Yes, because nothing says “Republican” like “punishing the kids for political motives.” I’d love for a kid who received an invitation to the Easter Egg Roll to ask mom/dad why he couldn’t go? “Well, I’m a Republican and I hate Obama and his out-of-control spending which led to the sequester and shutting down tours of the White House, so you can’t go hunt Easter eggs. Any questions?” Of course, the kid—being a typical kid—would then ask “Yes. Why can’t I go hunt Easter eggs?” (And if this were a typical sitcom kid, it would go something like this: “Yes. Two in fact. First, why can’t I go hunt Easter eggs? And two, why are you such a douchebag?”)

Perhaps O’Reilly should delve into the real crisis surrounding Easter: PEEPS!!!!!

If I’d known that O’Reilly was going to commence his defense in the War on Easter, I would’ve sent him an e-mail asking him to investigate why there are pink and purple and even blue Peeps and yellow Peeps dipped in chocolate and (shudder) Bunny Peeps. I can’t imagine how O’Reilly hasn’t already investigated this obvious attack on a lovely Easter tradition. (After all, seeing the Peeps in stores is the surest sign of Easter’s onset—much like the return of the swallows to Capistrano heralds the arrival of spring.)

@ Brian: I have NO problem with the producers of “The Amazing Race” visiting any country, regardless of its history with the US. Vietnam is, at least the last time I checked, a country with which we have full formal diplomatic relations. We also have a commercial relationship with the country and Americans have been free to visit the country—with little restriction—for a couple of decades (something which can’t be said of Cuba).

The US, as Priscilla pointed out, is not exactly free of its own share of atrocities during the Vietnam War. (I could only imagine the reaction from the FoxNoise kkkrew if “The Amazing Race” ran a leg through the village of Tinh Khe and the Racers stopped by the Son My Memorial. I don’t think the FoxNoise kkkrew would be too happy being reminded of the My Lai Massacre.)

So where were Douchey and Connor when Dubya was busy sucking face kissing some Saudi cheeks (maybe the nether sets as well as the facial pair—“you decide”) and holding hands for some (lovey-dovey) walks with Saudi leaders?

And where were these dorks when Dubya and Cheney were busy with their plans to invade Iraq (a country which didn’t provide any “students” for al-Qaeda’s little branch of Hijacker U)?

And we all know how disgusted Watters was with all those lesbians kissing each other. He made sure to make up a special tape for his own, um, personal use—editing out all the meaningless chit-chat, and keeping just the hottest lesbian kissing action—for all those “long, lonely nights” when he’s out on the road. (Of course, BillO probably had Watters make a copy for him.)

@aap: NONE of the right-wingers talking about the wonders of how businessmen are the salvation of the American economy have actually run businesses AND been able to take that experience and transfer it to their punditry or political service.

I’m sorry. But does this impersonator know of the REAL Washington’s constant battles with the Continental Congresses over silly things like “money for the troops” duting that silly little squabble with the British? GENERAL Washington wrote MANY letters to the various Congresses trying to requisition more money to pay the troops and supply the troops with basic needs (clothing, food, ammunition, weapons!) and was constantly being told by the Congresses that he was largely on his own. (If people think that our current Congress is dysfunctional, they really should read some of the horror stories about how bad the Continental Congresses behaved.)

Even as President, Washington had plenty of troubles. His cabinet ministers weren’t happy with each other (while Washington was largely apolitical, his VP and Cabinet officers were VERY political—and represented wildly differing political views on virtually every single subject; it’s part of the reason how our current political parties developed during Washington’s 2nd term—with the Federalists on one side and the Anti-Federalists on the other) and the members of Congress were constantly feuding with each other at the drop of the proverbial hat.

But, of course, this moron doesn’t know anything about the real Founding Fathers. No more than the Teabaggers know anything about the original Tea Party. The original Tea Party was basically a terrorist action in response to what was actually a fairly legitimate grievance. (To sum up, the Colonials were being overtaxed at every turn but had no representation in the Parliament in London. So an “extremist” group—most of whom were drunk at the time—decided to plunder ships belonging to a private business* and destroy the company’s property. It’s amazing how the truth about the “Boston Tea Party” isn’t as well-known as the fiction.) The modern Teabaggers may not like how their tax dollars are being spent (although I still find it interesting that these folk weren’t as willing to complain about the trillions of dollars in gov’t waste during the Dubya years—but I digress….) but they DO have representation in the US Congress. And while they may not like their Congressman, that—unfortunately—is one of the side effects of living in a democratic society (or, as the right-wingers always like to say, a "republic"**): You have to abide by the will of the voting majority (not the same thing as “the majority”), even if the winner doesn’t share your views. (For all his lunacy, Muammar Qaddafi had a point in his “Green Book.” “Political struggle that results in the victory of a candidate with, for example, 51 per cent of
the votes leads to a dictatorial governing body in the guise of a false democracy, since 49
per cent of the electorate is ruled by an instrument of government they did not vote for,
but which has been imposed upon them. Such is dictatorship.” On the other hand, even in the purest forms of democracy—even such as the old New England town halls or in Qaddafi’s theoretical “jamahariya”—where ALL the people participate on all civic matters, there’s always bound to be SOMEONE whose views are ignored or outvoted for whatever reason.)

