Tough Times for Phil Donahue’s “War”
Phil Donahue has told Politico‘s Jeffrey Ressner that he’s “feeling his way along the wall of a dark hallway” in terms of finding theatrical distribution for Body of War, the documentary about a wounded Iraq War veteran he co-directed with Ellen Spiro. The movie can’t get arrested because the leave-us-aloners won’t pay to see Iraq War dramas with movie stars in the cast, which makes distributor interest in a doc along these lines next to nil. It will obviously help if Body of War becomes one of the five Best Feature Doc nominees (it’s on the short list), but…be optimistic!
So you’ve seen it?
And no doubt after a dozen-plus anti-victory documentaries and a eight hurry-up-before-we-win films Mr. Donahue has something completely new and unique to bring to the debate.
Oops, did I say debate? I meant one-sided liberal, defeatist argument.
I’m sure if Phil can’t find some piece of shit distributor who wants us to lose the war, there’s always MSNBC.
Shut the fuck up, Harry.
It cut out before I could add: You’ve become as “thoughtful” and useful as DZ. How about you guys start your own He Said/She Said blog? You could call it The Assholes Who Are Destroying This Country from Both Sides.
Sorry, Burma: I forget how angry and irrational our impending victory in Iraq makes some of you.
Yes, victory. Yes, impending. Yes… *pats Harry on the head*
Thoughtful as in “Shut the fuck up?” You mean thoughtful like that?
Shut the fuck up DZ is a refrain on here you’ll get used to. Since you’re the new DZ, it fits. You want something more clever?
Don’t waste the pixels, Harry, white flag libs like Burma are the true lost cause. They are psychologically invested in our defeat, since, as everyone knows, it’s Bush’s war.
You mean thoughtful as in “pats Harry on the head?” Thoughtful like that?
You’ve taught me so much, Burma.
Mystery: I especially love when they scream at me from out of nowhere TO SHUT THE FUCK UP and to be thoughtful. They’re just so special. So, always everything I expect them to be.
Sorry mrmystery, killings are down, etc etc, but I just don’t see how replacing a secular thug with a Shiite theocratic democracy that will last probably about 5 years before Sadr and his types take total control is “winning” when we’re fighting a war on terror. We could use all the secular thugs we can get. I guess we “white flag” libs just have a different definition of winning. We play chess, you play football.
BS: Football maybe as in how liberals keep moving the goal posts to forever live with their hope that Iraq is a lost cause.
Libs will nitpick this victory to death because the psychological breakdown imminent with any acknowledgement that we just might have succeeded over there just isn’t worth it. Either Iraq is a Jeffersonian Democracy or a complete failure!!! And yet libs despise Jeffersonian Democracy… Hmm…?
Talking to people like BS is always a healthy reminder as to why I’m no longer liberal: rationalizing and lying to one’s self is just too much work.
And BS, don’t forget to thoughtfully tell me to shut the fuck up again. Or — and this is even more important — to mention the poppy fields in Afghanistan — can’t have that confused as a success either.
You know, even if I wanted to see this, why would I want to see it in a theater as opposed to on HBO?
I mean, so far a grand total of about 3000 people have been to see Redacted. How could you not get a bigger audience on TV, even if you showed it on RFD or Eternal Word Television Network.
“I forget how angry and irrational our impending victory in Iraq makes some of you.”
Wow, what have you been smoking? That’s some powerful shit. Don’t drive or operate any heavy machinery this evening.
I saw this at TIFF and it’s terrific (it was a runner-up for the audience award so I’m obviously not alone). What mystifies me is that right wingers like “Dirty Harry,” who will invoke troop sympathies whenever it helps fuel the corporate cash grab that is the Iraq War, suddenly don’t give two shits about troops when a documentary about actual troops who fought in the actual war is made. I don’t want to question anyone’s patriotism here, but the only one you’re fooling is yourself?
How about a troops winning a battle doc? Or, heaven forbid, narrative film?
Injured, demoralized, racist, sexist, psychotic, dehumanized troops…? Had my fill. Up. To. Here. Thank you, very much.
Where’s the film about our winning in Afghanistan? Fallujah?
How about our guys as heroes in an Iraq film killing the bad guys and saving the innocent? Where’s that film? Where’s the doc/film honoring their mission — their duty — their progress? Where’s the film saying why the blood spilled was worth it? The doc showing their sucesses instead of cherry-picking the mistakes?
