Crazy Larry: Perry Is GOP's 'Favorite Killer, Favorite State-Sanctioned Killer'
It's going to be a long campaign . . . Republicans haven't come close to choosing their presidential candidate yet, but already a proud member of the MSM is calling a leading GOP contender a "killer."
On his MSNBC show this evening, Crazy Larry O'Donnell accused Rick Perry of being--for his record of enforcing the Texas law on capital punishment--the Republicans' "favorite killer, favorite state-sanctioned killer." Video after the jump.
Watch Larry leap off the deep end.
LARRY O'DONNELL: Only in the Twilight Zone of this Republican presidential politics, 2011-style, could we see a man [Rick Perry] be cheered for proudly presiding over the execution of 234 people and then see that same man booed by the same crowd, booed because that champion of death by execution called his worshippers heartless [for opposing his support of giving in-state tuition to illegal aliens]. Campaigns for presidential nominations are sometimes called fights for the soul of the Republican party, fights for the soul of the Democratic party. No one has used that phrase this time around for two reasons. First, because no candidate fits perfectly into the current shape of Republican orthodoxy. And secondly, the Republican party of the 21st century, if we are to judge by the debate audiences, has obviously lost its soul . . . This Twilight Zone: how can this happen? Here's their favorite killer, state-sanctioned killer up there. They boo him after he calls them heartless.
- Mark Finkelstein's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Here's an idea: if Texas is
Submitted by mostlymoderate on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:18pm.
Here's an idea: if Texas is so tough on murderer's, maybe you should not murder somebody in Texas? Maybe you should move to New York.
Sadly
Submitted by Radical1979 on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:25pm.
Pennsylvania is another state murderers can move to. Daniel Faulkner's killer is still alive.
As is...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:22am.
Massatoilet. It all started with Dukakis "furloughing" Willie Horton. Although Massatwoshitts outlawed furloughs, the liberals still let "lifers" out, and guess what they do... they kill cops, they kill innocent kids, and they run unchecked to rape.
So Is...
Submitted by GeneralAl on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 6:59am.
So is Illinois thanks to Governor Pat Quinnocchio!
"Old Soldiers never die, they just fade away"!
The next one to go...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:24am.
Should be John William King who was sentenced to be executed, subject to appeal, for the dragging death of Byrd Jr. as well.
Let's see if the larry and his merry band of anti-death penalty-pro abortion liberals will mount a free King rally....
Yeah, didn't think so. King is white too.
Actually, you stand corrected
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 1:00pm.
Obviously you do not watch his show, but you should know what you are talking about before making such accusations. The show following the executions of Troy Davis and Lawrence Brewer (another of Byrd's killers) he mounted exactly such a plea. Though not a "free King rally", he rightly said that for those of us who are against the death penalty, the Brewer execution was the one we should not forget about. That we oppose not just the Davis case where there is doubt about guilt, but also the Brewer case, where there is no doubt about guilt and the condemned was a vile racist. So you may disagree with Mr. O' Donnell about capital punishment, the fact is, he is intellectually consistent.
I do not watch crazy Larry...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 2:05pm.
Consistent intellectualism though, would require crazy Larry to give equal time and equal outrage to both of the executions. BUT... Crazy larry didn't/hasn't/won't do that. He likes his propaganda job at MSDNC!
An intellectually consistent person does not make this kind of statement:
"Only in the Twilight Zone of this Republican presidential politics, 2011-style, could we see a man [Rick Perry] be cheered for proudly presiding over the execution of 234 people and then see that same man booed by the same crowd, booed because that champion of death by execution called his worshippers heartless [for opposing his support of giving in-state tuition to illegal aliens]."
1) Crazy larry compared execution debates to illegal alien debates. Apples and Oranges, and not "intellectually consistent" as you claim.
2) An "intellectually consistent" genius like crazy larry would not have said, "proudly presiding over the execution of 234 people..." Crazy larry would have been "intellectually consistent" by correctly identifying those 234 "people" as convicted murderers, rapists, and whatever else they were. Instead the "intellectually consistent" crazy larry infers that the people were "victims" of the evil death penalty. By the way, to be "intellectually consistent" here, crazy larry has not provided any proof that there were any unjustified executions due to exonerating evidence after the executions of those convicted criminals sentenced to death by a jury of their peers based on the preponderance of the evidence.
3) I am sure that the MSM has picked up on "intellectually consistent" crazy larry's passing remark. I do watch Bashir, Matthews, and Sharpton. I expect to see the tidal wave of support for King to be gicen a stay starting Monday, right? Or, maybe the "intellectually consistent" crazy larry will triumph the stay of execution for Duane Buck as an example of the powerful anti-death penalty agenda?
4) Thank you for permission to disagree with crazy larry on the death penalty and his hypocritical support for the war on the unborn. Intellectual Consistency is an oxymoron when applied to liberals.
So I say to you, "As you were... Dismissed!"
Where to start?
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 3:24pm.
1. I am not sure of the full context of the comparison between immigration and the death penalty. They do not have O'Donnell's remarks on it. Since they only put a bracketed inference in his quote, and not his actual words, I would be remiss to comment on it.
2. So to be intellectually consitent he has a to identify what crime they have been convicted for? This makes no sense. Are you saying that "proudly presiding over the execution of 234 people..." is a factually inaccurate statement? Perry has presided over the execution of 234 people, and he said in the debate, while not using the word "proudly" that he didn't lose a wink of sleep. As far as the fact that Lawrence "...has not provided any proof that there were any unjustified executions due to exonerating evidence after the executions of those convicted criminals sentenced to death by a jury of their peers based on the preponderance of the evidence." That is entirely my point! That he is against the death penalty even if there is no doubt of guilt whatsoever.
3. I am not sure what your point here is. That the MSM will not cover other scheduled executions as much? If so, then you are probably right. If there is any bias in any and all media, it is towards the sensational story. I don't think a "routine" execution qualifies.
4. You do realize the argument you make here completely contradicts the one you made earlier (#1) about apples and oranges. The argument about if it is moral for the State to have the right to kill, even if it is a convicted criminal is a very different argument than the central moral argument of abortion (when does life begin, and does the individual or state get to make the final call.)
So I think your snarky little comment "Intellectual Consistency is an oxymoron".... applies to yourself in this case. As you said "Dismissed!"
Good evening red-sox
Submitted by cocodrie on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 3:35pm.
