if they never served in the senate? What about slandering senators who never served in the military? Please clarify.

In any case, it's insane to claim that *anybody* is above criticism, or that only senatorial veterans can criticize sentatorial veterans, or whatever. For example: G. W. Bush at least served in the National Guard, and then he was elected both governor of Texas, and president of the US -- does this mean that you, having served nowhere and having been elected to nothing, have no right to criticise him? No. That would be absurd. You can criticise him if you damn well please. And how about Lt. Calley? He served, right? He sure did. Does that mean us civilians have no right to criticise him? Nope.

You're jabbering about perfect irrelevancies.

By the way, nobody called Kerry "a potential murderer". The traditional American method for acquiring a new wife is to divorce the old one; Kerry divorced his first wife, for example. There's nothing in the cartoon to suggest anything else.


Conclusion: You're off your meds.

DovBear said...

Ok, lunchbox lady, where to start:

1 - Your interp of the cartoon if farfetched, and you know it. Don't be stupid.

2 - Oh, but you are stupid, which is why you missed the irony of my using a GOP buzzphrase ("it shows a lack of charactar...") is defense of Kerry. Of course, it's ok to criticize Kerry if you want to. in fact I encourage it. Liberals aren't the ones who are famous for cutting off debate on charactar grounds. That's you "people."

3 - The swift vets lied. The people who made their ads went fast and lose with the truth. And everybody up to and including the president himself knows it.

Anonymous said...

Lunch lady moron who wrote:
"By the way, nobody called Kerry "a potential murderer". The traditional American method for acquiring a new wife is to divorce the old one; Kerry divorced his first wife, for example. There's nothing in the cartoon to suggest anything else. "

The word in the carton is "inherit" which is the traditional American ways to taking money from someone who has died. Don't be dense. You know the cartoon called Kerry a potential murderer. And you lapped it up like the dog you are.

porkopolitan said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
porkopolitan said...

Chapter 27: Are Moonbats Literate?

The word in the carton is "inherit" which is the traditional American ways to taking money from someone who has died. Don't be dense. You know the cartoon called Kerry a potential murderer. And you lapped it up like the dog you are.1. "Inherit" is the universal "ways to taking money" [sic] from someone who has died.

2. The cartoon clearly says it will be "Arafat['s] widow" who "may inherit billions."

3. John Forbes Kerry's second marriage was to a woman with far greater personal (and inherited, BTW; are you implying Teresa murdered John Heinz?) wealth than that of his first wife, whom he divorced.

4. Given all the above, the obvious expansion of of "Teresa's" balloon comment is "Don't even think about [divorcing me and marrying a richer widow]." Surely you knew that...?

Your interp of the cartoon if farfetched, and you know it. Don't be stupid.DovBear, there is a long tradition in American humor that lampoons the opportunist (of either sex) who divorces spouse A and subsequently marries (or at least desires to) a far wealthier spouse B, and you know it. (Or you should.) Don't be ignorant.

The Swiftvets served with Kerry only in the sense that they manned other boats in Vietnam. It's a bit like saying you spent the night with Bill Clinton because you were on Martha's Vineyard, too.DovBear: This quote from the slate.com article (which you failed to attribute to the article by enclosing it in quotes) mischaracterizes both the geographical and hierarchical relationships of the Swiftvets to John Kerry. The insinuation is that the boats they manned were stationed somewhere else in Vietnam. In fact, and contrary to your elsewhere-stated article of faith, they did man other boats in John Kerry's unit. If you doubt this, you need to explain why individuals who are now "Swiftvets" are mentioned in John Kerry's own after-action reports as serving on other boats in his unit. Not that you'll believe even the saint's own words if they contradict the Faith as explicated by Slate....

DovBear said...

I love the way stupid rightwing nut jobs worry about spelling. I guess it is supposed to make up for the fact that they don't worry about hygiene. Or gun control. Or Civil Rights. Or, anything, really, aside from their fat, stupid, Wal-Mart frequenting selves. (Note: Not all Bush voters are "stupid rightwing nut jobs" I have respect for many Bush voters. However, the "person" to whom I am responding deserves none of it.

To your "points":

::2. The cartoon clearly says it will be "Arafat['s] widow" who "may inherit billions."::

So why is it funny? So why is Kerry in it? Why is his wife in it? Don't be stupid (too late.) This cartoon suggests that Kerry is a potential murderer, and you and your beerguzzling band of nosepicking hillbillys can't stop chortling.

"DovBear: This quote from the slate.com article (which you failed to attribute to the article by enclosing it in quotes) mischaracterizes both the geographical and hierarchical relationships of the Swiftvets to John Kerry"

a - I atrributed the article, you nit-picking freak. Didn't I provide the link?
b - The Slate article is just one of several that makes it clear that the swiftvets lied, and that their lies were used by the GOP machine. Really. Turn off Rush. Take your bird dogs for a romp in the meadow. It'll clear your head.

