Rudy Giuliani - The Mafia, Cross Dressing and A Pedophile Priest
by David Jennings · 10/26/2007 11:45 amBack in 1987, Rudy Giuliani not only had hair on his head….
he also had a lot of mobsters on his tail. But a vote was taken, and the NYC crime families gave him a break.
“On Sept. 17, 1987, source advised that recent information disclosed that approximately a year ago all five New York LCN families discussed the idea of killing USA Rudy Giuliani, and John Gotti and Carmine Persico were in favor of the hit. The bosses of the Luchese and Bonnano and Genovese families rejected the idea, despite strong efforts to convince them otherwise by Gotti and Persico,” the memo states, according to the office of Brooklyn District Attorney Charles J. Hynes.
Whew. Rudy had a tough job back then.
“You get used to living with it,” he said, according to a transcript provided by his campaign. “You say to yourself ‘It’s worth doing what you are doing and it’s always a remote possibility.’”
Getting used to living with a price on your head has to be a bit stressful. Perhaps that is when Rudy decided to start, um, ‘disguising’ himself.
On a far more serious note, Rudy has not distanced himself from his lifelong friend, Msgr. Alan J. Placa, a priest accused of child molestation. While I admire Rudy for standing by his friend, after much thought and investigation, I must join those in calling for him to remove Msgr. Placa from any paid or unpaid role in any organization that Rudy has control over.
Again, I do admire Rudy for standing by his friend. And I hope that he continues to support his friend on a personal level and helps him seek counseling and redemption. But the gravity of the alleged crimes and the overwhelming evidence against Msgr. Placa require a man that wants to be leader of the country that is a beacon of light to the world to put that country above his personal life.
In April 2002, Bishop William F. Murphy of the Diocese of Rockville Centre removed Monsignor Placa from a diocesan panel investigating clerical sexual abuse, replacing him and the two other members in an effort to respond to the abuse crisis. Several families had accused Monsignor Placa of conflict of interest because, they said, he had used his role as a spiritual adviser to gain information from victims to strengthen the diocese’s legal position. He also stepped down as vice chancellor of the diocese.
Rudy should follow Bishop Murphy’s example.
Filed Under Uncategorized · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
173 Responses to “Rudy Giuliani - The Mafia, Cross Dressing and A Pedophile Priest”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
He just needed a good apartment…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORKyyHBy6JQ
Very well stated Bigjolly. Very well stated.
Jolly email me
AL@ALZOLLI.COM
It is my opinion that the pedophile priests were always pedophiles and purposely chose the priesthood as a way to gain access to children. After all, they are trusted by society, parents, and children alike. What a better way to practice your sickness? These were not good men who made a mistake - these were baby rapers who chose a professional to gain access to the most vulnerable. And then the church compounded the problem by covering it up instead of kicking them out of the priesthood and turning them over to authorities immediately.
Ron Paul article: One hour after posting, 34 comments.
Rudy Giuliana article: One hour after posting, 4 comments.
I guess Rudy’s followers aren’t as good at trolling the net for mention of his name.
Rickg
according to Rass, Giuliani’s lost 45% of his supporters since Fred called him out
And still dropping
[snip]
Rudy Giuliani remains precariously atop the pack with support from 20% of Likely Republican Primary Voters nationwide. Fred Thompson is close behind at 19% while John McCain enjoys a second straight day in third place with 14% of the vote
[snip]
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Michael Chertoff sure looks tough in that first picture. Must be the “cop ’stache.”
Might as well quote beyond the snips.
RE: The “Pedophile Priest”
When you require men to live an un-natural life style, do not be surprise when they behave in an un-natural manner.
Yes good post BigJ, It is to be admired that he stands by his friend. What I don’t understand,is why the Priest doesn’t do the reciprocal friendship act and step away from anything that could hurt his friends campaign. Go Duncan Hunter
FYI the 20% for Jules and 19% for Fred would be a statistical dead heat since the survey has a error of +/-3% same is true for the second place tie of Huckabee and McCain. McCain would not be doing as good if he had not uttered that excellent line about being “tied up” during woodstock.
BTW real friends would not hang around and help destroy their friend’s chances of becoming POTUS.
#12
You are correct sir. Unless of course you’re a pedophile priest in denial trying to cover up for your sins.
Are you railing against celibacy or air conditioning?
Best line o’ the day
One Voice, yeah look what happened to the Apostle Paul when he lived a life of celibacy.
#16
Is it your claim that the vow of celibacy is not related to the rampant pedophilia in the priesthood?
There are men who experience a true calling to do God’s work. There are men who hide under the blanket of the church. There are men whose mamma’s always wanted them to be a priest and so they did. Some of those leave and get married. They are all human, and men. Unfortunately the ones who have hidden are destroying the honor of those who are blessed with a true calling.