You missed the main point. There are 234 criminals that will no longer be robbing, raping and killing in this world.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
Um Red-Sox?
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 2:02pm.
There isn't any doubt about Davis' guilt. You apparently didn't follow the other threads about Davis, but that's OK. Just throw out the "doubt about guilt" with nothing to back it up.
And, don't go with the 9 witnesses recanted, because they didn't. Not credibly, not legally. Press conferences don't count.
Don't take my word for it..
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 2:47pm.
which I doubt you do. There are however prominent pro-death penalty Republicans that say there is doubt. And yes witnesses did recant. Those were not accepted by appeals courts not because they were not credible, but for technical reasons. For instance, because they implicated Sylvestor Coles, and because Coles never showed up when subpoenaed, they threw out that recantation on the grounds that Coles couldn't rebut this evidence. So your independent evidence that you linked to is an interview with the prosecuting DA? Yeah, because he doesn't have a vested interest in the outcome...pleeeease. You are right press conferences do not count.
And, again, they did not
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 6:46pm.
recant credibly and legally. It's not sufficient to attend an ACLU presser and say, I changed my story. If one wants to recant testimony, it has to be done, in front of a judge, in the course of a legal hearing, after being sworn to tell the truth, again. None of the so-called recanters did so, therefore the recanted testimony had no legal foundation, and was just so much hearsay. Would that be because they faced the very real possibility of a perjury charge, for lying on the stand in a capital case?
"There are however prominent pro-death penalty Republicans that say there is doubt". Would you name them, and not Bob Barr? Or is this the equivalent of what the LSM says, "Some say"? And, even if you trot out _________(insert your fav. Republican), it makes no difference. The evidence was heard and viewed by a jury of his peers, and found to be sufficient to find "beyond a reasonable doubt", that Troy Davis was, indeed, a cold blooded murderer. And the same evidence was upheld on appeal after appeal.
So, you're wrong, there is no "reasonable doubt".
Liberals looooooove their criminals...
Submitted by stage9 on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:25pm.
liberalism = criminalism
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner." — Malcolm Muggeridge
Using Leftie Logic... Which gives me a headache.
Submitted by syvyn11 on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:33pm.
Is Crazy Larry pissed that James Byrd's killer was executed by Texas? Wouldn't that mean Crazy Larry is secretly a white supremacist?
Something to think about.
Uh... yyyyyeah.....
Submitted by Honest Abe on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:28pm.
You do know that James Byrd's killer wasn't Troy Davis? That they were two entirely different cases?
Of COURSE you couldn't know that! You're solely here to kick your ignorance in Democrats' faces.
How glorious.
Something to think about, before you, in narcissistic wonderment, go showing the world how little you have to offer.
Better to keep your mouth shut and let people assume you are a fool than to open it and prove them right.
Hey Abe,
Submitted by NC Cop on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:51pm.
I didn't see Troy Davis mentioned anywhere in that post, so I don't know what you are ranting about.
That being said, syvn11 is correct, James Byrd Jr. murderer was executed IN TEXAS and he was white.
"in that post"?
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:05am.
Gee: what article is this in? Whose execution was spoken of in the article? The commenter did not specify--- only mentioned a white victim--- and then shamed himself by yet again going to the pathetic right wing well of slothfully projecting racism onto those that they hate. OF COURSE O'Donnell would be a "white supremecist"! Because every case is exactly the same, right?
Keep digging that hole
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:07am.
It's amusing.
Hey Dishonest Ape
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:33am.
Let me try and splain it to you. The Supremecist killed a Black Man and we executed the same day as the Black Cop killer was executed. Can you get your meager mind around that?
Poor Abe......
Submitted by NC Cop on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 10:10pm.
Looks like someone needs some government funded mental health care.
Troll
Submitted by Brad90956 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:00am.
You missed the point, troll. I'll break it down for you so that even you can understand:
1) Crazy Larry called Rick Perry a "killer".
2) Texas just executed Lawrence Brewer (white man) for the killing of James Byrd (black man).
3) Crazy Larry is bashing Rick Perry for so many executions.
Is Crazy Larry upset that Texas executed Lawrence Brewer? If so, that would make Crazy Larry a white supremacist.
Now, everyone knows Crazy Larry is not a white supremacist but it was an interesting point that the above poster brought up.
Class dismissed
Honest Abe
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:23am.
And I'm am sure that in the comfort palace of your warped worldview, that actually is complete logic.
You're so mature, you have to call the guy "Crazy Larry"? Wow. Awesome integrity y'er wielding.
Let's go to 3C:
Actually, let's go to 1: got a direct quote for that?
2: so race is what's important in who gets murdered? That's what's important in a story?
2b: Did O'Donnell call Troy Davis a racist for killing a white man?
3. Yes--- he is indeed bashing Perry for so many executions.
Do you actually know the formational principles of formal logic?
"Now, everyone knows Crazy Larry is not a white supremacist"--- no--- apparently you really don't. Or does the right just chuckle on that while "really not believing it"?
Hey Ape
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:34am.
Your telling me you haven't seen the spittle flying out of larry during one of his can't we all get along rants?
Please don't feed the trolls
Submitted by Marcus Porcius on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:39am.
They get plenty to eat at DailyKOS.
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." G.K. Chesterton
www.theconservativereview.com
Just wow!
Submitted by Blonde on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:40am.
Loonie libs....
It's ALL Noel's fault, you know...he has been linked two days in a row by Drudge....expect the liberal hordes of trollsters here....Old Abe (I say that because he's been lurking for quite a while) is just the vanguard.
Sheesh!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
We'll send the murderers to live with Larry.
Submitted by drsamherman on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:33pm.
If he loves him some murderers, we will send him a whole houseful.
I wonder if he has any nick names....
Submitted by NeoKong on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:36pm.
for the guy who started a war in Libya.....?
And ordered the execution of
Submitted by Reaver on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:43pm.
And ordered the execution of Osama bin Laden, can’t forget that. Libs like crazy Larry were ecstatic about that one, even predicting he would ride his corpse all the way to reelection. Liberals can be so confusing at times.
Duplicity, thine name is
Submitted by Honest Abe on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:30pm.
Aaaaand then, the insane on the Right kick the President in the balls for even directing the take-out of Osama bin Laden.
Nice to know you were dead set against that--- had the importance of Osama bin Laden's physical well-being tucked right there in high priority with your need to kick Democrats in the balls at all times for all reasons.
