Aw shucks, I'm really gonna miss her anti-bush tirades.
Or will I?
Molly Ivins....DEAD
Moderator: Jesus H Christ
-
smackaholic
- Walrus Team 6
- Posts: 21748
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:46 pm
- Location: upside it
Molly Ivins....DEAD
mvscal wrote:The only precious metals in a SHTF scenario are lead and brass.
-
TenTallBen
- No title requested
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 8:07 pm
- Location: Zydeco Country
A loss for the republic more than it can afford. Ivins was a great American--properly escorting Tom DeLay right to his cell--having had him pegged every step of the way. Same with the Bush malignancy. She's had it peeled and exposed and it's a shame she won't see the Chimp (or "shrub" as she called him) go down into his full disgrace, but she'll be there in spirit.
-
Husker4ever
- Elwood
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:39 am
-
Terry in Crapchester
- 2012 March Madness Champ
- Posts: 8995
- Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:56 pm
- Location: Back in the 'burbs
-
BSmack
- 2005 and 2010 JFFL Champion
- Posts: 29350
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:21 pm
- Location: Lookin for tards
No, because you're 26 and have yet to show the slightest bit of intellectual curiosity.Cicero wrote:B/c I'm 26 and couldnt give a shit about some hack in Texas?Terry in Crapchester wrote:Why am I not surprised?Cicero wrote:I have no idea who that is.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
- Antonio Brown
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
- Antonio Brown
-
BSmack
- 2005 and 2010 JFFL Champion
- Posts: 29350
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:21 pm
- Location: Lookin for tards
I'm pretty sure he's seen Cinder's meat curtains.mvscal wrote:Maybe his "intellectual curiosity" does not extend to toxic cuntflaps.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
- Antonio Brown
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
- Antonio Brown
Sure, babs, toss out your finest honed playground smears.....and just go on hiding. Because just as you can't and don't dare actually argue one of Ivins' observations over the years, so too are you just a pathetic hack who's dead on the run just like the rest of the "neocon" "Hardass Republicans"--or whatever you regard your militia mentality to reflect. Ivins, meanwhile, has been proven right again and again over the years as she rode herd on the sleazy Evangelical Capitalist War Freaks that comprise the GOP in her state. Just as their crimes were, and continue to be, exposed--and really.....listen....you can hear the sound of Tom DeLay being marched off to the Dining Hall--so shall that blessed woman be raised to her well-earned place of honor and dignity in her nation's history.
And now, here's the great woman's last column:
By Molly Ivins
The purpose of this old-fashioned newspaper crusade to stop the war is not to make George W. Bush look like the dumbest president ever. People have done dumber things. What were they thinking when they bought into the Bay of Pigs fiasco? How dumb was the Egypt-Suez war? How massively stupid was the entire war in Vietnam? Even at that, the challenge with this misbegotten adventure is that we simply cannot let it continue.
It is not a matter of whether we will lose or we are losing. We have lost. Gen. John P. Abizaid, until recently the senior commander in the Middle East, insists that the answer to our problems there is not military. “You have to internationalize the problem. You have to attack it diplomatically, geo-strategically,” he said.
His assessment is supported by Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the senior American commander in Iraq, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who only recommend releasing forces with a clear definition of the goals for the additional troops.
Bush’s call for a “surge” or “escalation” also goes against the Iraq Study Group. Talk is that the White House has planned to do anything but what the group suggested after months of investigation and proposals based on much broader strategic implications.
About the only politician out there besides Bush actively calling for a surge is Sen. John McCain. In a recent opinion piece, he wrote: “The presence of additional coalition forces would allow the Iraqi government to do what it cannot accomplish today on its own—impose its rule throughout the country. ... By surging troops and bringing security to Baghdad and other areas, we will give the Iraqis the best possible chance to succeed.” But with all due respect to the senator from Arizona, that ship has long since sailed.
A surge is not acceptable to the people in this country—we have voted overwhelmingly against this war in polls (about 80 percent of the public is against escalation, and a recent Military Times poll shows only 38 percent of active military want more troops sent) and at the polls. We know this is wrong. The people understand, the people have the right to make this decision, and the people have the obligation to make sure our will is implemented.