Ben, you are correct. Celibacy has nothing to do with sexual perversion. However, I would not classify pedophilia as rampant in the priesthood. If you are Christian you might remember that Christ was celibate.
Yeah, that is my claim. I’ve seen no evidence that the rate of pedophilia in the priesthood is higher than the rate in the general population.
Also, considering the fact that so many of the cases were priest molesting boys, I would suggest that homosexuality is a much bigger factor than celibacy.
Not rampant?
How much money has been paid to the victims? How many victims have come forward? How many priests have been accused? How many diocese were involved?
This is getting ridiculous. Some of you are in serious denial of reality.
Ben, can you provide any evidence that the rate of sexual abuse among priests is higher than the rate of sexual abuse in the population at large?
Who said celibacy has to be limited to heterosexual activity? Let these sickos hump each other all they want, just leave the innocent children alone.
Ben, “celibacy” means the state of remaining unmarried. As homosexual “marriage” is illegal in most jurisdictions, noncelibacy means a marriage between a man and a woman.
Homosexuals are 3 times more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals. A large (disproportionate?) number of priests are homosexuals.
Extrapolate.
Pedophilia is illegal also. Where do you stand personally on this issue, since I assume you’re Catholic?
“A large (disproportionate?) number of priests are homosexuals.”
Based on what? Opinion?
What is the percentage of pedophiles amongst those that support Ron Paul?
Danged Catho-holics!
#27
So pedophilia is not really a serious problem in the Catholic Church? Is that your position?
Keep blathering.
BeenDistilled
Pedophiles are in EVERY church, Catholics don’t hold the patent to it. Pentecostals and Baptists and Lutherans, oh my! Churches are places where adults are given close relationships with children. These are the kinds of places are where pedophiles sneak in. You make it seem as if it is desired and promoted by the Catholic church.
This is one of those “do you still beat your wife” arguments, btw….
And no, I’m not Catholic.
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
Don’t forget public schools…
And please don’t drag Ron Paul into a conversation about pedophiles–The next thing you know, Matt would be over at the NAMBLA site searching for RP ads.
I would be interested to see the citations for either of those claims. But even assuming you’re right, just for the sake of argument, how will allowing priests to marry solve this problem?
Gay priests still wouldn’t be allowed to marry.
Well summarized and well stated. This child-molesting creep has no place on a presidential campaign, and the longer Rudy keeps him there the worse it makes Rudy look.
Everyone should remember back to the Clinton era when the White House was frequented by scandal ridden F.O.B.’s, or “Friends of Bill,” who got various jobs they were completely unqualified to do. Remember names like Craig Livingstone? Or David Watkins?
Based on his track record you can expect more of the same with a Rudy Giuliani administration - crooks, henchmen, and sex perverts galore holding jobs they aren’t qualified for because they are F.O.R.’s - Friends of Rudy. Only this time instead of Livingstone and Watkins, they’ll be names like Placa and Kerik.
Matt, Why not?
When I was in the military, I used to go to Catholic service every so often. Guess what, they didn’t make me eat human flesh. They didn’t sprinkle goat blood on me and make me worship at the altar of the goddess Mary. The guy actually spoke about Jesus! And.. I think he actually MEANT IT!!
Which is what we’ve been saying about…oh, nevermind. What’s the point?
Does anyone know exactly how many priests were found guilty in court and how many kids were actually abused?
My family was closely involved in four churchs back in Jersey during the 60’s & 70’s and none of us were ever abused.
So is the hype actually bigger then the truth?
__
37
You can’t win. That wall is harder than your head.
I am female, I have lived alone since my husband died 15 years ago. No adult human touch what so ever. I enjoy my two grandbabies, so does that mean if I was a male catholic, instead of a female Pentecostal I would abuse my grandbabies.
BULL, pedophiles are every where, in our schools, scout troupes, and even our homes. It has nothing to do with being “catholic, or a priest” it has to do with a screw loose in the brain. And if your screw is loose, you would be better off to off yourself that touch a child for the damage you do to that child.
So beendistilled DO you STILL beat your wife?
Sorry, let me be more precise. Gay priests still wouldn’t be allowed to marry other men.
This is because Vatican policy does not carry the force of state law, regardless of what you may have heard from Tony Alamo.
“So is the hype actually bigger then the truth?”
Usually is…. correction, always is.
#33
http://pedophileophobia.com/10_myths_about_priestly_pedophil.htm
I’ll stand corrected on the celibacy relationship.
Again, where do you stand on this whole issue?
No, I don’t beat my wife, and I don’t sexually molest little boys entrusted to my care.
37 -
Except that the Don Black story has been out there for less than 24 hours and you are ALREADY jumping all over Paul for not immediately responding. Play fair and give him a chance to respond, and if he does take it in good faith.
Rudy, by contrast, has known about Placa’s child molester problems for several years. Placa was suspended by the Catholic Church BEFORE Rudy hired him on the campaign. That means Rudy indisputably knew, and Rudy did it anyway.