Wannabe Conservatives can be so confusing at times.
?????
Submitted by Brad90956 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:06am.
Are you taking prescription medication because what you just said makes absolutely no sense.
Name someone who didn't want Bin Laden taken out?
Apparently, the Right
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:24am.
Well--- apparently, Sentry here wanted OBL's rights to be preserved before all else. Or does he just want to insult the President either way--- just 'cause it's so fun?
You really arnt that honest
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:47am.
Are you Abe?
I think it's a typo.
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:36am.
His real name is Dishonest Ape.
whoa!
Submitted by kata on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:44am.
when did Alec Baldwin make an NB troll account?
Isn't it funny that these liberals...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:54am.
Cry over the execution of a convicted murderer, yet think that murdering a baby by sticking scissors in the back of the skull as it exits the birth canal to suck out the brain...is a Constitutional Right?
Liberals also insist that they have evolved from apes and believe in evolution when the fossil record supports no such theory!
I say to Dishonest Ape... "Get your damn dirty paws off of that keyboard!" Stick to your genealogical poo throwing, ape brain!
By the way, John William King is sentenced to be executed, subject to appeal, for the dragging death of the black man as well. There is time for the anti-death penalty liberals to mount the campaign to stop the execution!
Que the crickets for the evolved hypocrites!
Well, I can see why you don't
Submitted by NC Cop on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 10:14pm.
Well, I can see why you don't call yourself "Intelligent Abe".
Nobody is against the killing of OBL. He's just noticing the hypocrisy of the left, I repeat myself I know, of trashing Perry for being "responsible" for the deaths of murderers, yet this idiot doesn't have a single problem with the execution of OBL.
I know it's tough, Abe, but try and keep up.
Bill Clinton....
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:15am.
Didn't want ubl taken out, and he proved it many times.
The Bush policies led obama to success in killing ubl, but it took him 18 hours to "think" on it at the golf course...
Right, those 47 cruise missiles were all aimed
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:52am.
at bin Laden's feet--so we could watch him dance.
And at least Obama thought about taking OBL out, and gave the order. According to Bush, he didn't even worry about bin Laden for years.
Jer
And what's the excuse for
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 9:47pm.
Clinton not taking him out when he had him?
Jer must have forgotten these facts...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 11:37am.
Let me remind Jer of what Chris Matthews wrote about 9/11 happening under Bush and not under Clinton's regime:
"Lucky though he was, Bill Clinton never had his shot at greatness," what exactly do you interpret that to mean? Chris Matthews wrote it, and proceeded with the following two sentences. "He could lower the jobless rate, balance the budget, console us after the Oklahoma City bombing. But he never got the opportunity George W. Bush was given this Tuesday: the historic chance to lead."
That Tuesday's date was 11 September, 2001.
So to use Jer's liberal-speak against him, "one could reasonably assume that most Americans believe that Bill Clinton was allowing bin laden to run free with the hope that a major terrorist action would happen on US soil, in order for Clinton to have a legacy other than Monica Lewinsky. This is why none of those 47 missiles "pointed" at ubl ever hit him. Those missiles hit aspirin factories with lowly janitors sweeping the floors, as Clinton intended!"
http://clintoncrimes.tripod.com/ClintonsBinLadenGateMotherofallScandals/...
USMC must have forgotten that Matthews was a frequent
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 1:37pm.
critic of Clinton during his second term--nor was he particularly supportive of Gore either. As a matter of fact Chrissy voted for George Bush in 2000 and his gushing sycophancy during the early years of Bush's presidency was at times an eerie and off-putting prelude to his later tingly-legged Obama idolatry. Consequently, citing Matthews to prop up your argument--to the extent your incoherent and preposterous ramblings qualify as an argument--is a wasted effort.
But I must congratulate you on one singular achievement: Linking the most palpably biased piece of anti-Clinton bilious propaganda that I've run across in my four-year tenure at NewsBusters simply cannot be ignored. The material is of course laughable drivel and renders the Falwell-hawked fairy tales known as the Clinton Chronicles a tour de force in presidential scholarship by comparison. Please regale us once again with those tales of dark intrigue, drug-running, and multiple murders in Arkansas. They're just so darn entertaining.
Jer
More deflection?...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 2:02pm.
Did Matthews say what I quoted, or not? He says he voted for Bush, so it is gospel? Matthews also filled in for Rush Limbaugh's radio show before Chrissy went off of the rails of objectivity. So what?
Talk about drivel: That is all you posted above.
The argument was not wasted. You were personally offended by it because it is the truth and you cannot defend what Matthews said about Clinton and how vile it was, so you go on to such beautiful drivel...
Tenure does not make one infallible.
Yes, billions of dollars
Submitted by NC Cop on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 10:17pm.
Yes, billions of dollars worth of cruise missiles and we killed a camel, I think?
Apparently it needs repeating that we were attacked repeatedly under Clinton by OBL and he did NOTHING. Bush had 8 months. I also find it amusing that the same crowd that was screaming "WARMONGER!!! WARMONGER!!" about Bush are trashing him now that he didnt immediately take office and start bombing other countries.
Priceless.
They wern't aimed at bin Laden, Jer
Submitted by CobraMan on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 10:28pm.
Those missiles weren't aimed at bin Laden, Jer. They were aimed at a terrorist training camp. Unfortunately, that camp was abandoned shortly before the strike, but the target was the people training those terrorists, as well as the trainees themselves. bin Laden wasn't even "on the radar," so to speak.
President Clinton was, or is, many things, but he wasn't a fool. No military commander would ever send 47 cruse missiles to strike a single target, to kill a single man.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Cobra, don't forget
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 11:10am.
the aspirin factory, uh, er, chemical weapons facility.
Champions of death
Submitted by gfrrman on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:49pm.
approx. 45 MILLION murders, compliments of the left and Roe v. Wade. Qualify THAT LARRY. THE PARTY OF DEATH IS the DEMOCRAT PARTY!!!!!! Any questions Lar?.........crickets........didn't think so.
G
A nickname for the guy who started a war in Libya?
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:28am.
How about "Sarky"...for French President Sarkozy? Or did Fox News forget to report that item?
Jer
how about barry
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 9:49pm.
if the US didn't lead the party (from behind), NATO wouldn't have made a move. all we've done is help other countries get their oil and helped raise the next terrorist mill.
There are actually more
Submitted by rbosque on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 10:59pm.
