Give up sainthood, renounce wisdom.
And it will be a hundred times better for everyone.
Give up kindness, renounce morality,
And more will discover filial piety and love.

Give up ingenuity; renounce profits.
And bandits and thieves will disappear.

These three are outward forms alone, they are not sufficient in themselves.
It is more important
To see the simplicity
To realize one's true nature,
To cast off selfishness
And temper desire.

Tao Te Ching (CH-19)

http://home.att.net/~jrhsc/rush.html

"And don't forget, Sherrod Brown is black. There's a racial component here, too. And now, the newspaper that I'm reading all this from is The New York Times, and they, of course, don't mention that."

"The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies."

Have you noticed that all composite
pictures of criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?

"They oughtta change Black History Month to Black Progress Month and start measuring it."
"Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it."

'take that bone out of your nose and call me back.'
Why should Blacks be heard? They're 12%
of the population.

Who the hell cares."

Okay. I could go on for twenty pages. But you get the point. RUSH LIBAUGH IS AN UNABASHED RACIST. So what is a motherfricker to do? He said these things for twenty years and he still says these things. ESPN could not handle it because of its sponsors, because of all its Black reporters/pundits, because of its large African American viewers (except for NASCAR of course)

Face it, rush makes fifty mill a year saying things you cannot say on tv. His audience says these things in bars and similar meeting places for racist clowns. But these thoughts become real when broadcast over the radio waves. Rush gives a voice to those who cannot regularly be heard almost anywhere.

But when you are a racist, and you make your money being a racist, how can you deal with the 90% of the population that does not wish to hear such things. And how do you deal with arguments in the political sphere?

Well the best offense is to be more offensive. So you simply claim that EVERYBODY ELSE is a racist.

Colin Powell supported Barack Obama, BECAUSE HE IS BLACK. Ergo, Colin Powell is a racist.

Barack Obama is a racist. Barack Obama does things because he is black. Barack Obama is against all legislation that rush would detest, because Barack Obama is Black.

Rush said that prosecuting the previous administration is what happens in banana republics. He described the "two-pronged purpose" of this: to distract everyone from failure of health care, and to get the lunatic fringe back on board with his administration. Rush also declared that Eric Holder was investigating people who saved American lives, and went on to say that Obama "does not like this country" because he has a "chip on his shoulder."

Rush: "Obama has turned this into a [...] fascist nation -- think Mussolini"

Rush sums up WSJ op-ed: "Culturally, [Obama's] not American"

Rush, THE AMERICAN FASCIST calls my President a fascisto.

When a nominee for the Supreme Court, one of only nine lifetime appointments, makes an overtly brazen racist comment about tens of millions of American citizens, we don't need lectures. What we need to do is to confront her with what she said and what it says about her.
See, you simply reverse the charges. Easy as that. You are an American racist fascist so you simply call your enemies the same. You do not need documentation. You do not need to define terms. What a waste of time.

So this was my current mindset when I saw this gem at HUFFPO & TPM:

CHENEY CLAIMS OBAMA ADMINISTRATION POLITICIZING THE DOJ.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/big_surprise_torture_m...

Here we go again.

The single most politicized DOJ in history with cheney, w, gonzo, yoo, feith.....
Who is this man kidding? Earlier this year, former vice president Dick Cheney had requested that the CIA release documents that he said would prove that "enhanced interrogation techniques" worked. His request was, at first, denied, but now ABC News reports the documents have been released. So is Cheney vindicated? Spencer Ackerman at The Washington Independent gives the documents a read and finds that, not only do they not support Cheney's claim, but in fact they sometimes show the opposite: traditional, non-coercive interrogations often worked well at prying valuable information from detainees. "Cheney's public account of these documents have conflated the difference between information acquired from detainees, which the documents present, and information acquired from detainees through the enhanced interrogation program, which they don't." (Daily Beast)

Read it at The Washington Independent.

Am I picking and choosing with regard to dissing dickyc on this torture crap? No.

The materials being released do not demonstrate that torture works at all.