*Okay. “Private business” may not be the best term when describing the situation. The tea was aboard a ship that was operating on behalf of British exporters and would be sold in the American colonies to different consignees, sort of like an auction (the auction house doesn’t actually own any of the items being sold—it merely acts as a middleman between the actual seller and the buyers) with the only real difference being that most of the consignees had already agreed to the price they would pay for the tea.

**Under strict definitions, “democracy” and “republic” have the same basic meaning. “Democracy” originates from the Greek words “demos” (people) and “kratein” (to rule) while “republic” originates from the Latin words “res” (business, matter) and “publica” (people) so a “democracy” is a state where “the people rule” and a “republic” is a state which is “the people’s/public business.” As they’re NOW used, however, a democracy is more commonly nuanced to refer to the “pure” democracy seen in the old New England town hall meetings where all public business was voted on by all the people in the room while a republic is a democracy in which the people as a whole select representatives to do the voting on public business for them. (And, under the US Constitution, the term “republic” appears in the guarantee that all the states shall have “republican” governments, ie, that the people select representatives to vote on matters of public interest—a form which is used throughout the US, even in the smallest of towns, where people elect city/town councilmembers to vote on measures. It’s worth noting, though, that this guarantee does NOT necessarily nullify the little towns where all 47 voting age adults would meet in the local Elks Lodge to decide whether the dogcatcher overstepped his bounds by catching a cow that wandered from its pasture instead of calling the farmer who owned the cow.)

Donohue’s just pissed because Trey Parker and Matt Stone revealed his secret plot in the “South Park” episode, “Fantastic Easter Special.” Yeah, he made a statement saying how much he loved it, but you just have to know that was a front.

Donohue wants to be Pope so he can have all the power over the ordinary people. (Of course, if Donohue were to ever become Pope, the exodus of Catholics from the Church would be so overwhelming, he’d end up being the Pope of one person—himself.)

If anything, Obama’s outreach to GOPers shows Obama to be more like the beaten wife, going back to the abuser who promises he’s changed, only to get drunk again and beat her senseless.

“Bill O’Reilly Rewrites The History Of His Attack On Gay Congressman”

And, in other late-breaking news, it was finally learned that water IS, indeed, wet and that the sun IS really a great big nuclear furnace. Or, to put it another way, just business as usual in the hypocritical lying world of Bill O’Reilly.

@brian: I trust you’re well-stocked on anti-nausea medicine. Or do you just need those few days that you don’t listen to Limpballs to recuperate from his vomit-inducing rhetoric?

What does Ingraham do when she’s not on O’Reilly’s show? No. Seriously. What exactly does she do? What kind of job does she have that doesn’t involve the words “hand” and “blow?”

@aria: I Googled Kelly, and found her Wiki entry. What I found shows this skank doesn’t have any experience in CRIMINAL law.

Here are the relevant entries from Kelly’s Wiki article:

“After high school, she pursued an undergraduate degree in Political Science from Syracuse University and later obtained a J.D. from Albany Law School,. . . .”

“Following her graduation from Albany Law School in 1995, Kelly practiced law for nine years at Jones Day. She first worked as an associate in the Chicago office of Bickel & Brewer LLP, during which time she co-wrote an article for the American Bar Association’s journal Litigation entitled “The Conflicting Roles of Lawyer as Director.” While at Jones Day, Kelly served as an attorney for credit bureau Experian." (Note: This is the ENTIRE entry under “Career in Law.”)

Now, having seen the bit about Jones Day, I went to the Wiki entry for it and found this: “Jones Day is a global law firm headquartered in Washington D.C.. . . . Consistently ranked as one of the most prestigious in the world, the firm represents many of the world’s largest companies and financial institutions, and is best known for its litigation practice.” And, then there’s this intriguing bit:
“Jones Day is a full service, commercial law firm and has practice areas in:
Antitrust & Competition Law
Banking & Finance
Business and Tort Litigation (USA)
Business Restructuring & Reorganization
Capital Markets
Corporate Criminal Investigations
Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation
Energy
Environmental Law, Health, & Safety
Financial Institutions Litigation & Regulation
Global Disputes
Government Regulation
Health Care
Insurance & Recovery
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Mergers & Acquisitions
Private Equity
Real Estate
Securities Litigation & SEC Enforcement
Tax”
Very interesting that there’s nothing in those areas of practice that would qualify Kelly to speak with any legal authority on the criminal case at hand. Certainly, she’s entitled to speak her mind (bwahaha) as a private citizen offering an opinion, but would anyone hire a tax attorney or civil rights attorney to defend them in a murder case? It’s too bad that a lot of people forget that holding a law degree does NOT automatically qualify the holder as an expert in ALL forms of the law. But, I think it borders on the criminal for an attorney to misrepresent himself or herself as having expertise in a matter of law outside his or her specialty.