There are actually more prisoners on death row in California (blue state) than Texas. But don't let that little fact get in the way of your political rant Larry! Texas actually carries out the law and punishes murderers unlike California where appeals for known murderers help keep them alive for decades at tax-payer's expense.
Even when there 100 percent
Submitted by mostlymoderate on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:30pm.
Even when there is 100 percent certainty that somebody committed the murders, California still wastes tax-dollars feeding and housing these animals. Case in point: Richard Ramirez "The Nite Stalker". California apprehended this guy in 1985. In 1989 he was found guilty of 13 counts of murder, 5 attempted murders, 11 sexual assaults and 14 burglaries. Umm, why is he still alive?????
Y'DO KNOW that Lawrence
Submitted by Honest Abe on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:24pm.
Y'DO KNOW that Lawrence O'Donnell is the host of an OP-ED show--- right? NOT a news program?
I know, I know--- you're in such a tizzy pimping nonsense about "that dreaded left wing bias" that you absolutely lost your heads in confusing "news" with "op-ed"---- but then again: on Fox, there IS no difference between the two.
Mind actually showing bias about the Troy Davis case on MSNBC's NEWS coverage?
Or merely just work your filth up into a lather while being hilariously off your rocker wrong about that?
Or are you saying that Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are right down the middle of the road uncontrovertibly completely objective and not advocating a political philosophy?
So....
Submitted by sentry_99 on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:28pm.
Trolls apparently take about 2 years before they are ready to start flinging poo.
Born Slingin'
Submitted by Honest Abe on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:32pm.
While Conservatives? Are born with the slingin' spatula ready in hand. Arrogance in one hand, narcissism in the other, slingin' away, taking egregious insult at the need to actually substantiate the filth they allow themselves to believe in their prison of epistemic closure.
Take a crack at it
Submitted by sentry_99 on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:38pm.
Substantiate anything you say. I dare you. You completely missed the point in an above post about the outrage over the Davis execution vs. the ignoring of the Brewer execution. You missed another point relating to the killing of OBL. You must be a short troll as everything seems to go over your head.
The blunted point
Submitted by Honest Abe on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:43pm.
"the point"? The point of that message was a petty jibe. End of line.
Substantiate? You know what hasn't been mentioned in this article or in any of the comments here? The fact that 7 of 9 of the witnesses in the Troy Davis case recanted their testimony and said that they had lied. The fact that the Warden of that prison--- even Republican Senator Bob Barr--- said that the recanting of the witnesses indicated enough doubt that the execution should have been stayed.
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/09/bob-barr-witnesses-recanting-s...
"Substantiate anything I say"? I dare YOU to have the personal dignity to be personally responsible to substantiate a single thing you say--- to venture beyond the impulse for hyperpartisan bloviation--- and to actually give a hoot whether the crap you allow yourself to believe is actually true, rather than just mere political default.
The ACTUAL point
Submitted by Honest Abe on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:49pm.
THE ONLY point that matters at ALL here--- is that this site purposely misses the fact that the Lawrence O'Donnell show is NOT NEWS. It is not a news program. Just as Hannity is not a news program. Just as The O'Reilly Factor is not a news program.
It is op-ed. Which has bias.
But the mad filth that you all are perpetrating? Saying that Democrats--- oh, how lovingly was it put? something about someobody wanting to send a bunch of murderers to him? Yeah. That's just dripping with integrity. Just how low a bar do you hold for youself when enclosed in the bubble of the comfort of the far right?
Substantiate this
Submitted by Honest Abe on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:56pm.
"Ignored the Brewer case"? Did 7 of the 9 witnesses in the Brewer case withdraw their testimony? For twenty years, did the murderer in the Brewer case profess innocence? Was a requested polygraph test denied him?
http://www.newser.com/story/129147/troy-davis-request-to-take-polygraph-...
Please do, "sentry"--- shower me with your phenomenal understanding of this story.
Withdraw testimony?
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:02am.
No, they didn't. Two didn't even get called by the defense. You should know that if you understand the story. Are polygraphs admissable in court to prove guilt? Innocense? Stop stealing your talking points from signs and t-shirts. It's pathetic.
Fox News tshirts
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:09am.
"Stop stealing my news from signs and t-shirts"? It was Republican Congressman Bob Barr, sentry, as per that news link. And the warden of the prison? If you were the least bit personally responsible, you'd actually have sources to back you up.
"Former lawyer, Republican congressman and libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr said the fact that the vast majority of the witnesses had recanted in the Troy Davis case should have implored the Board of Pardons and Paroles to stop the execution."
"Innocense"? Is that like potpourri?
Nice ignorance you're truckin' wtih.
Onan master Abe---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:18am.
The "s" key is just northwest of the "c" key.
Typos occur.
"Truckin' with ignorance" describes dealing with your inane drivel.
Putz.
MD
One more for the tally
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:27am.
That, I was just kidding about.
But thanks for yet supplying 1 more insult.
"Putz"?
Matthew--- answer the question: what is that show doing on this site?
Or is it the Right's contention that Op-Ed programming is now "news"?
Simple question, Matthew--- a civil one, even.
HA---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:43am.
Giving orders and making demands through a keyboard and actually expecting the message receiver to snap shit and do as commanded is one of the lamest exercises on the face of this planet.
In order to shed light, though, for a dim bulb such as yourself who cannot, I electronically transmit a a civil possibility:
While I neither answer for nor presume to represent the administrators of this site; in all likelihood, "that show" is on this site as a perfect example, as is Larry O'Donnell, of 'Liberal Media Bias'.
Larry O'Donnell is an even better example of rabid, out-of-his-mind liberalism.
Is that why he is such an HA magnet? Like attracts like?
MD
Matthew--- dear Lord
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:04am.
The site is "NewsBusters". They are about confronting perceived liberal bias in news.
If this site were non-partisan, and going after partisan bias on both sides in news coverage---- would you see the point if the author (any relation to the CEO of News Communications Inc.?) had cited Hannity for Conservative bias?
Your response would be--- well OF COURSE Hannity offers Conservative bias. It's a Conservative show, advocating a Conservative worldview to a Conservative audience. Op-ed programming is not INTENDED to be free of bias.
"Rabid, out of his mind liberalism". OK. Yah. Sure. What was he arguing in this case in particular? 1: Anti-death penalty, sure. 2: that perhaps there was a shadow of a doubt that needed to be considered.