So now the Pedophile Priest situation is hype.
Wow.
Regardless of the hype, it is a horrible stain in the church. There are a couple of points that can be made - most of the abuses occurred in the ’70s and ’80s when the prevailing theory was that child molesters could be treated and made better by counseling. The Church went along with it. You can thank the quack psychologists for that gem of wisdom. You can’t treat criminal behavior by talking to them. They should have been locked up. The church realized this long before this scandal became what it is today and took steps to correct it. That’s why most of these cases are 15, 20 or 30 years old. They were guilty of sweeping it under the rug by hiding priests away. Another thing that non-Catholics and most Catholics don’t see is the intense screening that goes on now in the Church to look out for pedophiles, and not just the priests. Any layperson involved in ministries with children go through it.
Pedophilia? I’m against it.
Next!
#47
Finally, a well-reasoned answer from someone.
Thank you.
#48
So you don’t think this Giuliani thing deserves the “Ron Paul” treatment?
Come out from behind the curtain and we’ll talk.
Click here.
I don’t see you contacting the Giuliani campaign demanding him to disassociate with this pedophile priest. Are you?
#50
What curtain? We’re talking, aren’t we? It’s actually getting somewhat constructive (if you factor our Fister).
41 — Thanks for the clarification, I see now that you were speaking only about the Catholic Church (and that’s cool by me.)
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E4DD153CF934A25757C0A96E958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print
So to clarify my question, if priests of some faiths are warming up to performing same sex weddings, why not marry a pair of gay priests?
Btw, I’d never heard of Tony Alamo until you mentioned him.
There are no conclusive studies available on the historical prevalence of Roman Catholic priests committing pedophilia (sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children) or ephebophilia (sexual attraction to post-pubescent adolescents).
A Texas lawyer named Sylvia Demarest has done quite a bit of research. She looked at the 60,000 men who had served as RC priests in 1984 and since. She found approximately 1,500 had been accused of molestation or 2.5 percent. There is no way to measure priests whose victims did not come forward or those who were falsely accused.
How that compares to the general population, I am not sure at this moment.
Matt - And I do commend you for publicizing the Rudy stuff. Today’s thread shows a consistency of scrutiny that was lacking at times in the past few days.
My only hope now is that this story will be pursued with similar vigor, particularly given that Rudy indisputably knows about Placa’s child molester problem and has decided to keep him anyway. Don’t relent until this scumbag is gone from Rudy’s campaign, and then give Rudy a stern condemnation for sticking with the guy so long.
#52 - I think that’s a fair request to make of any conservative news outlet. Hold Rudy’s feet to the fire on this one.
Ron Paul has conclusively known about the Don Black donation, made less than a month ago, for a single day since this story broke. He’s already been bombarded with calls to return the thing (which he should do, and I anticipate he will do in short order).
Rudy has known about Placa for several YEARS now. The Grand Jury hearings were 5 years ago, and the guy has been suspended for a while. Rudy hired him anyway despite all that knowledge. There shouldn’t be a call to his campaign that doesn’t ask him why.
You don’t really believe that, do you?
Because if that’s the case he should fire his entire campaign staff.
52 & 53 ROFL!
Because they’d no longer be priests at that point, and this whole conversation would be moot.
Yeah, I know. If you ever get a chance to read one of his little pamphlets, it’s worth a read. It’s interesting to peer into the mind of a madman.
59. Hamous, if you want to request that Ron Paul or any candidate’s staff research millions of donation references, please consider funding such an effort.
He is free to ignore the NAZIs, and LST.
I’d never heard of Alamo either. Have to check that out. I sure do like me some Ernest Angley, though.
#58 - The donation was made on 9/30. That means it probably wasn’t even processed into their disclosure form for another week when the filing was made in the first part of October. Knowing how campaigns work, it was probably entered in along with hundreds of other checks by a volunteer or a part-time staffer who doesn’t know Don Black from the guy down the street. And it sat there for all of two weeks until somebody here found it and made note of it yesterday.
Barring some unrevealed evidence you may have showing otherwise, I see no reason to believe that Ron Paul personally knew about this donation (or that he even knew who Don Black was for that matter) until yesterday.
Nor do I buy the line that he should have known because y’all called his campaign HQ out of the blue a couple days ago to ask about it. Presidential campaigns recieve thousands of phone calls a day, and most of them are answered by unpaid volunteers who don’t have a clue about how to talk to the media, or how to distinguish is something is even credible or not. Again, unless you have specific evidence showing otherwise, there is no basis for you or anyone else to assert that Paul himself knew about this until yesterday.
Rudy did know about Placa though, and he knew it for months and even years BEFORE he hired the guy.
61. That’s true for the Catholic Church only. I’ve heard of several Episcopal priests that are gay/lesbian, and suspect it’s only a matter of time before a pair of them get hitched.
