C’mon Leno, I’d expect more out you than to make a stretch like this. I think your beginning to drink too much of the NBC liberal kool-aid. I think Chrissie Matthews may have infected your brain.

“[Something that happened on the watch of a Democratic Administration] is a perfect example of what would happen [on the watch of a Tea Party Administration] (as if you could find enough literate Tea Partiers to CREATE an administration).”

Soooo….basically the situation would be the same no matter who’s running the show? Brilliant, Jay.

The Bush administration never stomped on anyones civil rights. It is this kind of nonsense that the libs spew all the time. Hey, Jay, why don’t you name ONE person that had his civil rights stomped on.
The entire country has had its Constitutional rights stomped on by ObamaCare.

Gotta love that reasoning. If the tea party was in charge, then we’d have things like the oil spill. Huh?

Well, the “Gordon Blower Show” you have to remember that some people do consider the denial of counsel, indefinite detention without charges being filed and the suspension of Habeas Corpus bring big stomps. Of course, I imagine you consider such people liberals and even worse, RINOs, but that will be a future episode of the “Gordon Blower Show”.

The Real Royal King says:
May 25, 2010 at 10:13 am

You mean the stuff that Obama decided to continue… and the left decided was no longer a problem?

You lack the credentials to speak for the Left, INB. I can’t say that know of any liberals, progressives or moderates who give President Obama high marks for his allowing these abuses to continue, nor do I know of any who think they ought to continue. It is only transactionally, relatively that what President Obama is doing is even slightly tolerably.

For goodness sakes: Tone down the anger. Take solace in the fact that you have a substantive point over which persistent moaning, bleating and whining is somewhat appropriate.

The charges from the Left just get more and more deranged. First, tea partiers were racists, but those charges never got traction, and looked especially odd when African-American tea partiers started showing up on TV. Then the accusation was that tea partiers were violent, but since not a single violent incidence has taken place at a tea party, that charge also turned out to be a joke, and make the accusers look ludicrous. Then the Left wanted to pin the Time Square car bomb on the tea party, but unfortunately some Muslim extremist turned out to be the (obvious) culprit.

So what now? But of course, the tea partiers are behind the oil spill. Didn’t you see Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck out there in the Gulf in their wet suits with explosive devices? Even the crazies on the far, far left should see what these kind of comments do to their credibility.

King, were you certain that INB was still present before making that comment?

“…Farrakhan was not present, and I didn’t care to make remarks about someone not present.” Royal King

Saying if tea partiers were in charge, we’d have oil spills, is sort of like what was said during the ’64 presidential election. If we elect Goldwater, we’ll end up in Vietnam.

Sure Felix, there are tons of African American tea partiers, and millions of Hispanic tea partiers too. LOL. But here is the reason that Rand Paul is being scrutinized so closely: Nobody knows yet what the tea partiers believe, other than the smaller government, less taxes, drill baby drill platitudes that Sarah trots out for all speaking occasions. Naturally, since Rand Paul is being held out as a tea party candidate, people are interested in what he believes. Otherwise, tea party candidates are running without a known platform. And while many people are willing to vote their displeasure with the status quo blindly, most people would like to know what the people they vote for stand for, specifically, as opposed to just those platitudes.

King just did what libs do to the Arizona law, they lie. Why don’t YOU name one citizen that had any denial of councel or was held without charges. Key word CITIZEN. Name one citizen denied Habeas Corpus. You need to quit repeating lies from the left-wing media. Poor King just keeps repeating lies. Keep reading Mao’s Red Book.

The King had someone read the Arizona law to him, and he’s sure it’s racist. Of course, he was sure of that before it was written.

Geez, Gordon Blower Show, you need to go back and read Article I of the Constitution. Habeas corpus is a PRIVILEGE which extends to PEOPLE IN THE US and not just to CITIZENS. There are many such provisions of the Constitution. I’m surprised you don’t realize that. In the future, you ought always look for the specific limitation of a right or privilege to citizens, then make your non-sensical argument.

And, Righter, once again, you are lying. There are a number of reasons that the Arizona law is unConstitutional. One is that immigration is a province reserved to the federales. The other is that, as applied, it is inherently discriminatory. I fail to understand why you have to resort to these lies everytime you find yourself out of your league. Just admit that the matter at hand is one which is beyond you knowledge, skills or capabilities. Certainly, you’ll never hear me explaining the fundamentals of rococo architecture or Sanskirt meter. Those are out of my league. It is important we understand our limitations, even more so when we have so many.