That gets "rabid out of his mind liberalism" from you? It should ring just as true as Libertarianism, Matthew.
But hey. At least it seems you've broken the shovel, or ran out of the will to chuck dirt--- so let's end on a positive note, eh?
Happy politicking.
So you lose the debate
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:10am.
So now were channeling Hannity? I dont think thats going to work either
Onanist Abe - invoking a deity cannot possibly help---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:15am.
one who uses the phrase "perceived liberal bias in news".
You are not only hopeless, you are 'locked down mind' helpless.
I broke that shovel over your thick skull, doofus.
Now that is ending on a positive note.
MD
Fruitcake Abe
Submitted by MrShy on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 11:43am.
"They are about confronting perceived liberal bias in news."
BZZZZZT. Wrong, knucklehead. Go look at the masthead, at the top:
NewsBusters
Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias
"News" is in the title, yes, but it's not -- NOT -- in the very clear and concise stated mission spelled out in the tagline. That's what we're about. We expose actual (not perceived) overall Media Bias, not exclusively bias in the news.
You're an idiot.
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
Polygraph Tests
Submitted by Brad90956 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:16am.
are not 100% accurate and thus not admissible in a court of law.
Absolutely true
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:29am.
That's right. But as the good Republican Congressman and the previous warden were quick to point out: 7 of 9 rescinded witnesses does indeed reopen the burden of the shadow of doubt.
Or is your argument that it doesn't? Or that that doesn't matter?
Here's the strange part apparently none of you bothered to notice: LIbertarian Conservatives should be freaking to the nines that Big Government just killed a citizen whose guilt was in doubt.
Guess Fox never bothered to say that. Like O'Reilly, they just called him a "copkiller" and said no more about it.
The witness issue did raise doubt
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:38am.
So they sent it down to another court. Still guilty. You keep forgetting to mention that 2 of those 7 didn't testify in court, under oath. Are you doing that on purpose or didn't the t-shirts tell you that?
Not too mention, sentry, that---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:50am.
there were something like 34 witnesses total.
This HA is just making noise.
Probably trying to get an additional shot at working 'epistemic' into another of his posts.
I think he is queer for that word.
MD
Do you think if 7 of the 9
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:45am.
Were going to be jailed for purjury, they might rescind again? They were not believed, nor was their testimony Paramount. Maybe you should read the Court findings, instead of the libtard ramblings
What Would Bristol Do
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:05am.
And then there's that pleasant slur. "libtard". Wonder what the Palins think of that juicy morsel of red meat.
Finding Cinderella
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 7:36am.
If the shoe fits.
And since when does a slur like you care what anyone thinks? Up and down this thread making a perfect little slur of yourself, good grief
"they just called him a
Submitted by NC Cop on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 10:34pm.
"they just called him a "copkiller" and said no more about it."
I dunno, maybe it's because he was convicted.........of killing a cop........in a court of law.
Weird how that works, huh??
There were more than 9 witnesses...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:00am.
And 3 of them were US Airmen. Your boy was convicted by a jury of twelve. 7 BLACKS and 5 WHITES!
You didn't bring that up. Neither did your liberal ape media.
John William King is sentenced to be executed, subject to appeal, for the killing of James Byrd, Jr. You still have time to get all of your liberal anti-death penalty crusaders together to stop it!
The Governor, The SCOTUS, and the Black President never made the call to sty the execution, and regardless of who said what, they were the only ones that could have stopped it. If he were innocent. He dd go through the appeals process, right?
Republican Senator...
Submitted by GeneralAl on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 6:45am.
"The fact that the Warden of that prison--- even Republican Senator Bob Barr--- "
Bob Barr was a Representative, not a Senator. Furthermore, he left the Republican Party and became a Libertarian.
"Old Soldiers never die, they just fade away"!
Hey, Slick.
Submitted by UpNorth on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:10pm.
You do know that none of the witnesses recanted in a sworn statement, in court, right? It's all here, if you have the ability to open your mind. The judge who reviewed the case, on appeal, found that there was no credible recantation by anyone. I know you won't even look, it would actually blow your whole hypothesis to hell.
You Ape, can't you count
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 12:41pm.
there were over thirty witnesses that testified. And the recanting occurred after the trial and is therefore irrelevant, much like yourself.
Hey Dumbo Ape
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:37am.
are you denying the MSM bias?
OBL
Submitted by Honest Abe on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 11:45pm.
"I missed another point regarding OBL"? No--- I pointed out the abject hypocrisy--- that the Right is more than willing to stand on politics to even kick the President in the balls when directing the killing of OBL.
"Country first"? Not on your life. For wannabe Conservatives--- whose epistemic closure shames the very name of Conservativism---- it's politics first, last, and always.
Hypocrisy Abe
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:02am.
Did OBL get due process? Did troy davis? Which one are you mad about?
Miranda OBL? LOL!
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:16am.
So you seriously are walkin' down that road! You're SERIOUSLY so sincerely worried about the rights of the foreign national terrorist Osama bin Laden. Wanting Seal Team 5 to have read him his rights before calmly arresting him and bringing him back to the United States.
Would you have preferred that they wait outside the compound calmly presenting a warrant for his arrest?
Are there any depths to which you will not stoop for a political jibe?
Seal Team 6 did the Bin Laden mission, fool---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:21am.
not Team 5.
Oh, it must have been a typo on your part as the 5 key is right next to the 6 key.
You're still a fool.
MD
23skidoo
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:30am.
Nope; just "misremembered" that one.
But thanks again for yet again another insult, Matthew.
About that whole "the show was not a news program" thing, Matthew. Oddly silent on that.
Misremember?
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 12:44pm.
Put that with mispoke as more bs execuses for lameness and lying. How about you're full of crap and have again been called out. Misspoke misremember my keister.
No idiot
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:32am.
You are STILL missing the point. Troy Davis had his due process. A trial, many appeals and found guilty by a jury of is his peers (7 black, 5 white acctually) but here you are, defending a cop killer. Ann Coulter has an excellent article you could look up if you weren't intellectually dishonest as does the Washington Post (linked by NB on the home page). Troy Davis was sentenced to death and it was carried out but here you are howling about injustice with the usual liberal drivel.
BUT....OBL was killed/assassinated without any of those things and you dig out your Obama signs and hoot and holler and pretend you love this country. I'm glad JUSTICE was done to both of them. I'm sure you'd be upset OBL didn't get his miranda and warrant and due process if a Republican was in office, because you're a partisan hack....just like Crazy Larry.