Congress must work for the people in the resolution of this fiasco. Ted Kennedy’s proposal to control the money and tighten oversight is a welcome first step. And if Republicans want to continue to rubber-stamp this administration’s idiotic “plans” and go against the will of the people, they should be thrown out as soon as possible, to join their recent colleagues.
Anyone who wants to talk knowledgably about our Iraq misadventure should pick up Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s “Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone.” It’s like reading a horror novel. You just want to put your face down and moan: How could we have let this happen? How could we have been so stupid?
As The Washington Post’s review notes, Chandrasekaran’s book “methodically documents the baffling ineptitude that dominated U.S. attempts to influence Iraq’s fiendish politics, rebuild the electrical grid, privatize the economy, run the oil industry, recruit expert staff or instill a modicum of normalcy to the lives of Iraqis.”
We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. Raise hell. Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous. Make our troops know we’re for them and trying to get them out of there. Hit the streets to protest Bush’s proposed surge. If you can, go to the peace march in Washington on Jan. 27. We need people in the streets, banging pots and pans and demanding, “Stop it, now!”
And there's not a damn thing you can really say to dispute her. And you know it.
SCOREBOARD IVINS
And now, here's the great woman's last column:
By Molly Ivins
The purpose of this old-fashioned newspaper crusade to stop the war is not to make George W. Bush look like the dumbest president ever. People have done dumber things. What were they thinking when they bought into the Bay of Pigs fiasco? How dumb was the Egypt-Suez war? How massively stupid was the entire war in Vietnam? Even at that, the challenge with this misbegotten adventure is that we simply cannot let it continue.
It is not a matter of whether we will lose or we are losing. We have lost. Gen. John P. Abizaid, until recently the senior commander in the Middle East, insists that the answer to our problems there is not military. “You have to internationalize the problem. You have to attack it diplomatically, geo-strategically,” he said.
His assessment is supported by Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the senior American commander in Iraq, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who only recommend releasing forces with a clear definition of the goals for the additional troops.
Bush’s call for a “surge” or “escalation” also goes against the Iraq Study Group. Talk is that the White House has planned to do anything but what the group suggested after months of investigation and proposals based on much broader strategic implications.
About the only politician out there besides Bush actively calling for a surge is Sen. John McCain. In a recent opinion piece, he wrote: “The presence of additional coalition forces would allow the Iraqi government to do what it cannot accomplish today on its own—impose its rule throughout the country. ... By surging troops and bringing security to Baghdad and other areas, we will give the Iraqis the best possible chance to succeed.” But with all due respect to the senator from Arizona, that ship has long since sailed.
A surge is not acceptable to the people in this country—we have voted overwhelmingly against this war in polls (about 80 percent of the public is against escalation, and a recent Military Times poll shows only 38 percent of active military want more troops sent) and at the polls. We know this is wrong. The people understand, the people have the right to make this decision, and the people have the obligation to make sure our will is implemented.
Congress must work for the people in the resolution of this fiasco. Ted Kennedy’s proposal to control the money and tighten oversight is a welcome first step. And if Republicans want to continue to rubber-stamp this administration’s idiotic “plans” and go against the will of the people, they should be thrown out as soon as possible, to join their recent colleagues.
Anyone who wants to talk knowledgably about our Iraq misadventure should pick up Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s “Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone.” It’s like reading a horror novel. You just want to put your face down and moan: How could we have let this happen? How could we have been so stupid?
As The Washington Post’s review notes, Chandrasekaran’s book “methodically documents the baffling ineptitude that dominated U.S. attempts to influence Iraq’s fiendish politics, rebuild the electrical grid, privatize the economy, run the oil industry, recruit expert staff or instill a modicum of normalcy to the lives of Iraqis.”
We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. Raise hell. Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous. Make our troops know we’re for them and trying to get them out of there. Hit the streets to protest Bush’s proposed surge. If you can, go to the peace march in Washington on Jan. 27. We need people in the streets, banging pots and pans and demanding, “Stop it, now!”
And there's not a damn thing you can really say to dispute her. And you know it.
SCOREBOARD IVINS
Again, cornered bigoted smears. Which are completely bullshit, as usual.
So what if she was a dyke? She was naturally large, but neither obese nor a slob at all. She REALLY didn't die alone, but rather within the love of legions of fans, admirers, and Americans everywhere who are determined to take back their nation from the vile Cheney/Chimp cabal.