You’re the liar, King. Do you honestly think you can just spew your far left bias and no one can question it? The law is on the net for everyone to read, and I’ve read it. The discrimination is your interpretation. And since you think anyone who has ever used white out is a racist, your interpretation is somewhat suspect. And speaking of lying, let’s revisit your comment about not being able to ‘label’ Farrakhan because he wasn’t ‘present’. That’s never stopped you from commenting on Beck, or Palin, or all southern whites, for that matter. Were all of them right there with you when you made your comments?

The Real Royal King says:
May 25, 2010 at 10:37 am

You lack the credentials to speak for the Left, INB.

I didn’t realize I was speaking FOR the left… just ABOUT the left.

I can’t say that know of any liberals, progressives or moderates who give President Obama high marks for his allowing these abuses to continue, nor do I know of any who think they ought to continue.

Wasn’t it Keith Olbermann… hero of the left… who railed against FISA under Bush, but made excuses under Obama? Oh that’s right… it was.

It is only transactionally, relatively that what President Obama is doing is even slightly tolerably.

Yeah, or overt hypocrisy. However you want to spin it.

For goodness sakes: Tone down the anger. Take solace in the fact that you have a substantive point over which persistent moaning, bleating and whining is somewhat appropriate.

Kiddo, it’s tough to be angry when the weather is so nice out today… and my veggies (especially the peppers) are doing so well.

You knee-jerking jerk-offs from both sides make me SICK. There hasn’t been a substantive discussion on these issues, in these threads, for a long, long time. Why do the heathen rage?

While I can’ stand Leno or David Gregory it’s clear that the “Drill Baby Drill” crowd, i.e. teabaggers and even the Democratic pig that is Mary Landrieu would like to see more drilling by their own admission. Oh, and while Gregory’s ratings are down, he’s still beating ALL of the other Sunday shows. You’ll note that even with the decline in viewers on This Week fox still can’t seem to climb out of the basement. Now, these ratings are from May 16th but, I’m guessing that Gregory’s numbers may have been up on the 23rd where he roasted Paul for backing out. Perhaps Mediaite could get those numbers? I mean, it’s what you do right?

May 16th, 2009
Network Program Total Viewers A25-54
NBC “Meet the Press” 2.57M 910K
CBS “Face the Nation” 2.32M 650K
ABC “This Week” 2.05M 660K
FOX “Fox News Sunday” 1.22M 430K

Sorry, that’s can’t stand Leno or Gregory!

Trickle, someone holding a gun to your head, making you check in?

Nice substantive post, though.

writer, if you realized how predictable and boring your contributions were, you’d be embarrassed. Your snappy comeback doesn’t change that.

Trickletown says:
May 25, 2010 at 12:35 pm

Does your post solve the problem… or simply add to it?

roxsteady says:
May 25, 2010 at 12:39 pm

Does anyone want to give Roxy the, “But it’s such a small part of the population” speech that she (and others) give when pointing out FNC’s ratings? Should we bother also pointing out that FNC’s evening/prime time block gets ratings pretty close to the average Sunday morning network programs… and often beats them?

Nahh… it’s not worth it. She doesn’t care, it doesn’t fit the spin.

Trickle, I’m devastated that you consider me boring. But again, who’s making you post here?

writer, you keep asking the wrong question. the right question? get on your knees and pray on it. Glenn Beck might just answer you.

So, if I’m getting the gist of this, your original point was criticizing the posters here for criticizing other posters here.

wrong again, my frustration is the entrenched party-line ‘My side is always right, your’s is always wrong!’ boloney you engage in. Hence, the boring predictability.

gordonbloyershow says:
May 25, 2010 at 9:33 am
The Bush administration never stomped on anyones civil rights. It is this kind of nonsense that the libs spew all the time. Hey, Jay, why don’t you name ONE person that had his civil rights stomped on.
The entire country has had its Constitutional rights stomped on by ObamaCare.

THE FUCK BUSH NEVER TRAMPLED ON ANYONES RIGHTS. Um, Gordon, illegal wire-tapping, the derelict of Habeas Corpus ring any FUCKING BELLS? Your memory serves you short…again.

So trickle, your throwing in that little Glenn Beck jab shows your impartiality?

Beck is equally as despicable as Olbermann, amazingly, I’m free to see both for the P.O.S’s they are. It’s quite liberating to be of ideological chains.

*** to be free of ideological chains. ***

Rasul v. Bush, Habib v. Bush, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld!!

GORDON, YOU’RE JUST LYING TO YOUR BENEFIT…the FUCK BUSH NEVER TRAMPLED ON ANYONE’S RIGHTS…just keep spewing the lies, you lying sack of shit.

Rasul v. Bush, Habib v. Bush, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld!!