Staring into the corner of the prison of recursion
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:35am.
"Ann Coulter has an article"? How profound. Gee--- please do tell me all the different recursive corners of right-wing media you've gone to researching the story.
You could had mention up front
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:38am.
You dont care how stupid you sound. Makes it easier for all of us
Indeed
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:42am.
Seek Truth, defend liberty indeed.
Truth--- not that which your favorite pundits love to spill like hemlock in your ear.
Care enough to be liberal with suspicion, conservative with that which allow in as belief.
Can any of you actually, laughably claim objectivity in your news intake? Seriously?
Can any of you actually laughably claim objectivity in your news
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:55am.
Can you? Look Abe, while we all appreciate your bleeding heart, you are just not that bright. Folks here know whats what, we have already done our research.
Maybe you should work on that? Would help you with that dimwit moniker you are quickly acquiring.
Don't like facts?
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:42am.
We know. You keep ignoring them.
"but here you are, defending
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:47am.
"but here you are, defending a cop killer."
John Adams defended the RedCoats in the Boston Massacre.
I'm not defending a cop killer. I'm defending the notion that 7 out of 9 witnesses recanting testimony may----- may--- signify a recision of "beyond a shadow of a doubt".
That's a simple, civil argument to be had.
Or do you just want to waylay dignity, insult some more, and castigate your integrity by showering the site with yet more tired boilerplate right wing nonsense?
Have any of you read SCOTUS' decision declining a stay of execution?
It's hard talking to a wall
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:55am.
7 of 9....7 of 9.... Who's spouting tired boilerplate nonsense? Shall we take a vote? Have you read anything from the actual trial, the many appeals and the final appeal with your "7 of 9" bs?
WHEN did they recant their
Submitted by bertkillian on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:50pm.
WHEN did they recant their testimony?
Hey Ape. Can't you count?
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 12:45pm.
Over thirty witnesses testified that they saw the shooting. And people that recant AFTER the trial are meaningless like yourself.
Apy
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:38am.
I'm betting you'd like OBL to have been tried in Manhattan. Come on, admit.
Heh?
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:40am.
Who said I was mad?
I was perturbed that this right wing site felt it necessary to lie and indicate that the Lawrence O'Donnell show
is any sort of news show.
Troy Davis did indeed benefit from due process. And then 7 witnesses recanted their testimony: the only point of order on that count bearing value examining is whether that substantiates enough of a dent in the burden of guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt enough to stave off case review.
If you want to continue arguing that Big Government can and should kill the potentially innocent, go right ahead--- but know that the perpetration of this "all the Dem's be murderer huggers" ridiculousness is just right wing bias talkin'.
Still ignoring facts?
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:45am.
There was a case review. The one I keep reminding you that 2 of your 7 didn't get called to testify under oath at.
Big Government killed OBL and you seem okay with it.
Amen, I'm ok with OBL gettin'
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:53am.
Amen, I'm ok with OBL gettin' popped.
Got a link to your "2 of 7"?
What I'm pursuing here is the notion of Justice. Was justice done. That's it.
If the guy was guilty, so be it. But if an innocent man was killed, what on earth is your problem?
It was said that Coles, one of the witnesses, confessed to the murder to his girlfriend,
who wound up fleeing in terror and reporting that confession.
"Davis was granted a hearing by the Supreme Court to prove his innocence, the first such hearing in 50 years according to the Atlanta Journal. At the hearing in federal court, the defense failed to subpoena Coles, so Judge William Moore did not allow hearsay evidence from witnesses who claimed that Coles had confessed to the killing. "
http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-atlanta/troy-davis-is-georgia-really-about-to-execute-an-innocent-man#ixzz1YqICDKxt"
http://truthinjustice.org/troy-davis2.htm
So Ann Coulter no but truth in justice yes?
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:12am.
It was said huh? Doesn't matter. It was said/hearsay won't get a man convicted without testimony under oath. The Defense failed....end of story. This is the only link that really matters....http://multimedia.savannahnow.com/media/pdfs/DavisRuling082410.pdf..
Posted at 02:30 PM ET,
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:02pm.
Posted at 02:30 PM ET, 09/22/2011
Troy Davis: guilty as charged
By Charles Lane
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/troy-davis-guilty...
Chief Judge William T. Moore of the U.S. District Court in Savannah, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, convened the hearing in June 2010 -- whereupon Davis’ case crumbled. Much of his “new” evidence had already been heard by the original trial jury. Some of his witnesses fared badly on cross-examination, while prosecution testimony stood up.
Davis’ lawyers declined to put two of Davis’ purported recanting witnesses on the stand, though they were available – one even waited outside the courtroom. Judge Moore quite logically found these omissions “suspicious.”
Davis’ lawyers did not call the “real” shooter; nor did Davis, with his life on the line, testify. Perhaps this reflected his experience at trial, where he told his story to the jury, and the jury did not believe it.
In August 2010, Moore issued a 174-page ruling, in which he picked apart Davis’ factual claims one by one, concluding, “The vast majority of the evidence at trial remains intact.”
Davis’ supporters say Moore unfairly required Davis to present “clear and convincing” proof of innocence, a high standard. But Moore’s emphatic findings implied Davis’s case wouldn’t have passed any test; it was, the judge wrote, “largely smoke and mirrors.”
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
WHEN did they recant their
Submitted by bertkillian on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:51pm.
WHEN did they recant their testimony?
Yes...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:02am.
Troy Davis had due process. He appealed the results of that process, and he was still found guilty.
And now he's dead. Recidivism rate = ZERO!
Onanist Abe---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:07am.
So, you got "Wannabe Conservatives" and "epistemic" down cold.
Most impressive for a dumb ass who gets a little more screwy and insulting with each post.
Better expand quickly on your post volume if you want to make it into NB's Hall of Shame, as you aren't going to last too long around here spouting that kind of nonsense.
MD
Selectively Blind Matthew
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:14am.
Oh Matthew--- read the page again. Who has insulted? I've insulted the ignorance that you all allow yourselves to live under, and that's worthy of even your scorn. But apparently, you've grown accustomed to it.
Epistemic closure? Gee, Matthew--- where'd you learn about the Troy Davis story? Objectivity much?
"Last too long around here"? On this site of right wing madness? I've no interest in being here in the mouth of right wing madness any longer than I care to. You're welcome to glad-hand yourselves on your recursive depravity all y'like.