WAKEY WAKE
So what if she was a dyke? She was naturally large, but neither obese nor a slob at all. She REALLY didn't die alone, but rather within the love of legions of fans, admirers, and Americans everywhere who are determined to take back their nation from the vile Cheney/Chimp cabal.
WAKEY WAKE
-
indyfrisco
- Pro Bonfire
- Posts: 11683
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:15 pm
I'm part of the huge majority that wishes you dead, you proxy shit mother fucker.LTS TRN 2 wrote:I'm part of the huge majority of Americans that wants out of Iraq, and who believe that the Chimp is a repulsive piece of shit/criminal.
Last edited by indyfrisco on Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Goober McTuber wrote:One last post...
-
marinerfan
- Jake
- Posts: 88
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:31 am
rack Ivins and rack this take:
Prescient (and right) as ever, Ivins said in a February 11, 1998 column about the crazed House of Representatives speaking in session: "Next up, several members decide to demand that if we use air strikes against Iraq, we take out Saddam Hussein. In the first place, murdering foreign leaders is not a proper tool of foreign policy, for the sensible reason that you never know what you'll get if you do. One of the most famous hypothetical questions of history is: What if someone had managed to murder Adolf Hitler early on? Suppose someone did, and then the Nazi movement had been taken over by, say, Albert Speer, who was a lot better organized than Hitler?"
Ivins never became the regular TV pundit that so many other alleged columnists became. Perhaps it was because of moments like this, being interviewed about the brewing Clinton "scandal" on some Fox "news" program in March 1998: "If we had devoted this much time and this much space in the newspapers to the single most important problem in American politics today, which is the money that finances campaigns and the way the people that get elected respond to that money, we would have solved the problem by now. We would have the people of this country so outraged, they would be demanding campaign finance reform. What are we doing? We're talking about the president's dick. It's ridiculous."
In that same interview, she said this: "I actually have a fair amount of respect for good politicians. And by 'good politicians,' I mean people who really try to move the ball in such a way that people can get helped. And they do deserve respect and they do deserve credit." But she believed all politicians, good and bad, need to be held to account, not for fucking around or drinking after work. But for what they did that affected you and everyone else in the country while on the job. If they're not dicking us over, who gives a shit about their dicks? Because of this, she reserved special scorn for the Washington press corps.
On CNN's Reliable Sources on July 14, 2001, in those heady Chandra-riffic days before everythingchangedon911, responding to Howard Kurtz's question on the press's behavior on the "Did Gary Condit kill that woman?" story, Ivins said, "It's a disgraceful performance. Look, part of what happens is that in journalism there is a contest for the limited time and space we have available to try to present what is going on to people's attention. And we had the same problem during the Monica Lewinsky scandal; two-thirds of the world's economy collapsed while the press was simply obsessed with Ms. Lewinsky."
She said, often, that the sins of omission were the real crimes of contemporary journalism. Her columns so often filled that gap, talking about labor and working people and countries like the Congo and Indonesia. She refused in the last few years to get drawn into the false debate of "would you rather Saddam still be in power," turning that around to say that the left never wanted him in power in the first place.
She was goddamned smart, so smart she didn't have to flaunt it. So smart that she could use the down to earth side to say what she meant so all of us could understand it. She didn't suffer bullies. She loved Texas like a parent loves her child even after that child has gone on a three-state killing spree. She was unfailingly polite. And she could eviscerate anyone who was failing all of us with just an image or two. Those guttings will be desperately missed. That sense and celebration of the decency of the average American will be missed even more.
Prescient (and right) as ever, Ivins said in a February 11, 1998 column about the crazed House of Representatives speaking in session: "Next up, several members decide to demand that if we use air strikes against Iraq, we take out Saddam Hussein. In the first place, murdering foreign leaders is not a proper tool of foreign policy, for the sensible reason that you never know what you'll get if you do. One of the most famous hypothetical questions of history is: What if someone had managed to murder Adolf Hitler early on? Suppose someone did, and then the Nazi movement had been taken over by, say, Albert Speer, who was a lot better organized than Hitler?"