From the article:

What if he gets to heaven and it turns out that God is a liberal? “I doubt very much that he is. He’s got a good heart.”

Say WHUUUU? That old favorite Bible quote, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son” (John 3:16—readily seen at almost every professional, and quite a few college, football games). Somehow, that does NOT sound like something a conservative would do. It doesn’t say “For God so wanted to start a needless war with some third-world country with a tinpot dictator that He sent His only son to lead thousands of soldiers to die for no reason at all.” Now, THAT sounds like the kind of God that conservatives would like.

Now, I know that conservatives also have a deep abiding appreciation for the God of the Old Testament—the one that was always smiting sinners and sending plagues. The only problem is, as one is all-too often reminded, that this is a “Christian nation” and the God that REAL Christians worship is the much-less bloodthirsty God of the New Testament (the one that was willing to send “His only begotten son” to die for the sins of ALL mankind—not just the rich, white males). And, it should also be noted that the NT God must’ve really been much more mellow than the OT version. I mean, that one sent plagues on the Egyptians (even after He deliberately “hardened Pharaoh’s heart” every time the Pharaoh was willing to let the Jews go; don’t believe me? look it up), even to the point of killing all the first-born Egyptian males* but the NT version doesn’t go on a plague-sending bender after Jesus is executed?

*I have always wondered about that. Most Pharaohs were, themselves, first-born sons. Yet there’s nothing in the Biblical account of the Exodus that suggests that the Pharaoh died from the final plague (in fact, the later story of the parting of the “Red Sea” clearly states that Pharaoh led the pursuit of the Hebrews and was among those who died when the “Sea” closed back).

Does anyone remember if Hannutty raised a fuss when billions of dollars worth of cold hard cash simply disappeared from Iraq back in the heyday of Dubya’s Invasion?

Or did Hannutty simply write that off as part of the “price to free Iraq” from Saddam?

And just earlier today (as I type this, it’s still Mar 5, 2013), we were treated to a lovely story about Billy-Boy:

*Bill O’Reilly Gives Advice On Being Rational? Really?

Posted by Priscilla · March 05, 2013 11:10 AM · 13 reactions*

I guess we all know Billy-Boy’s motto: “Do as I say, not as I do.”

“Ann Romney said about losing the election:

It was a crushing disappointment. Not for us. Our lives are going to be fine. It’s for the country.

…The dream was to make a difference. The dream was to serve."

Someone should point out to Queen Ann that there are MANY ways to “serve.” Former President Carter built houses for Habitat for Humanity. Former President Clinton started the Clinton Foundation to promote a variety of humanitarian causes. Former VP Gore promotes environmental causes and helps educate on climate change. Former Congressman Joe Kennedy helps get free heating oil to needy customers in more than a dozen states.

But the Romneys? What have they done “to serve” since Mittens left the Massachusetts’ governorship? Nothing. Mittens spent all that time running for the White House. When he didn’t get the GOP nomination in 2008, he went right back to prepping for 2012. And Ann, specifically? Well, “Your Majesty,” raising a horse for the Olympics don’t count as “service.” That, “Your Majesty,” is a vanity ploy.

Robert, you made a slight mistake. Aramaic is NOT an extinct language. The language is still spoken as a first language by roughly 500,000 people in the Middle East. The language IS regarded as endangered but it’s still around (with several dialects).

@he who cant: The Bible doesn’t say anything about SPECIFIC sins. It says “WITHOUT SIN.”

And, for the record, there are just as GOPers who’ve been hit with a number of violations while in Congress. Why is it that THOSE people don’t earn your outrage? Could it be because they don’t have a “D” after their names?

Wait a minute. I’m confused. (Of course, when discussing O’Reilly, that’s pretty par for the course. But I digress….) Billy wrote, in his memorable tome, “Culture Warrior” (published in 2006),

“To this culture warrior, gay marriage is not a vital issue. I don’t believe the republic will collapse if Larry marries Brendan. However, it is clear that most Americans want heterosexual marriage to maintain its special place in American society. And as long as gays are not penalized in the civil arena, I think the folks should make the call at the ballot box. Traditional marriage is widely seen as a social stabilizer, and I believe that is true.”

And now, he has a problem with marriage equality? I wonder what could’ve changed in the past 6 years?