Matthew--- riddle me this: if this site is about "bias in news media"--- then what is this article doing here?
The Lawrence O'Donnell show is not news.
Is Hannity news? Is he to be upheld to a standard where he flings no bias?
"Nonsense"? Yeah. Like?
H. A. also stands for ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:27am.
Horse's Ass.
You fit that description much better than you do Honest Abe, fool.
You also fit the description of a liberal plant going bug shit cuz Obama is going down by virtue of his own incompetence.
Rage on.
Rave on.
Neither will help, dorkmeister.
MD
Blunted shovel
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:34am.
Matthew? You're just a treasure trove of insults. And with all the dirt you're throwin? You're just losin' ground. Thanks for that. Truly a Conservative hero at work. Buckley and Burke would be so proud.
And then, when in sullied folly you just have nothing more than your pate of insults to spread, you go straight to Obama Derangement. Awesome.
HA---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:58am.
better to throw an occasional shovel full of dirt than the dumpster load full of bullshit you are flinging with abandon.
MD
Crazy Larry is that really you?
Submitted by Brad90956 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:00am.
.
Either that,
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:03am.
Or his lame a$$ producer
Boudin---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:21am.
I swear HA sounds a lot like old Hank Mud (Henry Clay).
Maybe a bit less of the Victorian era prose, but definitely a similar odor.
MD
HA sounds like a composite of Dead + Incestmo sans...
Submitted by drsamherman on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:48pm.
...the Ron Paul worship.
I note with professional psychiatric interest HA's obsessive use of using questions to deflect criticism of his/her position. I equally note HA's persistent use of "conservative" in an insulting manner, almost as if he/she is gagging at the keyboard. The other facets of HA which are illuminating is the constant bifurcation of "news" versus "opinion" aspect of various programs we discuss. Some other observations include HA's fixation with the "7 of 9 witnesses recanted" and the positions of various politicians as somehow rising to an evidentiary level not considered in the two decades of litigation and judicial examination of the case. Additionally, it appears that HA has a delusion with respect to the meaning, purpose and intent of this site. HA asserts that the title "newsbusters" limits the issues examined in this forum to only pure news and not commentary, while the byline giving the site's purpose clearly states "media bias", with the latter clearly indicating media of any sort. For someone who asserts that the conservatives of this website are somehow impaired with respect to functional logic, HA has certainly failed to apply those rules of logic to his/her incorrect interpretation of this site's purpose. Were HA to be my patient, I would be initiating treatment with low-dose Seroquel to attenuate acute mixed anxiety/depression symptoms with long term control via a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor like fluoxetine or sertraline. Longer term, as it appears the obsessions/fixations are leading to compulsive behavior with HA's repetitive posts all having a negative, very self-defensive tone edging to an aggressive nature, I might even consider the addition of a mood stabilizer like valproate or carbamazepine.
/Psychiatric moment over
Good work drsam*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:33pm.
To quote Blonde .....we need a better class of troll.
http://img1.photographersdirect.com/img/16474/wm/pd1746231.jpg
Trolls like HA are frustrating because they do not have the ability to think beyond the lib talking points sitting in front of them on little cards 5x7.
Ape man-child...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:09am.
Hannity has always said that he is a right wing conservative devoted to advancing the right wing agenda and defeating liberals at every opportunity.
He doesn't make up facts like Rick Maddow, who has apologized 3 times for doing so.
The only leftist worth his salt is Sharpton. He said that he would never criticize the president, no matter what. At least he admits it.
Hannity reported Solyndra, Lightsquared, and Fast and Furious.
None of your heroes will go near any of those stories. I wonder why!
Well, you're partially right. I don't believe Hannity has ever
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:33am.
apologized for his distortions.
Jer
ahem
Submitted by kata on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:40am.
*cough*
katainent
Submitted by well99 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 8:51am.
Only thing I can say is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKUOB8MN4Kc
Larry
Submitted by grammajane on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:09am.
do us a favor and move to TX and commit a crime. Have you ever listened to how stupid you sound? Did you get a degree from the same school Olberfool went to or were you just born...........stupid??
Abe, you owe NB's
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:06am.
A good donation for tolerating you.
Constitution by Contribution
Submitted by Honest Abe on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:08am.
"For tolerating" free speech. Thanks. Glad you cleared that up.
What can I say
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:15am.
Cost money to educate dimwit such as yourself. Pony up
I challenge that charge...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:12am.
I'd say that the public screwel liberal indoctrination Ape got was worth every penney to the democrat party!
Wasn't Honest Abe a republican that went to war against the democrats to free the slaves? Yet a liberal identifies itself like that!
E-Mailing attackwatch now...
Ok twit I have read your
Submitted by ThePickle on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:22pm.
Ok twit I have read your drivel but this just takes the cake. Every time one of your morons gets in over your head you start yacking about "free speech".
This is a privately owned site, and as such, you have absolutely no right to "free speech" here.
So yes, you are being "tolerated".
The reason you are being "tolerated" is that your mindless insistence that your view on this issue is the only correct one is mildly amusing, as it points out your own "ignorance" of the facts of the case, as well as, the depths of your "ignorance" of our legal system.
You want "free speech" take that shiite to a street corner and get out your soap box. You wanna post here, on a privately funded site, then maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea to "pony up" a few bucks. But I forgot, your a typical liberal douche that thinks it someone else's responsibility to pay your way through life.
Here you are "allowed" to give voice to your liberal stupidity.....so don't get to thinking that you have the "right" to do so.
And if you have issue with the phrasing of this post I suggest that you go and perform an "Unaccompanied act of Sexual Gratification"
or to put it in small words for ya ......"Go !$@% Yourself"
is that... Niles Crane?
Submitted by kata on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:04am.
I'm sorry, I just can't take this man seriously.
Obama takes away asthma meds
Submitted by Marcus Porcius on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:45am.
And call us killers? First they took away albuterol inhalers (or as the Anti-President calls them, "inhalators") and replaced them with less effective ones, and now they're going to take away the last OTC inhaler...all to bend over for the precious EPA and the econazis.
Not to mention the right to choose...to kill babies...millions and millions of babies.
Perry's killing murderers and libs are killing children, starting with the ones who never even got the chance to be born.
Who's calling who a killer?
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." G.K. Chesterton
www.theconservativereview.com
It appears the OTC inhaler decision was finalized in
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 5:28am.