GORDON, YOU’RE JUST LYING TO YOUR BENEFIT…the FUCK BUSH NEVER TRAMPLED ON ANYONE’S RIGHTS…just keep spewing the lies, you lying sack of shit.

Then that’s fine, trickle. But when you come to a site like this, what did you expect? Kind of like having sex. The end result may be predictable, but it’s still fun. Sure the right only sees their side and the left only sees theirs. Shooting the shit with the other side is a harmless diversion. If you just want bland and no opinions, log on to a gardening site or something.

Most ignorant and uninformed statement I have ever heard: “The Bush administration never stomped on anyones civil rights. It is this kind of nonsense that the libs spew all the time.”
This comment would be a source of much levity if it were not so desperately and willfully stupid.

The Patriot Act alone abrogates the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution, idiot.
The list is much longer but I am fairly sure that would be too much of a challenge for your already compromised attention span.

TEXICAN says:
May 25, 2010 at 1:17 pm

homie says:
May 25, 2010 at 1:34 pm

You mean the same stuff that Obama re-authorized?

It’s amazing how angry you guys can get… yet so detached from reality. It’s all politics… not policy.

(OH and Trickle… you never answered my question… are you helping, or provoking the status quo?)

Trickletown says:
May 25, 2010 at 1:23 pm

Beck is equally as despicable as Olbermann, amazingly, I’m free to see both for the P.O.S’s they are. It’s quite liberating to be of ideological chains.

—

Martha, in “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolfe,” would adore you. You have such a way of getting to the essence of things.

I would only note that it is still possible one to be of the ideological sort yet find both Beck and Olbermann as equally despicable. However, to do so, one has to drop the ideological mindset and engage in some objective analysis, which brings us back full circle to your point.

Thanks for you input.

Texican, can you read? I said the key word CITIZEN. You just listed three non-citizens.
King, why don’t you cut and paste that part of the Constitution that extends habeas corpus to anyone in the country? I will be waiting.
Don’t put up the legal opinion of a left-wing judge. Just the EXACT wording in the Constitution.

homie, you don’t get to decide that the Patriot Act abrogates the Constitution. Don’t quit your day job.

It is a peculiarity of Americans, and to a lesser extent the Brits, that a man can be devoted to his family, committed to his faith and his nation, lead the most respectable of lives, wear oxblood wing tips, boxer shorts, button down Oxford cloth shirts and scholastic ties and feel a deep loss that it is almost impossible to get an Ivy League haircut anymore, and be politically liberal, whilst another man can be an adulterer, never cross a church’s threshold, wear Birkenstocks, cut off jeans, no underwear, and a tie-dyed T-shirt, braid his nose hair and sport a scraggly pony tail and be politically conservative. No one is completely defined by his political ideology and no one’s political ideology completely defines him.

Homie, I don’t think that the Gordon Blower Show has the right to demand that conform to his protocol, particularly based upon what we have demonstrated to be his woeful ignorance of or deliberate misreading of our Constitution. In this instance, the fact that the accused is or is not a citizen is irrelevant Constitutionally. He is a person, and that is all that matters.

The Real Royal King says:
May 25, 2010 at 2:24 pm

Homie, I don’t think that the Gordon Blower Show has the right to demand that conform to his protocol…

Of course not. The truth need not apply to the people King agrees with. Evidence is a luxury… hypocrisy forgivable… and dishonesty over looked. That is, of course, if you say something King agrees with.

Is King the good cop and Texican the bad cop? Leno putting foot in mouth has degraded into Bush? WTF?

Remember folks, everything King says is funny. It is not ment to be funny but stupid is funny. Notice he could not cut and paste the part of the Constitutions that gives non-citizens the right to Habeas Corpus. Why, because it doesn’t exist. Libs want to rewrite the Constitution to cover the world. They are proving to the regular people everyday just how crazy they are.

LETS FACE IT ..THE TEA BAGGERS CAME IN LIKE A LION….. AND OUT LIKE REPUBICANS (not misspelled)

TRRK, I agree that one can be determinately non-ideological, yet find themselves alligned with one side or the other, depending on the issue. Welcome to my world. Oh, and thanks for getting the point of my comment. Martha would love me? Perhaps, I always did relate to the non-existant child that George probably had no part in parenting.

Well, Gordon Blower Show, you know I’d have to copy and paste. The cut function would be disabled.

I notice you have never copied and pasted the part of the Second Amendment that guarantees your right to ammunition.

By the way, Gordon Blower Show, how many provisions of the Bill of Rights and the remainder of the Amendments vest rights in PEOPLE or PERSONS? How many in CITIZENS, only? If you have to look it up, you just failed your CITIZENship test.