Bob, Paul’s campaign staffers are not ignoring the Nazis.
They are opening envelopes from Nazis, removing the Nazi checks, endorsing the Nazi checks, depositing the Nazi funds and writing thank-you notes to the Nazis. Then, they are spending the Nazi money in an attempt to install Ron Paul — the #1 candidate among U.S. Nazis — in the White House.
That’s what we’re talking about.
bob42, I’ll assume you either know nothing about websites and the software that runs them or you’re just playing dumb for the sake of belaboring this point. They know every donation that came in from that banner on stormfront and they know about Mr. Black. Paul’s own communications director came right out and said he didn’t care. So don’t try and play that “it would take thousands of manhours to track it down” routine. I may be ignorant but I ain’t stupid.
And Giuliani is breaking bread consistently, for years, with a pedophile priest.
Has it ever occurred to you that the people who do the grunt work on campaigns (as in stuff like stamping envelopes, answering phone calls from the public, and doing data entry of the checks they recieve) are almost always unpaid volunteers?
And has it occurred to you that the average volunteer doesn’t know an obscure neo-nazi website operator from the guy in the apartment next to him?
The donation by a common-sounding name like “Don Black” has been on record for all of three weeks, and it’s been connected to the same Don Black who runs stormfront for all of one single day. At least have the courtesy to give them time for an answer.
#69 - Just another reason I have no intention of voting for him.
YWWISHM™
I repeatedly left messages on Jesse Benton’s voice mail. He’s the main press contact for Paul’s national campaign, so I presume he’s competent to talk to the press.
When given an opportunity to distance himself from white-supremacist supporters, Benton declined, saying only “We don’t pay attention to that. All Americans are free to support Dr. Paul for what Dr. Paul believes in - liberty, individual rights and the Constitution.”
He’s right, of course. All Americans — even Nazis — are free to support the candidate of their choice. But all candidates are also free to reject the support of unsavory groups. Like Nazis.
Gotta give y’all this. Your loyalty knows no bounds. Heck, I’d say its at least as strong as Rudy’s loyalty to his child-molesting priest buddy.
Is anyone arguing that Ron Paul shouldn’t respond? He should, and may in due time.
But in the grand scheme of things, Ron Paul is irrelevant. He has no chance to win.
Giuliani does, and one of his closest associates and friends is a pedophile priest.
One would think that Giuliani would be the bigger target, no?
Shakes,
Guiliani responded already. In a dissatisfactory way. What’s the point of holding his feet to the fire now? He just doesn’t get my vote. LST has published their piece on the matter, there’s really no need to demand another statement from the Guiliani campaign, is there?
#75
So you’ll “settle” for a dissatisfactory answer from a pedophile priest supporter who may end up as our President, and that’s it?
Interesting™
Oh, by the way, BenShaker - Welcome back to LST. It’s been, what, 3-4 days in a row now??
#39 Just saw that. That’s pretty danged hard, I tell ya.
No, I won’t. That’s why I won’t vote for him, and I will convince everyone I know to vote for someone else, too. He’s a lost cause, I am not expecting him to change his ways, just lose the election…
Now, if he wins the primary or, heaven forbid, the election, then I will be pounding the crap out of his campaign or office to straighten the hell up.
#68 -
That’s a nice piece of speculation, Hamous, but unfortunately it isn’t accurate for most campaigns including Paul’s. On most political campaigns website operations are a very different thing than donor databases.
Donor lists are usually kept in-house for reason of FEC disclosure. They’re the type of thing that gets compiled by volunteers who (1) enter in the checks recieved by mail and (2) import the merchant account transfers recieved off the web.
Campaign websites are almost always contracted out to a vendor firm who manages the traffic data and supplies it only when requested. And secure credit card forms on candidate websites are always contracted out to a vendor with a merchant account to take said credit cards. Ron Paul’s campaign is no exception. His website is managed by a firm based in California called Terra Eclipse. They do everything from campaigns to government services to commercial for-profit websites.
When a donation is made online the merchant account vendor processes the credit card through its secure server and takes an agreed upon cut as a processing fee (e.g. 1% of the donation total). It then compiles the legally required name, ammount, address and occupation for the campaign to use in its disclosure reports. Next the firm transfers an aggregated sum of processed payment to the campaign’s official bank account (as in the one that goes onto the FEC report) by wire, check, or direct deposit depending on the arrangement they use.
In most cases, the campaign itself never even sees so much as a single digit from the credit card that was entered. Aside from being secured in the website software, their only data comes to them through the contracted merchant account holder who processed the thing.
In layman’s terms that means the campaign only gets what their website credit card vendor gives them, and in most cases that is nothing more than the legally required information: name, date, ammount, address, and occupation.
Oh, I’m sure another banning is imminent.
Que sera sera.
66.
