I don’t know where to begin with this guy. He need his fucking teeth kicked in. This guy is the lowest of the low.The great thing about about watching this traitor is seeing his magazine crash and burn. I don’t see this guy being at the helm of this magazine much longer, but the way the left-media operates, who knows?
There is no question that Meacham is a far-left guy. He wants the Bush administration investigated over the treatment of terrorist detainees. He and his ilk don’t give a damn about how this weakens the country. Of course these fools are so clueless that they believe just the opposite will happen. It’s interesting to watch Meacham tell O’reilly that he isn’t being vindictive in his pursuit of an investigation. I think it is clear though, that this man hates conservatives and conservatism. But he never lets the veil of the calm, cool, and collected scholar ever fall away. In this respect he reminds me of Obama. They both have this warped, detached manor. Obama’s detachment was on full display as Jill Stanek described to him how she held a tiny aborted baby for forty five minutes while it’s life slowly ebbed away. Of course, this testimony didn’t faze Obama one bit as he went on to fight tooth and nail against anti-infanticide legislation in the Illinois senate.
At the end of the segment O’reilly asks Meacham why Newsweek had to publish a commentary that attacked Mel Gibson over his pending divorce and that gossiped about the possibility that there is another woman. Meacham says that Gibson put him out there as a Biblical literalist and apparently this makes him fair game for the left-wing goon squads. Sure Jonnyboy, you don’t hate conservatives. Newsweek couldn’t get anymore evenhanded, could it? Somehow, I think there is a very hot place reserved in hell for this faux-Christian S.O.B.
Well this is an old blog post, but I found it randomly through Google so here’s a response in defense of Ron Paul’s position.
According to this article from Fox News - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85446,00.html
“…the presence of American forces here has long been an irritant for Saudi rulers facing strong anti-American sentiment among a growing and increasingly restive population. Fifteen of the 19 alleged Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudis, and Saudi-born Osama bin Laden cites the U.S. military presence in his homeland as a reason for his hatred of America.”
Even if our troops were there at the invitation of the Saudi government, it well-known that their government does not represent the will of the people. Apparently Bin Laden perceived our presence there as an occupation.
Also, Ron Paul votes against every appropriations bill. However, because his district is paying loads of taxes, just like every other district, it is Ron Paul’s duty to represent his constituents and try to get some of that money back in the form of earmarks. If Ron Paul did not submit the earmarks, that money, which has already been appropriated, would be taken by an earmark for another district or just spent without oversight by the Executive branch.