2008 which means it occurred during the Bush administration.
Jer
Dates from before that time.
Submitted by drsamherman on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 12:23pm.
The controversy was a matter of record in the late 1990s under the Clinton administration as the FDA and EPA fought over the propellant content of asthma inhalers containing short-acting beta-agonists (e.g. albuterol) and inhaled corticosteroids (budesonide, mometasone, triamcinolone). EPA insisted the small amounts of CFC released during inhaler operation was severely damaging to the ozone layer. FDA countered that suddenly pulling all aerosol inhaler products off the market would be catastrophic for public health. Turns out FDA was right--both in terms of treating asthma and COPD, but also economically.
FDA mandated that all manufacturers of aerosol inhaled asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) move away from the standard CFC propellant to other formulations. Under FDA regulations, these new products became new drugs in new dispensing forms with new doses requiring massive investments in new clinical trials. The change in formulations increased the cost of treating asthma and COPD precipitously. The cost of a single albuterol inhaler, available generically from multiple manufacturers for less than a few dollars, suddenly shot up to over $30. Multiply this nearly ten-fold increase in costs by the large increase in asthma and COPD patients and you quickly come up with a huge price tag for a marginal (at best) improvement in decreased CFC emissions. The newer albuterol (short-acting beta agonist) inhalers used primarily for rescue and short-term symptomatic treatment of asthma and COPD are also all branded agents, making them more expensive to the patients in terms of co-pays, which multiple patient behavior studies have demonstrated decreases patient adherence with therapy resulting in negative outcomes like hospitalization.
The controversy over the CFC propellants extended into the Bush administration, but it was really started within the Clinton era and accelerated forward to the point where the final rule was adopted after much fighting back and forth. Even though I do not treat asthma or COPD in my regular practice, I see enough patients with chronic lung disorders and I also talk to my pulmonology and allergist colleagues to say that the withdrawal of the more cost-effective CFC inhaler products was questionable at best.
Dr Sam -- thanks for the
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:37pm.
Dr Sam -- thanks for the info.
Bottom line. In your opinion, will PEOPLE die because of this?
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
Difficult to tell.
Submitted by drsamherman on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:21pm.
Ultimately, the effect of switching to non-CFC propellants was not a cost-effective move. The marginal environmental risk certainly did not outweigh the benefit of maintaining existing and clinically-proven inhaled medications for chronic lung disorders.
Two extensions can be made based on patient behavioral studies: a) the fact that these medications are now branded again after years of being generic increases their costs dramatically - and patients are far less likely to use a pricier medication by virtue of having higher co-pays; and b) decreased adherence to medication regimens in three key areas of medicine (cardiometabolic, respiratory and mental illness) has been demonstrated to increase morbidity (e.g. hospitalization) and mortality (death). Given the substantial evidence from other disease states, there is a higher probability that this change will increase morbidity and mortality. Any offsets from perceived environmental benefits of having less CFC propellants used would be difficult to measure against the more provable world of medical costs and economics given the availability of large-scale databases containing health care claims and utilization information.
A conclusion that there is an increase in mortality associated with the conversion to non-CFC propellants for aerosol inhalers for chronic lung disease will likely take a few years to provide more substantial proof of effect. Given the analyses I have seen already in my role as an adviser to multiple health care agencies, my personal belief is that the conversion has already displayed higher mortality. A medication not used provides no therapeutic value.
The FDA and EPA
Submitted by jon_torlin on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 5:59pm.
Given what's been done lately, the EPA and the FDA do not hold a positive record to date of helping the people when their actions are "for the planet." When government entities, which are supposed to be part of the US Government which is supposed to be FOR the people, start acting against the citizens' interests in this fashion(especially with the utility power shutdowns they want to do, a move which has resulted in death back in February), they need to be dissolved.
And given that those entities are following the directions of DuhOne, that government entity also needs to be dissolved and replaced with one that WILL act in the interests of the people, FOR the people and by the people.
I fear this is just the beginning. I never thought I'd see it in this country that this government would actually and actively do harm to the people but make the false and damn foolish claim that it's for the planet.
-Jon
Save the killer, to hell with
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 3:27am.
Save the killer, to hell with the victim! Heres hoping some celebrity liberal is the victim of a capital crime.
Already happened LAM SON*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 10:31am.
Charles Manson ring a bell?
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Submitted by liberalsarefunny on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 11:56am.
Seriously--ha ha ha....he cracks me up..
Well, with the media, the
Submitted by jessieH on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:02pm.
Well, with the media, the Democrats & the Republicans tromping on our rights, trying to destroy our Constitution, It's probably a good enough reason to have the Tea Party! Everyone is fed up with the liberals & the RINOs. The Tea Party is a breath of fresh air, compared to what we have been putting in office.
Mad Larry's China Love... a country executing 2000+ annually
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 1:34pm.
The odd thing is that the proud "socialist" O'Donnell thinks CHINA is wonderful as it's the perfect "middle ground" for him between socialism and capitalism.
“China has a lot more capitalism than Cuba, but a lot more socialism than the United States.”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/lawrence-odonnell-explains-his-brand-of-...
CHINA also probably has at least 50 x more executions than the US, executing more innocent people than the rest of the world combined..
China is far and away the global leader in terms of the number of people executed: It executed at least 470 people in 2007 and at least 1,718 in 2008.
For 2009 and 2010, Amnesty's report only lists “thousands” because of the Chinese government’s stance that such statistics are state secrets. In 2010, China executed more people than the rest of the world combined, according to Amnesty International.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-Issues/2011/0918/Death-penalty-Top...
The US executed 46 people in 2010.
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
Crazy Larry
Submitted by djwolf12 on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 2:16pm.
Did Rachel Madcow play a practical joke on you and hide your meds????
My favorite killer
Submitted by CobraMan on Sat, 09/24/2011 - 10:07pm.
My favorite "state-sanctioned killer" was Eisenhower. He makes Perry look like an angel!
Of course, using the liberal's own logic, that darling of the Democrats, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "killed" millions of people. He incinerated entire cities, women and children included! Tell me again which party is heartless?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
MSNBC should hire Charlie
Submitted by Attila on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 8:33am.
MSNBC should hire Charlie Sheen as a commentator. He isn't any more crazy than any of the current loons, and he may be less crazy.
It appears that Rachel Madcow should share some of her testosterone with O'Donnell. She could share some of hers with BO too for that matter.