This reaches a new level of absurdity, even for Matt. Do NAZIs use special stationary, checks, and envelopes? Gimmee a break. Matt says he’s done the research so he should know the ratio between mail and internet contributions. He should also know that ronpaul2008.com gets as much as 10K$ PER HOUR, and the average contribution is under $100. That adds up to a LOT of individual supporters.
68. Hamous, I’ve been in the IT industry since Matt was in diapers. So here’s the flaw in your logic. The referral information is sent to the HTTP server in the initial TCP transaction generated by the user’s browser. Some time later, the user may or may not fill out the online form, and proceed through several interchanges and confirmations, each of which are separate TCP interchanges.
The initial information that could be used to identify the referring site is long gone before the transaction is actually processed. While possible, it would be far more difficult than you assume to be able to track each online donation back to a THIRD URL that referred them in the first place.
Oh btw the answer is the 4th, 5th, and 6th comment earlier today.
Actually the 2nd but I’m modest.
#79 jimb
Bingo! Now if you feel that way, and you’re a real Conservative (which we know you are), why can’t LST pound on his campaign like they’re pounding on Ron Paul’s?
Don’t feed us the “because he hasn’t answered us and Rudy has” crap. That’s so lame it’s laughable.
That’s all.
Hey, you’ve been here for days in a row. I am sure you could stay “unbanned” with a few simple changes in your approach.
But that wouldn’t be any fun…
#80 Back to the condescending dissertations… Laters
#81 Try it without the sneaky stuff and see what happens. You just might be allowed to live.
80 - Which is all apparently moot in this case, since the Paul campaign has come right out and said they don’t give a rat’s a$$ who’s donating. It doesn’t matter how much data they had, or when they had it or who is filling in the paper work - they don’t care!
#84 - you haven’t been paying attention. Nobody from the “Rudy Giuliani is our SAVOIR” cult has been showing up every day and throwing pipe bombs.
If they were, the response may be a little different, and Rudy may indeed get that equal-opportunity pounding you so strangely call for.
That’s all. It may not be the most pure motive, but it is what it is.
Right on, JohnRH.
#85 You mean not curse? Have I cursed lately? Nope, and the bannings continue. Will I suck up just to be allowed to stick around? I think you know that answer.
#86 I’ve tried several times. Nothing
#88 What came first, the chicken or the egg?
#90 - you know what I mean, and it doesn’t involve sucking up.
#90, part 2 - Well, as I recall (again, for the 40th time), this all pretty much started when BigJolly started his “rate the Republicans” debate series. He dared to give Ron Paul a bad grade and say a few negative things about him in the context of the debate, and the Ron Paul pipe-bombs started sailing.
So you figure out whether that is the chicken or the egg…
Jimb, what exactly do you mean?
We’ve been over it before. Multiple times. If you haven’t figured it out by now, I can’t help you…
Overall, the depiction of Ron Paul supporters I’ve seen here is terribly skewed and frequently impolite. But that’s OK, we’re used to it.
You don’t have a flock of die hard Rudy supporters posting here simply because Rudy and the other wrapped in the flag Reagan wannabes don’t have that many enthusiastic supporters! (duh!)
I signed up to do some block walking for Ron Paul a few weeks ago, but was on the fence about actually showing up–Until LST launched the smear piece.
Maybe I’ll be in your neighborhood tomorrow
But I doubt you’l see any RudyMcRomneyClintonObama volunteers.
Probably a better discussion to have at the bar across the street…
#72 -
Matt, that may be so but consider this: If he’s the main press contact for the campaign, he is probably fielding hundreds of reporter calls a day. That virtually assures some will not recieve an immediate response. There simply isn’t time to do it, especially when you are short staffed - and Paul’s campaign is as they are intentionally saving their money so they can buy airtime against the better funded campaigns right before the elections. Note that I do not consider this an excuse for not responding. It’s a sign of ineptitude if it happens, but the point is that it happens nonetheless. Good press guys are hard to come by on political campaigns, and the best ones charge 6 figures, while the bad ones are a dime a dozen. It’s no excuse for the harmed campaign, but neither is it justification for implying that a campaign “knows” something and is willfully avoiding it.
Furthermore, ask yourself how you would react if you were Jesse Benton (or anyone else on Paul’s campaign) and you got a call out of the blue from a blogger demanding that you repudiate Stormfront. For starters, there’s a good chance he’s never even heard of LST until now. He’s probably based in DC, and though there are a few of us up this way who do visit here regularly chances are he isn’t one of them. If be chance he had heard of LST, i’m willing to also bet that his perception of it is that of a hostile Ron Paul-hating blog. Note that I am not saying whether this perception is justified or not - it’s just the likely perception they would have, if any, given Paul’s historical track record with this site before the Don Black stuff. If you were in Jesse Benton’s shoes, would you make it a priority on your busy schedule to return such a call?
Even if you *should* do so as a good press secretary just as you *should* respond to any call, the probability is significantly less that you will when you percieve the caller to be an unknown or a hostile blog.