You want to honor the troops… Get off the troops-as-victims bandwagon. That’s not how the see themselves. They see themselves as warriors doing good.
How twisted an industry that every single thing about Iraq these sick fucks pump out is about defeat, loss, and getting out. Not even one opposing opinion is allowed to see the light.
I would think the monolithic thinking in H’wood would bother even the biggest opponent to the war based on fairness and a desire for diversity and a belief in free speech alone.
In a Gallup poll 20% of Democrats admitted they wanted us to lose In Iraq. Well, we sure know where to find some of those 20% are.
So now sinking rat#35 of Team Bush is trying to backpedal from his accusations that he lied for them. See DH, that’s why this war is evil, stupid and deadly for this country and world. Because it was based on a lie that will keep bouncing back until these crooks are run out of Washington.
Anyway, Donohue was taken off the air by the liberal media because of his opposition to President Dicatator’s war, so hopefully he’ll get this out there.
I wish DH and Medved would get together to make a stirring Iraq war film called VICTORY. I’m sure that would scare the enemy and rally our wounded nation to the cause.
“I’m sure if Phil can’t find some piece of shit distributor who wants us to lose the war, there’s always MSNBC.”
MSNBC fired him because his lips weren’t as deep into Bush’s asshole as the corporatists in actual charge of information.
The NBC memo read that Donohue created a “difficult public face for NBC in a time of war.”
Now blow that out your liberal media. Stop lying DH. It won’t help your party anymore.
Oh and let’s give thanks to Australia for booting out Bush lap dog John Howard. It’s a sign of the times…one hopes.
DirtyHarry, where do you stand on the Military asking wounded and disabled veterans for their signing bonuses back? Since you love the troops so much. I happen to think it’s a symptom of our sociopathic commander in chief, but I’m sure you have a different opinion. And don’t you dare say it’s a fabricated story.
I find myself in a quandary: I support the war, but I’m against the troops. What to do…?
Blackwater! Now hiring!
I’m someone who’s very aware of what’s going on over there so I’m not what Jeff would call a “leave-me-aloner”. However, I have NO INTEREST in clunking down 40 bucks with parking and popcorn to see a predictably slanted movie or doc that enlightens me as to the real-casualties-of-war.
Hollywood has pretty well established where it stands and people don’t like their politics preached AT them by a group who accept–and congratulate each other–for titles as frivolous as “the world’s sexiest man”…can you really blame audiences for being cynical and staying away?
Wells talks about these movies as if simply watching is some form of protest or civil disobediance, which it’s not. Actions define us, not thoughts or reflections. Watching a movie, feeling motivated to “do something” for twelve hours, then ripping into Amy Adams does nothing to shorten the war.
So, please Jeff, stop acting like you’re organizing a march on the White House…your armchair criticism of the war–and those who don’t look to Hollywood, as you seem, for a guiding light in every facet of life–is an embarrassment. I believe that you’re passionate about the war, just don’t tell me I’m not because I don’t worship your gods.
Hollywood has pretty well established where it stands and people don’t like their politics preached AT them by a group who accept–and congratulate each other–for titles as frivolous as “the world’s sexiest man”
That’s valid as a criticism of big Hollywood movies like Lions for Lambs, maybe. But that’s not where the documentaries come from — the big studios are generally as un-keen on docs as you are. If they weren’t, Donahue would have no trouble finding distribution.
Dirty Harry, seems like most here see you for what you are – a partisan hack and flaming douchebag.
So let me second the request for you to please shut the fuck up
Phil Donahue?
Yes, Dirty Harry, we don’t allow people to spout off about the war ignorantly. Oh wait, maybe that’s all we allow. I forget.
Anyway, the irony of all this is that we’re about to get a movie about that part of the world which people actually will go to see, because it will be the first one that seems like it actually may show and tell them something that’s actually rooted in the authentic experience about that part of the world, and not some rich Hollywood guy’s idea of what must be going on in that part of the world.
The Kite Runner will probably show that people weren’t avoiding the war– they were just avoiding lame movies.
It _would_ be nice if people were interested in actually discussing the issue because there is common ground and simple, rational discussion to be had.
But not by someone who’s going to call himself ‘Dirty Harry’ (though it is a good movie.)