Skeptic said...

Lord, there is something pompous about a fat freak who starts her post "Lesson #xxx"

And it's not like she had anything useful to say.
Shame she got up from her soaps for that.

And moonbat? Sounds like another LGF reprobate. Lord, they do come crawling out of the woodwork.

Shame a nice girl like Miriam needs to attract such low charactars

Gullyborg said...

DovBear is so freaking ignorant, rude, and stupid that I am halfway suspicious that (s)he is a plant from the right-wing, here posing as a lefty, just to make lefties look like ignorant, rude, and stupid a--holes.

It's working.

Here is my interpretation of the comic:

1) Kerry married a rich chick long ago. He divorced her and walked away with more money than he went in.

2) Kerry later married Teresa, who herself had inherited a ton of money when her previous husband died.

3) Mrs. Arafat, like Teresa before her, will probably inherit a ton of money.

4) Teresa, knowing her hubby's habits, is concerned that he might divorce her, as he did his first wife, walk away with millions more than when he and Teresa married, and then begin courting the widow Arafat.

5) It is funny.

6) Liberals are not.

Anonymous said...

DovBear -- you're out of control! You started out sane and logical, and ended up nasty and bitter. Shame on you -- go read your entries, and slap yourself.

Anonymous said...

//rant
Dovbear.... or whatever your silly name is, you may have think you attributed the article, but you are misleading and wrong. If what you wrote is a direct quote is most certainly needed to be in quotation marks, and cited, if it wasn't it still should have been in quotation marks, or separated or somehow noted that your silly thought process didn't figure that one out on it's own. Replying to the person who debunked your plagiarism saying you attributed the article and calling them an idiot is proof you are moreso and idiot than anyone else here. Go read the style book for APA or MLA writing and you will find what you did is plagiarism and misleading.

On to the second topic... I don't see where you got this idea that the cartoon is depicting Kerry as a murderer, (although I do hold him partially responsible for the deaths of god only knows how many POW's and South Vietnamese) It is as a previous anon poster stated a simple character defamation saying John has been marrying for money his whole life, and is apt to do it again if he can. (who would honestly marry Tereeeezzzaaaa for love... eeeewwwwww) If you are trying to suggest he had anything to do with the death of Arafat (big fat HIV ridden terrorist, not martyr or leader of oppressed people) from that cartoon I have some suggestions.
1. Look at the cartoon again and this time think for a second and read it.
2. Put down the glass of spiked Koolaid and take a breather. If you are having it directly injected in your veins with IV tubes, pull them out, it isn't doing any good.
3. Stop posting here because your thought process and analysis of the cartoon is that of a 4 year old overhearing his father tell a joke to a buddy over a beer. In other words, you don't get it, never will get it, and have no intellectual input on the matter in this case.

So to end this.... Back off, leave us to laugh at the silliness that the character defaming cartoon is, although John Kerry's character need not be attacked as his bio says it all for me. Liar, murderer, pompous ass, the list keeps going, but it is all there although mostly inferred, unluckily for you since you don't understand what that is or how it works, you probably don't see it that way.

//rant

//scold

Oh yeah I forgot, spelling does matter it makes your statements more credible, and keeps us from having to decipher if you actually meant to write what you did or not. If you can't spell and proofread use a word processor. Also, quit using this idea that we are bagging on your spelling because we have no valid points. Spell correctly and your point may become a little more valid in my eyes, maybe everyone else’s.

//scold

Anonymous said...

Lay off Dov Bear.

You're all so quick to judge him and to be rude to him when it's clear he was responding to this comment:

"I just thought he was dreaming of a day when he might play Suha to TeRAYsa's Yassir..."

The Idiot who wrote this was implying that Kerry would kill Teresa, like Suhu was alleged to have killed Arafat. That was DovBears objection. This is what he was answering. This is what prompted his comments. Those of you who did not see it are blind, or cruel, or one-dimensional, or just stupid, probably.

Crying about his atribution of the slate article is also stupid. Do you really think he would have cited the slate article DIRECTLY beneath the quote if he thought he was plagarizing it? So what if he didn't follow AP style.(!) Only scolds like your pathetic selves would make an issue of that. If he wanted to steal the quote, he wouldn't have given the source DIRECTLY beneath it!!!!

As for his spelling, lighten up. IF any of you had anything valid to say, you wouldn't attack him on those grounds. Attacking dovbear about his spelling, is like attacking Einstein about his handwriting. IT just shows how stupid pathetic and small minded you are for doing it.

Alexander Klein