Yeah, come by my house and try to sell me on Ron Paul. I need a good laugh.
Seriously, though. The actions of the Paul-bearers who show up here, by and large, far exceed that of “enthusiastic supporters” and venture into the cult-like follower.
Bob, the presidency does not go to the person with the wildest-eyed fanatics. It goes to the person with the most electoral votes. Ron Paul will not get any of those.
As for block-walking, I believe my neighborhood’s libertarian-style private-sector security will negate that possibility
Hey wobblenoggin, I never thought you would be a Cult of Paul follower. I had you pegged more as a Kucinich man myself….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU9R7-sfJ_A
#96 - think he’s heard of hotair.com?
Matt - Another way to think of it is to imagine a similar hypothetical.
Imagine you are the press secretary for the future Paul Bettencourt for Governor campaign. Paul’s a frugal guy and he’s spending his campaign money wisely, so you’re understaffed and you’re fielding hundreds of calls a day on all sorts of issues just trying to stay up with the reporters. One day you get a voicemail from a guy you don’t know who identifies himself as a blogger at the Burnt Orange Report. Maybe you know a little about the Burnt Orange Report, and you remember that they’re left wing radicals. You also know that they’re campaigning against Paul Bettencourt for Governor and you believe they would do anything they could to sink or embarrass his campaign.
So the Burnt Orange Report guy calls and leaves you a message:
Tell me - would you be eager or enthusiastic about returning that call?
Dang. Broke the link:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/10/25/did-americas-greatest-patriot-get-a-500-donation-from-stormfronts-founder/
Fister,
I’m not a Paulestinian. I’m merely the Arbiter of All that is Right and Good™ (according to jimb).
By the way, anyone seen Vietnam Vet around here lately?
#101 - Well, the Burnt Orange Report is local to Texas and is fairly well known as a blog. A Texas campaign manater worth is salt should know about it.
Not saying that this matters much, but do a google search on Ron Paul and Stormfront. It is out there.
Good Post BigJ
Again we conservatives are going to be stuck holding our noses casting a vote. Well this time I won’t, but I am sure many will.
Welcome back quiver head….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhmJZJ8K-NY
102. Well, you know that LST has hit the big time when they begin to smell like Michelle Malkin’s farts.
Arbiter of all that is Blight and Wood?
Fasternu was that video necessary? I ate 4 hours ago sheesh. I dont like watching Giuliani supporters doing what they do thank you ….. :-p
#106 Fistinu
LOL, thanks for the kind thoughts but I don’t swing that way.
I wonder if he still had the pretzel in his mouth?
How did this turn into a Ron Paul thread?
Maybe so, but do you think a campaign press secretary for a conservative Republican candidate would be likely to put them at the top of the list for media inquiry responses?
Cause I think a press guy in that situation would suspect, be it rightly or wrongly, that Burnt Orange Report had something they were planning to use to embarrass his candidate. Regardless of how you look at it, he would be cautious about responding at best, and he certainly wouldn’t make it a priority.
Was that Smacky at a Rockets game?
Do you swing like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aAOH9SKAFs
tic tic tic tic tic tic tic
testing 1 2 3
tic tic tic tic tic tic tic
112. BJ, it’s cuz ya’ll asked for it! Maybe ya’ll should go back to pretending that the Ron Paul phenomenon is insignificant. After all, it’s working for Fox News, right?
Tick Tick Tick Tick
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyaxMNcP9Os
bob42,
Can I “un-ask”?
For two weeks all we’ve heard is “What about Rudy and the Pervert Priest???” from you guys. So you get a thread and you still can’t stop talking about Dear Leader! Craziness.
Aww, heck with it.
bob42, the RP “phenomenon” is insignificant, he has no chance at being elected. We simply asked a guy that is a non-factor to return some money and stop encouraging donations from Nazis, Jew haters, Black haters, etc.
It really didn’t seem like a federal offense to ask that!
We refrained from mentioning the Alex Jones max contribution because we knew other sites would pick that one up.
119. BJ, as far as un-asking, that would be about as easy as Michelle Malkin un-farting.
120. Hamous, I think you’re painting with a broad brush. There’s lots of Ron Paul supporters that like me, had not heard or cared about Rudy’s buddies–we already know that he’s a bad idea.
Let me clue ya’ll in to some inside information. Ron Paul does not lead his supporters. That would be about as easy as herding cats.
That wasn’t bad, bob42. Not a Michelle Malkin or Hot Farts fan myself. I rarely, if ever, view that site because of a couple of people that post here that are disciples of her.
But to be clear, you just posted exactly why Ron Paul cannot be President, period, ever.
He doesn’t and cannot lead. Never has been able to and never will be able to.
What his “movement” is about is that certain subgroups of society are desperate to find a movement. So what you have is something akin to an anarchy, freedom, liberalism, conservatism, etc., movement, all wrapped up in a ball that will grow to about 7% of the vote.
