Comments on: The party of Al Sharpton

By: Jeremy-Gilby-dot-com

Jeremy-Gilby-dot-com — Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:36:05 +0000

What I’m Reading Online :: (July 28, 2004)

Go a check out Michelle-Malkin-dot-com, and her article on “The Party of Al [The-Race-Card-Hustler] Sharpton”. She also links to her article on town-hall-dot-com, Five reasons to fear the Democratic party.
I was pointed in Michelle’s direction, vi…

By: Blogs for Bush

Blogs for Bush — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 19:56:45 +0000

Rounding Up Wednesday at the DNC

Written by guest blogger Steven Taylor of PoliBlog. ________________________ THE BIG STORIES FROM WEDNESDAY Kerry rides a Swift Boat water taxi into town: Kerry Returns to Boston With ‘Band of Brothers’.Said the BoGlo: An election with echoes of the ’6…

By: Surge

Surge — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:55:22 +0000

“Millions? Got a reliable link to that number, Surge?

I’ll go with the Human Rights Watch’s numbers. See any 7 digit numbers there?”

I stand corrected, onecent.

But I’m still correct about U.S. military/ financial support for the murderous Saddam Hussein regime that killed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Iraqis.

By: QandO

QandO — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:32:08 +0000

Our vote is not for sale…..because your offer isn’t big enough.

I’m particularly interested in one claim by Al Sharpton from last night’s speech… “In all due respect, Mr. President, read my lips: Our vote is not for sale.”Interesting. Powerful. And a bit hard to reconcile with what Al Sharpton has…

By: PoliBlog(TM)

PoliBlog(TM) — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:11:01 +0000

Bite-Size Toast: Recapping Wednesday in Boston

Bite-Size Toast: A Supplement to this week’s Toast-o-meter BITE-SIZE TOAST FOR WEDNESDAY It still appears that no bounce-producing heat has emanated from Boston. The week so far: The Pre-DNC Toast-O-Meter. The Bite Sized Toast fort Monday/Tuesday. THE …

By: Carolus

Carolus — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 09:37:35 +0000

Thanks, Dave, for pointing out two of Sharpton’s more outrageous actions. The “Rev.” (who was proclaimed spiritual leader at the age of 8 apparently) ought to be cooling his heels in the big house.

Just shows the level to which things have descended.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 08:56:02 +0000

Ms. Malkin’s article on Al (“if they’ll buy it, we’ll riot”) Sharpton contains half truths. Had she told the whole truth she would have included Sharpton’s 1991 incitment of the Crown Heights riot following a tragic car accident. The riot resulted in at least one death, many injuries, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in property damage. She would have also included his 1995 incitement to riot at a white (Jewish) owned Harlem clothing store, freddy’s fashion mart. His comments during two months of demonstrating (inciting to riot) bore fruit when a gunmen finally shot dead four light skinned employees and and set fire to the building. All told, 7 people died. more here:
http://www.nationalreview.com/nr_comment/nr_comment090701.shtml

By: Baklava

Baklava — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 03:42:43 +0000

Don’t respond to Surge. It feeds him/her/it.

By: onecent

onecent — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 03:33:19 +0000

It’s a FACT that REAGAN was SUPPORTING Saddam in the 80′s, when Saddam was SYSTEMATICALLY gassing MILLIONS of Kurds, Joseph.

Millions? Got a reliable link to that number, Surge?

I’ll go with the Human Rights Watch’s numbers. See any 7 digit numbers there?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/news/20030404-1.html

“If presenting FACTS makes me a moron to uninformed conservatives, I’m more than happy to accept the title.”

Accept it.

By: Baklava

Baklava — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:57:38 +0000

Just wanted to point out that Democrat Mr. Ford from Tennessee USED to be the up and coming star when he spoke at the year 2000 Democratic convention.

Now it’s an unelected person without an opponent named Barack Obama.

He can run saying whatever he wants and not worry about losing. He doesn’t have to define himself. He can just say things like “we are going to win” and when he wins without anyone knowing where he stands (for real) he’ll start voting.

Then he’ll have a track record of votes. Just like Mr. Ford of Tennessee.

Facts and records hurt the Democrats.

By: jack white

jack white — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:48:33 +0000

Well, give it to Sharpton, at least he didn’t hide his truly grotesque face–like the rest of the Boston cabal.

By: wvobiwan

wvobiwan — Wed, 28 Jul 2004 23:39:48 +0000

Surge isn’t interested in facts, he just wants somebody, anybody, to talk to him. Sad.

By: onecent

onecent — Wed, 28 Jul 2004 23:00:05 +0000

Sharpton is a pimping race hustler whose shtick is waning.

Surge:

Here’s some reading for you as your idiotic hyperbole lacks verifiable links to sources. Read them at your own peril, because it appears that they make a liar out of you instead of Bush. Pay real close attention to the Washington Post editorial, basically a retraction of their Bush lied position.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jeffjacoby/jj20040712.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A482-2004Jul20.html?referrer=emailarticle

By: Tom the Redhunter

Tom the Redhunter — Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:54:17 +0000

Michelle,

Right on regarding Sharpton. He is a hateful individual.

Surge

The US was allied with the Soviet Union during WWII. And this at a time when the USSR was under it’s worst dictator, Stalin. We went so far as to ship tons and tons of war material to them. One might even say that had it not been for US/UK support, Germany would have won the war in the east.

So…does this mean that it was illigitimate for us to fight the Cold War? That we then somehow had no right to oppose the Soviet Union once WWII had ended? According to your logic, I guess so.

What is clear is that your main objective is just to bash the US in general and George W Bush in particular.

And the there’s the charge of lying. Surge, he didn’t lie. We simply got (some of) the intelligence wrong. Hard for you to understand the difference I know. But if Bush lied,
- JFK lied about the “missile gap”
- Clinton lied about the “asprin factory”
I could go on but I think you get the point.

By: jeff

jeff — Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:36:55 +0000

First off, Bixby, just screaming FACTS ARE FACTS at the end of your post doesn’t make it so.

And he didn’t “sabotage” Pat Toomey. He made the very realistic judgement that a moderate Republican was far more likely to win, and help keep the Senate, than someone as far to the right as Toomey. Toomey would’ve guaranteed a far-left liberal like Hoeffel would’ve taken the seat.

You’re so paranoid about Specter chairing the Judiciary committee. Would Patrick Leahy or Hillary or Diane Fienstein be better? Because, that’s what you would’ve got if Toomey ran against Hoeffel and Republicans lost the senate.