Oh, let me toss this out there: the very concept of ‘victory’ in Iraq (or ‘on terror’) has never been defined so how are we supposed to know when it’s happened?
When did we win in Korea? 1992?
There was an armistice in Korea. Who is going to sign an armistice in Iraq?
Oh, and really, we never ‘won’ in Korea since the People’s Republic never ceased to exist. It was, I think, a draw.
dirty harry and his ilk will never admit that we are not engaged in a ‘war’ but, rather, an ‘ illegal’ occupation based entirely on lies….that said:
i got a screener of ‘body of war’…it was ‘encoded’, ‘watermarked’, ‘branded’ and came with the usual admonitions re: copying, sharing, etc……it’s a tough watch that needs a shove….
wouldn’t a little piracy/viral video behoove this movie and get some w.o.m. going? …… why didn’t they just send it out ‘clean’ and let the internet do the heavy lifting?…..anybody??
Oh, and really, we never ‘won’ in Korea since the People’s Republic never ceased to exist. It was, I think, a draw.
Let’s see, democratic Asian tiger economy making cars and computers… famine and labor camps… I think I can pick a winner out of those two, even if you can’t.
MGMax, I was talking about a military conflict which ended in 1953 when the Koreas signed an armistice. If you mean that we won’t ‘win’ in Iraq until it’s a prosperous and democratic society, which obviously won’t happen for many, many years under the best circumstances, that’s fine but let’s keep our terms of discussion clear.
Scooter, even though the invasion was a bad idea, considering that we’re in an ‘illegal occupation’ is also a counterproductive notion that ignores the facts on the ground.
yeah, i’m not sure i feel bad about ‘counterproductive’ references…the invasion was a bad idea…the occupation is a bad idea…and i’m really not too concerned about pissing off people like ‘dirty harry’…..
I’m not concerned about pissing off Dirty Harry either, and yes, the invasion was the worst idea of the decade, but I don’t believe in pulling out of the country until it’s stabilized (if pulling out would stabilize it that would be great but I don’t think it would happen).
Mgmax, earlier Dirty Harry was saying ‘victory’ was ‘impending’ so obviously you and he don’t see eye to eye on that subject.
imo: stabilization will last minutes/hours….
Under what conditions?
I believe in the ‘you break it, you buy it’ principle.
“the invasion was the worst idea of the decade, but I don’t believe in pulling out of the country until it’s stabilized”
Exactly, that is the dilemma, whether we are democrats or republicans.
But, what if we’re one of the main causes of the instability? Perhaps it’s time to just get out of the way:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKYAT72246420071001
Dirty Harry :”How twisted an industry that every single thing about Iraq these sick fucks pump out is about defeat, loss, and getting out. Not even one opposing opinion is allowed to see the light.”
I’m sure Harry is no longer monitoring this post because that’s what he does, he beats his chest and copies and pastes Republican campaign slogans and then runs away when everything he has said is proven to be BS. But if I may humor myself…
It’s not allowed to see the light because people don’t care about opinions when the facts suggest otherwise. The media gave you your wishful and blind propaganda for the first two years of the war. Now that they’ve suddenly begun to show it for what it really is… you want Frank Capra to waive our flag and hand out cookies and rainbow colored candies to all the Iraqi children.
Dirty Harry :”Football maybe as in how liberals keep moving the goal posts to forever live with their hope that Iraq is a lost cause.”
Ha, that’s a laugh. Because the “Mission wasn’t Accomplished” when we removed Sadam. Then it wasn’t when we caught him. Then it wasn’t when we set up a provisional government. Then it wasn’t when the Iraqis voted. Then it wasn’t when Brigades full or Iraqis were trained.
Lets face it, you’ll never have your “stabilization” while we are there because we are the ones causing it. Ask me if I hope we lose when there’s still 50,000 troops stationed there and we’re still “at war” in 2058.
If losing means admitting that are many accomplishments haven’t resulted in anything and we’re staying because it saves face for Bush and makes more money for his corporate cronies with no bid contracts. Then we’re do I sign?
MGMax, I was talking about a military conflict which ended in 1953 when the Koreas signed an armistice.
Yes, and I’m suggesting that your notion of armies neatly squared off against each other in trenches until the generals sign a paper in a chateau is out of date.