He should start a third party now, it’s the only chance he has to get that vote into double digits.
Well bob, someone’s “leading” a lot of them because they all come here and spout out the same talking points verbatim (hence the cult characterization). It’s like they are one organism, you know, like all those Quaking Aspen trees in Utah
Sword of Righteousness in the Don Black Thread, please?
123. Well BJ, that has to be the most rational anti-Ron Paul comment I’ve seen here in way too long.
124. Keep working on it Hamous. I’ve been supporting Ron Paul’s latest effort since late March. The people I’ve worked with are not wild eyed, fanatics, or brainwashed cult members. They’re people just like you and me, and they believe that neither party’s pre-ordained choices are acceptable.
That distills the whole Ron Paul “thing” down to its essence very nicely…
127. I disagree Jimb. BJ’s input was rational but less than realistic. It may apply to some RP supporters, but it has been my experience that most of us are not searching for a movement, we’re deeply disappointed with the quality of potential leaders that the two party system has offered.
We are so deeply disappointed with the political industry that we enthusiastically support the candidate that “doesn’t stand a chance” but will make a difference.
testing 1 2 3
#126 I don’t doubt you bob. Honestly I haven’t met very many RP supporters face to face. Only one that I can think of and I actually like the guy (even though he hates MY guts). There are a few good guys here like you, little mike, Jaime, and phil M (although he could trim some fat ;-)). But the vast majority that show up here are goonier than road lizards and they give the rest of you a bad rap.
I posted a comment earlier. Did HAL eat it?
Nothing in the bucket shakey.
I’ll try again:
Kind of like the DeLayers and Bushacons a few years ago. It would be an interesting exercise to go back and read the comments.
128 - And everyone I have talked to about Ron Paul is desperate for a movement. I guess we each have our own anecdotal data…
133 - Don’t you think that since many of Bush’s most ardent supporters have at best become disillusioned with him and at worst turned their backs on him, that you’re working on stale, irrelevant, data?
DeLay lost most, if not all, of us when he stated that he saw no fat left to trim in the budget.
He also stepped down. And I am still waiting on his conviction.
#135 jimb
You miss the point (as usual) :).
The point is that at one time those guys could do no wrong and there were a lot of folks here who were defending them to the death.
The term DOTI™ was coined for a reason. I don’t think you were around at that time. Remember, I’ve been here since almost day one.
#136 of course.
I have been around longer than you think. Basically since Chronically Biased opened its doors.
You coined the term DOTI for your own reasons. Mostly because people didn’t throw people you had declared scum and guilty based on hints and innuendo off the roof immediately.
You don’t seriously believe Bush supporters acted anything like these guys, do you?
And please, I beg you. Please don’t start with the acronyms.
139 - this is GREAT. Just like the old days, I tell ya…
You guys really ought to let this persona hang around…
#137 jimb
Do you not see the irony in your words? I won’t even mention the DS words.
#138 hamous
I’m referring to the blind faith.
#139
Is that a personal request or a management request?
#141 I can only speak for myself and wasn’t around here until after the last election. I didn’t vote for Bush in primary in 2000 but did in the general election. And given the bizarre twist Gorezilla took I’d do it again in a heartbeat. In 2004 we were at war. I’d make that same vote again in a heartbeat. But you’ve never heard me carrying on about Bush with blind faith. Ever.
And that was a personal request. I don’t control anything here but my own posts.
I submit that you don’t see the irony in your words, not the other way around. It has always been a situation in which you believe that you alone can define what constitutes a double-standard or defense of the indefensible.
Have people at LST defended Bush or DeLay beyond what I have considered reasonable? I would say absolutely so. The difference between you and me is that I don’t scream acronyms from the rooftop every time somebody crosses my threshold of double standards or indefensible positions. I argue vigorously and eventually move on.
Here’s a hint: Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t automatically make them DOTI or PODS or ABCDEFG.
As for your response to 139 - You’re simply being ridiculous.
jimb,
Why does it bother you so much? Seriously.
You talk about me going on and on, but you do the same thing ABOUT me.
Are we both obsessed? Do you have HDS?
I’ll say it one more time. Blogs are for opinions. If my opinion is that a double standard exists, why suppress it? In the grand scheme of life does it really affect you or anyone else here? Of course not.
My suggestion is if you don’t like my opinion, simply ignore it. Isn’t that the advice given here often?
And moreover, a lot of that was to stir debate and discussion. I’ll say it again; there have been times in the past when this place was dead (at least from a comments standpoint). It’s no mystery that some of the best and most-commented-on threads were the ones where I was going at it with Sarge, Hamous, et al, along with guys like EPJ, Willie, and some others. There were some great arguments, but somewhere along the line it got out of control, more personal, more heated. Maybe it’s just the times we live in, people are under a lot of stress. I don’t know.