What a MORONIC statement!

THIS is one of the LIMITED things that government OUGHT TO DO, protecting beyond the boundaries of the individual states.

Unfortunately, our current two (fake) parties are more interested in power for themselves than representing the people, and thus we have this problem.

All you sheeple against the Tea Party are what got us to this place, where government is just ignores the people and pays attention (too little and too late to what they do bad and too much when they are BUYING Congress) to the corporations. YOU will lead us (the rest of the way since we’re almost there already due to our two “parties”, which are really two sides of the same party) to FASCISM!

And what is Mr. Leno’s qualifications for such a statement? Doesn’t he have a “degree” in Restaurant and Hotel Management from some matchbook “university?”

OOPS! “And what ARE Mr. Leno’s qualifications…”

It is unbelievable how passionately some people will assert something they do not know to be true. This board is amazing.

“You mean the stuff that Obama decided to continue… and the left decided was no longer a problem?”
“Wasn’t it Keith Olbermann… hero of the left… who railed against FISA under Bush, but made excuses under Obama? Oh that’s right… it was.”

By the way, the link that was provided as proof only pulls up an empty salon.com page, but I notice Glen Greenwald in the url and assume it’s the same article Glen links to himself in this other article he wrote praising the left for criticizing President Obama. I would also like to point out the date: April 09, just weeks after he took office.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/04/08/criticism

From the article:
“Several weeks ago, I noted that unlike the Right — which turned itself into a virtual cult of uncritical reverence for George W. Bush especially during the first several years of his administration — large numbers of Bush critics have been admirably willing to criticize Obama when he embraces the very policies that prompted so much anger and controversy during the Bush years. Last night, Keith Olbermann — who has undoubtedly been one of the most swooning and often-uncritical admirers of Barack Obama of anyone in the country (behavior for which I rather harshly criticized him in the past) — devoted the first two segments of his show to emphatically lambasting Obama and Eric Holder’s DOJ for the story I wrote about on Monday: namely, the Obama administration’s use of the radical Bush/Cheney state secrets doctrine and — worse still — a brand new claim of “sovereign immunity” to insist that courts lack the authority to decide whether the Bush administration broke the law in illegally spying on Americans.”

The article continues to cite Daily Kos, Boingboing, and other Bush critics who have criticized Obama for the same and even updates at the bottom that Olbermann is actually following up the story and continuing coverage.

On a side note: Citing Glen Greenwald’s criticism of Olbermann as an example of how the WHOLE LEFT is unwilling to criticize the President or it’s own is itself evidence counter to your point.

Again, the monolithic left groupthink proves how brainwashed they are by the magnificently capable and ruthlessly effective Democratic Party.

Since evidently this is even a question, I will take it upon myself to answer it.

“why don’t you cut and paste that part of the Constitution that extends habeas corpus to anyone in the country? I will be waiting.”

Amendment V
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…”

The constitution is very specific when differentiating between “person” and citizen, as seen in the passage requiring that the President of the U.S. be a “natural born citizen.” Guess you are not a birther, or you would of have had that passage memorized no doubt.

“Don’t put up the legal opinion of a left-wing judge. Just the EXACT wording in the Constitution.”

Since you are in effect defending President Bush (AND President Obama incidentally) against violating the non-rights of non-citizens, then instead of quoting the legal opinion of a “left wing” judge, then I will point out the opinion of the most right of right wing judges Antonin Scalia, and the defendant himself George W Bush:

“To the contrary, Justice Scalia, in his scathing dissent, approvingly quoted Justice Jackson in conceding that foreigners detained inside the U.S. are protected by the Constitution (emphasis added):

Justice Jackson then elaborated on the historical scope of the writ:

“The alien, to whom the United States has been traditionally hospitable, has been accorded a generous and ascending scale of rights as he increases his identity with our society . . . .

“But, in extending constitutional protections beyond the citizenry, the Court has been at pains to point out that it was the alien’s presence within its territorial jurisdiction that gave the Judiciary power to act.” Id., at 770–771.

That’s from Scalia, and all the dissenting judges joined in that opinion. It is indisputable, well-settled Constitutional law that the Constitution restricts the actions of the Government with respect to both American citizens and foreigners. It’s not even within the realm of mainstream legal debate to deny that. ”

“Indeed, the whole reason why Guantanamo was created was that Bush officials wanted to claim that the Constitution is inapplicable to foreigners held outside the U.S. — not even the Bush administration would claim that the Constitution is inapplicable to foreigners generally.”

The quotes are from a VERY excellent and thorough breakdown on why the constitution protects all people within the jurisdiction of the U.S. and can be found here: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/02/01/collins