Home

Balzheimer’s is a terrible, terrible disease, that attacks the spot where a conscience is supposed to be in the brain.  Victims find themselves suddenly possessed with ginormous balls which imbue the afflicted the cajones to accuse others of the things they themselves are guilty of.  There is no known cure.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about “Rove and Cheney Have Ballzheimer’s“, posted with vodpod
Advertisements

15 thoughts on “Rove and Cheney Have Ballzheimer’s

  1. i hope dick cheney becomes an american idiom… “that guy was a real cheney”… or, “you better wash that cheney before you stick in my goat”….

    what an awful, immoral man

  2. I’ve said it before – I just love Jon Stewart. He is one of the few people who can take on the stories that really make me mad, and make me laugh.

    • How much fun did the graphic artist have making that Cheney image! I think I would have put Lie or Die in feminine lettering rather than “Lie.” 🙂

    • And you know Mayberry Machiavellis is just too kind of an appellation. They are Lords of the Flies in suits.

  3. This issue is simply too sensitive. On one hand, none of us want to unnecessarily bring undue harm or worse to our enemy combatants; however, where the innocent lives of Americans are at stake here, it’s not in our best interests to feed them cake and ice-cream and shower them with flat-screen television sets at tax-payers expense, especially when they have openly admitted to living/existing for one thing only–the destruction of the so-called “Great Satan”. Some of our enemies can be likened to labradors but we wouldn’t treat them the same as our enemies akin to pit-bulls…

    Yet another interesting post, M, thought-provoking too– but that proverbial “but” you may have sensed before I even wrote it is we have to be careful not to be on either extreme of our interrogation methods–yes, undue harm is cause for concern, but feeding these sinister thugs cake and ice-cream is out of the question too.

    Hope all is well. Have a wonderful weekend.

    • If the issue is too sensitive, we must thicken our skins. I’ll bet no prisoner in Rumsfeld’s Defense Department or Tenet’s CIA was served cake and ice cream unless it was quite literally laced with excrement.

      The very words “enemy combatant” were injected into the national vernacular by the Bush Justice Department so that untried suspects would be viewed as something different, something inhuman….something beyond Justice and America’s great legal tradition.

      With all my heart I hope those terrified cowardly bastards (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, Rice) REAP WHAT THEY HAVE SOWN. Yes, let them and not future soldiers, as Mike alluded to.

      King James comes to mind…what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul? What does it profit a great nation to brutalize untried suspects if she lose her very soul, her ideals, her respect.

      Now we wait for the images that have been tied up in the courts and slated for release in May. According to reports, Abu Ghraib was the frat house compared to what’s coming.

      Thanks for visiting, Al. You remind me that I have a refined sensibility underneath the clown suit.

  4. Ronald Reagan on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment:

    “The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention . It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.

    “The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called “universal jurisdiction.” Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution.” from Reagan’s signing statement

  5. Taking nothing away from the great man/leader that President Reagan was/is, let’s please be fair here and acknowledge that his comments were written in a context prior to the horror of the morning of September 11, 2001.

    Melissa’s comments regarding the immense value of human life is honorable, and I agree with her wholeheartedly that due process should be afforded all humans everywhere on this blue and green planet. However, in the heat of battle to determine/assess the threat level of terrorist who have suddenly struck without provocation, it’s more than reasonable (in the spirit of maintaining a safe and protective shield around our sacred borders) to detain those individuals identified through intelligence to be members, senior leaders and/or executive level commandos hell-bent on rallying their forces for a second round of attacks upon American targets/interests.

    With that said, yes–initially–the adrenaline may have been a bit high on a heavy ended response; however, once those terrorist minded individuals were at least detained and the threat had lessened, cooler heads prevailed. There again we come to the labrador and pit-bull scenario/analogy, even if the interrogators initially attempted to glean vital information/intelligence from the members of the terrorist-cell group in a respectful and responsible/appropriate manner, How do any of us know if that approach may have been met with resistance so strong and fierce that their own lives may have been in danger/at-stake?

    Remember too that time was of the essence in determining if further strikes were immienent on American soil, so the interrogators were often racing against the clock in their mindset, assessing an invisible terror threat with the lives of the American people heavy on their hearts and minds. Am I condoning torture? NO, heavens not–just want the methods used placed in the context of why it happened as much as what happened. Again, once the seriousness of the terror threat had been assessed and neutralized, cooler heads within the matrix prevailed, which, in my humble opinion, would mean the order to change methods most likely came from the top and trickled down.

    Do Americans regret that interrogations even had to take place? Of course, we are a fairminded people who value decency and justice, but, unfortunately, our way of life and those sacred principles/values we cherish most came under attack by sinister forces without provocation, so intervention was needed. Have we learned anything? Of course, we have, most notably: That the immense shock of the terrorist attacks caught us all by surprise, and that the interrogators were initially grampling with an invisible, potent enemy, but once they regained control of the situation (that the sinister terrorist brought upon themselves), the interrogators honored the “labradors” with just treatment and simply met force with force with the “pit-bulls”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s