“Boy the way Glen Miller played…”
I don’t suppress your opinion, but I won’t rule out HDS…
Seriously, though, what bothers me is that you come across as self-righteous when you start calling people PODS and DOTI when their viewpoints are often at least as valid as your own.
And yes, I will admit to some inflexibility and even self-righteousness on my own part.
Can I give you some advice (Like if you said no it would stop me)?
You ask way too many questions. State your point and stop demanding everyone be as outraged (or as happy) as you about a particular subject. Accept their response and agree or disagree but stop with the hounding.
#147
LOL, re-read what you just said and apply it to the Ron Paul situation here.
(point taken however)
Or yapping. Yapping is a better verb
147 - thanks. That’s twice now today that someone else has made my point better than me.
I’m just trying to figure out what a guy who has gone on and one about LST supposedly ignoring Racial Injustices, like Shaquanda Cotton, and then when they expose a Republican Candidates ties with known racisits of the vileist sort, he calls it “an obsession.”
#151 Sarge
Do you support supporters of Pedophile Priests?
Did you not see where I said Ron Paul needs to respond?
But which is the greater evil here?
BenStiller65 Says:
October 26th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
#151 Sarge
Do you support supporters of Pedophile Priests?
No
Did you not see where I said Ron Paul needs to respond?
You called LST’s exposure of a Republican Candidate’s acceptance of campaign donations from Nazis, and his allowing them to use his Campaign’s copywritten intellectual property on thier websites for the purposes of collecting money for his campaign an “obsession” and have belittled the effort with a number of perjorative posts here and elsewhere.
But you also have a long history of claiming DOTI and demanding outrage because (according to you) they ignore racial injustice—and whatever else you think they should be outragfed about.
The only consistency, therfore, is criticism of LST, no matter what they do or say–so whether or not you say that Ron Paul should respnd is moot.
But which is the greater evil here?
As soon as pedophiles kill more people than Nazis have, I’ll say it’s pedophiles.
Wow.
Wow what?
What;
You think pedophiles would be better people if they killed the kids?
The Nazis are no longer in power.
Pedophiles are still abusing children.
Do you really believe a $500 donation to Ron Paul from these Nazi-wannabe morons is a better crusade than one against Giuliani’s pedophile priest associate and advisor?
OK;
So first, LST does exactly what you say they should have been doing all along:
Exposing the worst elements in the conservative movement in order to excise them from the ranks, and you call it an “obsession”
And now you say that child murder is better than child molestation.
No wonder your head shakes.
157
Both candidates suck.
OK Sarge; where did I say that? Please point me to it.
Geez, and people have the nerve to say I start crap.
BJ does a negative thread on Guiliani and several on Fred Thompson. Matt exposes the Ron Poptart / SS Totenkopf relationship, and how is this a bad thing?
It shows me that LST isn’t just a lap dog to the GOP. We konw the Dhimmicrats suck and this is LST helping to weed the garden where we reside.
All of the candidates have warts-a-plenty, Especially Guiliani! But what are the choices? I tire of voting for the lesser of two evils.
I don’t expect a moderator to come to my defense, but that accusation is way out of line and has no basis in fact. It’s just meant to antagonize.
#161
It’s not a bad thing, it’s a good thing.
Are you planning to skip the Presidential ballot box at this point?
What accusation is out of line?
163
Not just yet… but I ain’t voting Dhimmi!
that wasn’t the question you asked me.
You asked this:
I answered that question. Racism, and particularly Nazism, has been responsbile for hundreds of millions of deaths just in the last century. Even today Isslamosocialist Baby Killers are killing people, using racial divisions as part of the justification for it.
I therfore, think that racism is a greater evil than pedophilia.
You took issue with me on that.
This led me to the conlcusion that you think pedophilia is worse than murder.
Ask your questions preoperly, you will get a proper resose.
ask them in a way desinged to twist the anser into something you want to twist it into, and you’ll get an answer that can be tweistexd.
I am a reflection of you when we debate.
Remember that.
Time to knock off the mutual back biting. Take it else where.
Phil_M - 1
Islamofascists - 0
Baby Killers
My favortie part.
Everybody should get one to tack onto “Islamosocialist”
http://obadiah1317.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/bailing-animated.gif
BigJolly
You got me curious - who are the Hotair disciples?
Oh BTW the Eagle Forum was in the Wall Street Journal blasting the second coming from Hope
Sorry for the confusion
Shakey, that’s your modus operandi. That was a totally unnecessary statement and nobody really even attacked you.
Further, you asked a question, Sarge answered it honestly, and because it didn’t square with what you expected to hear, you went all flippy about it, even after the answere was explained to you.
That’s a perfect example of what you need to learn how to fix during a blog-discussion. There’s nothing really wrong with Sarge’s position, it is just different than yours so you, honestly, berate him unnecessarily for it.
jolly you still here?