Ivins never became the regular TV pundit that so many other alleged columnists became. Perhaps it was because of moments like this, being interviewed about the brewing Clinton "scandal" on some Fox "news" program in March 1998: "If we had devoted this much time and this much space in the newspapers to the single most important problem in American politics today, which is the money that finances campaigns and the way the people that get elected respond to that money, we would have solved the problem by now. We would have the people of this country so outraged, they would be demanding campaign finance reform. What are we doing? We're talking about the president's dick. It's ridiculous."
In that same interview, she said this: "I actually have a fair amount of respect for good politicians. And by 'good politicians,' I mean people who really try to move the ball in such a way that people can get helped. And they do deserve respect and they do deserve credit." But she believed all politicians, good and bad, need to be held to account, not for fucking around or drinking after work. But for what they did that affected you and everyone else in the country while on the job. If they're not dicking us over, who gives a shit about their dicks? Because of this, she reserved special scorn for the Washington press corps.
On CNN's Reliable Sources on July 14, 2001, in those heady Chandra-riffic days before everythingchangedon911, responding to Howard Kurtz's question on the press's behavior on the "Did Gary Condit kill that woman?" story, Ivins said, "It's a disgraceful performance. Look, part of what happens is that in journalism there is a contest for the limited time and space we have available to try to present what is going on to people's attention. And we had the same problem during the Monica Lewinsky scandal; two-thirds of the world's economy collapsed while the press was simply obsessed with Ms. Lewinsky."
She said, often, that the sins of omission were the real crimes of contemporary journalism. Her columns so often filled that gap, talking about labor and working people and countries like the Congo and Indonesia. She refused in the last few years to get drawn into the false debate of "would you rather Saddam still be in power," turning that around to say that the left never wanted him in power in the first place.
She was goddamned smart, so smart she didn't have to flaunt it. So smart that she could use the down to earth side to say what she meant so all of us could understand it. She didn't suffer bullies. She loved Texas like a parent loves her child even after that child has gone on a three-state killing spree. She was unfailingly polite. And she could eviscerate anyone who was failing all of us with just an image or two. Those guttings will be desperately missed. That sense and celebration of the decency of the average American will be missed even more.
-
warren
I don't have a problem with you hating Texas as much as I have a problem with you trotting your dungeons and drag-queen ass down to Magnolia every year to pimp your faggoty wind chimes to all the other non-Texan morons that throw away good money to watch you and the other knights of the round bung hole ram your jousts up each others medevil exhaust pipes. If you hate Texas so much than find another state to fund your crack habit in.420 wrote:She was a great writer and humorist... as well as a Texas legend.
It almost makes you wonder why she spent her time in Texas.
Oh yeah... humor.
I personally think I would be doing the world a monstrous favour by crop dusting you and the rest of the rhen-virgins with a hefty wafting of anthrax or basting your turkey legs in a bath of cianide.
Oh, and by the way, if it weren't for the Bush clan Molly"where's the free buffet"Mollins would still have been stuck in the complaint department at the Houston Comical.
No, even though her observations rarely allowed factual information or logic to get in the way of sophomoric rhetoric and a faux Texas homespun sense of humor, she did accomplish a lot and I hope she can rest in peace and keep mouth shut for eternity.
The truth.
-
indyfrisco
- Pro Bonfire
- Posts: 11683
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:15 pm
Im s'o much smartern th'an your.warren wrote:I personally think I would be doing the world a monstrous favour by crop dusting you and the rest of the rhen-virgins with a hefty wafting of anthrax or basting your turkey legs in a bath of cianide.
Sin,
mYouknowwho
Goober McTuber wrote:One last post...
Wrong. You're a cowering little punk with nothing whatever to say--'cept like babs, playground taunts and smears, etc. But don't worry, SOMEONE agrees with you and will prop up your scared little paradigm. His name is Rusp Limpdick and he's blathering on--just like you--right now on your AM radio dial.IndyFrisco wrote:I'm part of the huge majority that wishes you dead, you proxy shit mother fucker.LTS TRN 2 wrote:I'm part of the huge majority of Americans that wants out of Iraq, and who believe that the Chimp is a repulsive piece of shit/criminal.
Ivins was right on virtually every issue she examined--and neither you nor any of your playground circle-jerk buddies, or Rusp, can dispute ANY of the points in just the two short pieces offered on this thread.