Thanks for the pointless mockery, Mgmax. I’m legitimately asking for a benchmark of progress and the best thing you’ve said is that we’ll know that we’ve ‘won’ when Iraq is as prosperous as South Korea, which isn’t useful. Try again if you like.
bents75 brings up the most salient point, that this war was supported by the fully functioning power of the liberal MSM (who sociopaths like Hewitt and O’Reilly claim are leftist marxists!) and the American people who were told to beware of Saddam mushroom clouds. Oh, and Hussein was one of those responsible for 9/11. You righties got your war and it was a bomb. Now you want us to accept more lies, corruption and incompetence. Our troops are targets there. Forever. The first step to stop more death is to remove them.
David Rothkopf nails it:
Their [The Project for the New American Century's] signal enterprise was the invasion of Iraq and their failure to produce results is clear. Precisely the opposite has happened. The US use of force has been seen as doing wrong and as inflaming a region that has been less than susceptible to democracy. Their plan has fallen on hard times. There were flaws in the conception and horrendously bad execution. The neo-cons have been undone by their own ideas and the incompetence of the Bush administration.
And here’s just a sample from PNAC’s 2000 playbook on US world domination. Imagine folk like Bill Kristol and Dick Cheney coming up with these wild visions of the future:
“Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region.”
And for fun, my favorite PNAC Buck Rogers dream:
CONTROL THE NEW “INTERNATIONAL COMMONS†OF SPACE AND “CYBERSPACE,†and pave the way for the creation of a new military service – U.S. Space Forces – with the mission of space control.
That’s all true, but it appears to me that precipitously pulling our troops out would only make things worse and that we cannot allow Iraq to become a failed state a la Afghanistan or Somalia.
It’s neither pointless nor mockery, Jeffmcm, and I’m surprised that you prove to be so brittle in regards to a legitimate point. We are not engaged in a 1914 (or 1815) style balance of powers conflict against cleanly-defined nation-states, but an ideological struggle against a religious/cultural movement which is very bad at running nations and very good at inspiring disaffected youth in high-birthrate, low-employment societies. Ultimately we will have to see the conversion of a preponderance of those societies to a more modern and humane democratic way of life in order to extinguish the appeal of the Islamic death cult; if extinguishing the socialist death cults of the 20th century took most of that century this struggle could well be much longer. Put in those terms it may well sound hopeless, except that we saw many other societies– from Germany and Austria to Japan and Korea– make the same transition from starting points arguably even less promising. In any case, in an age of nuclear proliferation it is difficult to imagine that we have any other alternative.
So the surge is heartening; the “victory” in one corner of the war is imaginable; but in Cold War terms it is not only not 1989, it may not even be 1947– it may just be 1922.
That all sounds fine, and I don’t disagree with your points, but I would point out that the ‘socialist death cult’ was not defeated by military power but rather by waiting out the clock until they imploded under their own failure. To use your parallels, it’s as if we were in 1947, say, but instead of establishing NATO and the Marshall Plan, Truman had set MacArthur loose to invade China and gotten immediately bogged down.
Do you think “waiting out the clock” didn’t have an enormous military component to it (not to mention involve a considerable number of proxy wars)? How do you think “containment” worked?
And of course, part of the reason I said “socialist death cults” was to include Germany, who most certainly were defeated militarily, not by waiting for Nazism to reveal its internal contradictions. (That they were mostly defeated by another socialist death cult is ironic.)
Unfortunately, in an age of suitcase nukes and such, we can’t fight that last war the same way.
When the book is written on this war, they will call it the anal-retentive war.
These liberals amuse me. Whatever happened to “too soon” when it was “United 93″ about to be released? Funny how when it’s U.S. soldiers committing a horrific act the libs say anyone who doesn’t want to see it lacks “courage.”
By the way, did DePalma really have to go all the way to Iraq to find a noteworthy rape story to tell? What about Juanita Broaddrick’s story? Or Katherine Willey?
Oh well. I was thinking of organizing a boycott against “Redacted”…but, really…what would be the point?
By the way, did DePalma really have to go all the way to Iraq to find a noteworthy rape story to tell? What about Juanita Broaddrick’s story? Or Katherine Willey?
…or Selene Walters?
I think Stephe96 should stick to the alt.showbiz.gossip boards. Or better yet…to locating truffles.
Mgmax, I agree with just about every premise that you’re starting from, I just don’t think that I agree about the conclusions you’re reaching.
For example: regardless of what we do now and in the future in Iraq, surely you agree that it was a poor strategy, incompetently executed, right? The Grand War on Terror would have been better served by completing our job in Afghanistan and otherwise executing the ‘war’ as a massive criminal/police action.
Of course, that ship has sailed.
“Whatever happened to “too soon” when it was “United 93″ about to be released?”
Huh?
You know what I agree with?
“No battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy.” –Helmuth von Moltke (the Elder)
So, yes, it was something of a botch early on, much like the Union side of the Civil War under McClellan and Hooker, or Churchill’s Norway battle plan.
I have a feeling that unseating, trying and hanging Saddam by an at least somewhat civil process may count for far more than any of this in the decades to come. The myth of the Arab strongman, the Saladin who rules by terror, needed smashing– and that could be a hugely momentous change in that region.
I love the way the America-haters just let drop as though it’s fact that Afghanistan is a failed state. Pathetic.
Hope don’t make it so BDS victims. Hope don’t make it so.
And Yea in the year 2009 Anno Domino, it came to pass that George Bush was hailed round the globe as a strategic genius. His triumph did not last though, for wiley George III’s secret plan finally boar fruit as 20% of the population spent 24 hours a day sucking on “Bush dogs”, neglecting their productivity and the economy collapsed. And Yea, though John Bull was frightfully clever, he was not as sharp as Phillip II, whose “2nd” armada laying wait just of Lands End launched there dastardly invasion. Mere moments after they raised the Flag over Buckingham Palace came the word all feared. Mubarak, the great falcon of Egypt in the 93rd year of his reign, revealed himself to be none other than the Saladin Who Rules by Terror leading the Moors to sweet sweet triumph over the decadent West. So Let It Be Written
Yeah, what GreenBear said!
Uh…what did GreenBear say?
Dirty Harry, nobody said what you’re saying. Afghanistan _was_ a failed state prior to 2001. That’s what I said.
What the hell is a BDS victim?
And seriously, It pisses me off that the term ‘America-hater’ is considered usable as a term in conversation. For one thing, it tells me you’re primarily interested in name-calling, which you should really restrict to your own website without clogging up others. Next, it’s incredibly rude and offensive. I refuse to give you that ground to stand on. Grow up and learn how to actually have an adult conversation or stay in your own back yard.
To be fair, Dirty Harry has rarely been greeted with anything more adult than “Shut the fuck up” from tolerant liberals here, so picking on him alone for that is hardly fair.
BDS is “Bush derangement syndrome,” a mock diagnosis invented by Charles Krauthammer for people whose dislike of Bush goes beyond garden variety political opposition into baroque fantasy. See also: Bushitler, depleted uranium, Afghan pipeline, Dixie Chicks.
Dirty Harry has rarely been greeted with anything more adult than “Shut the fuck up” from tolerant liberals here,
No, I counted two at most. But then DZ is told to shut up constantly and he is a flaming lib, yes? But calling people America-Haters as you and DH do with calm regularity, then complain about mean lib discourse is funny. And let’s just count 75 percent of America as suffering from BDS. Not unlike CDS which still afflicts Republicans and is clearly terminal.
DZ is told to shut up by Jeffmcm, not by me. I enjoyed jousting with him, back in the day.
I’d be curious if you can find a single example where I called someone “America-hating.” Certainly not with regularity. Nor do I complain, quite the contrary I enjoy tormenting lazy bumpersticker thinking with erudite, even abstruse historical references.
And I’m pretty sure that while 75% “disapproves of the president’s performance in office,” the percentage who truly believe fascism is coming to America is a tiny, tiny fraction of that– a tiny fraction who fantasize about being the heroes in the great anti-Bush resistance precisely because they know, deep down, that HE is not the real danger.
“Certainly not with regularity.”
Ah, temperance in the face of extremism is no vice.
And why should you resort to such lazy bumpersticker thinking when you have Rush Limbaugh to call anybody opposed to Bush or the war as America-Haters? And he only gets the President’s praise.
Huh?
Now everyone wants a civil debate… How cute.
An America-hater is someone who only sees or discusses the bad in America. Someone who can’t hear something good about America and keep from controlling themselves with a “yeah, but.” Like someone who brings up soldiers being asked to return their signing bonuses when we’re talking about the progress in Iraq — as though that’s not wildly off-topic — as though that isn’t based on an irrational rage.
An America-hater hates America, and I have been on this site long enough to know there are more than a few here. Way more.
If good news from Iraq makes you angry — that might a sign you have a problem.
If this weekend’s booming retail sales disappointed you, that may also be a sign.
DH, your myopic talk radio definitions are just that. If one doesn’t care, one doesn’t complain. Yes, there are folk, leftists even, who do hate this country. Some have been persecuted and some sympathize, however overreaching. Mostly, people care so much they have to speak up.
But folks like you and your brethren of Medved, Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, have such a narrow, insulated and jingoistic world view. Calling 9/11 widows “harpies” who “relished their husband’s deaths” sounds like real America Hate — but that voice is one of your party’s intellectual Christian lights. Then I read essays on Townhall.com telling the dead and displaced of New Orleans to “get over it” with the most racist bigoted comments from America Lovers. Both sides preach their own kinda hate. Along with those in the middle.
The USA is loved around the world as my travels proved to me. But the world doesn’t much trust us anymore. And we need to change course. That’s not hate, it’s common sense.
Nobody trusts the boss, until they have the next one.
“If one doesn’t care one doesn’t complain.”
BWAHAHAHAHAHA… Don’t you mean, “If one doesn’t care one doesn’t complain constantly without ever discussing the many many many virtues of America,” because that’s you and so many others on this site just like you.
Is that like, “The highest form of patriotism is dissent?” Which interpreted by the left means everything is patriotism but, you know, actual patriotism — or that if dissent is the highest form of patriotism treason must really be up there…?
ALL you do is complain. ALL YOU DO is revel in the flaws no matter how off topic you must go to bring them up.
Here’s the difference twit: People who love America want us to win in Iraq. WIN. McCain and Lieberman were angry and criticial of Bush because he wasn’t winning. That’s patriotism. They wanted America to succeed and he wasn’t succeeding. That’s patriotism.
You and your sick ilk are angry because we’re not losing — because we haven’t pulled out of Iraq with our tails between our legs in disgrace.
You don’t fight for us to succeeed. You don’t argue for our winning. You want us to lose. You’re not angry because we’re losing and you want us to win, because you don’t want us to win — you want us to leave disgraced. You want us to fail. And that’s anti-American. Duh.
And I’m sorry but the highest form of Americanism is not anti-Americanism. It’s purely and simply anti-Americanism. Meaning you and anyone else upset and unwilling to hope for, acknowledge, or even listen to good news from Iraq. Meaning those of you hoping retails sales would be bad this weekend.
“Here’s the difference twit:”
Well now you’re clearly about to illustrate fact.
Let’s make it simple. Cos now I get it: YOU hate America. So YOU project your hatred onto others.
The word WIN doesn’t man JACK SHIT. We won by going in there to topple Saddam. But WINNING was not the original goal. So you think you can move the goal posts to the next goal — as outlined by PNAC — and then attack those who don’t join your team. Well, it almost worked for Goebbels.
And to equate retail sales theory with an ill-conceived war is bizarre but about equal to your level of AM radio insight. And sure, we hate America because we didn’t all go shopping.
Really DH, you’re starting to lose it. But then, you’re named after a Hollywood fascist cop. I understand. Don’t tase me, bro.
Godwin’s Law! Thread over.
“The word WIN doesn’t man JACK SHIT”
Case closed.
“And sure, we hate America because we didn’t all go shopping.”
Yeah. That’s what I meant.
‘Nor do I complain, quite the contrary I enjoy tormenting lazy bumpersticker thinking with erudite, even abstruse historical references.’
well now pard, think you may have overstated your abilities a wee bit there. Fer instance, contrary to what passes for urinary obtuse historical references the korean war had specific objectives. Those objectives were not met, the opposition’s objectives were not met either, and for the last 54 years the two sides have been looking down the barrel of a cannon with a very short fuse. To the uninformed, the other side enjoying their preferred form of government is not generally considered a “victory”. The only torment you inflict is that the left is well aware that there is the potential of real intelligent opposition and all we seem to get around here are fly-blown pussies like dirty Hairy and yourself.
wow!…that’s not a post…..it’s a screed….. dirty harry is nuckin’ futz…really…the guy is insane….