John François Kerry for Secretary of State?

I wrote, on November 13th, that for President Obama to nominate Senator John François Kerry (D-MA) to replace outgoing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta “would show tremendous disrespect for the men and women in our armed services.” I also stated:

If President Obama wants to appoint him to be Secretary of State, fine, let him; the President is going to appoint a liberal Democrat regardless, and there’s no particular reason to think that Mr Kerry would somehow be worse than any other appointment Mr Obama would ever make.

It really doesn’t matter who has the job, because the Secretary is not going to be able to replace the President’s rotten foreign policy.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gives a press conference during the second day of NATO Foreign Affairs ministers meeting at the NATO Headquarters in Brussels, on December 5, 2012. Clinton said it was crucial that NATO allies stick to their commitments to fund Afghanistan’s security forces after Western forces end their combat. (Photo credit: John Thys/AFP/Getty Images)

After all, Hillary Clinton had exactly zero qualifications to be Secretary of State, other than having slept with Bill Clinton, and apparently a lot of women meet that standard. (I hear Monica Lewinsky needs a job, and she does have experience in bowing down before heads of state.) John Kerry won’t be notably better than Mrs Clinton, nor notably worse.

And, who knows? Perhaps as Secretary of State, Mr Kerry would manage to avoid stomach viruses and dehydration and falling over his own two feet — though there’s a reason Eric refers to him as Lurch — and hitting his head, and getting a concussion, all to avoid causing the Secretary to miss testifying about the Benghazi incident.

The sad part is that President Obama and his political team destroyed their best candidate, Ambassador Susan Rice. She’d be just as bad on foreign policy, because she wouldn’t be setting foreign policy; that’s President Obama’s job. But she actually is a diplomat, has actual diplomatic experience, and would (probably) have been as good as anyone could be in pushing the President’s rotten policies. Unfortunately, she fouled up and actually trusted President Obama and his minions, and wound up telling lies for the Obama Administration. She had to withdraw, and so we are stuck with Senator Kerry.

But that’s a good thing: it gets Lurch out of the Senate . . . and gives Scott Brown a chance to run for the vacant Senate seat. :)

61 Comments

  1. Utter and complete nastiness has replaced reason in this post by our Editor. Further response is hardly warranted.

    Not quite. If he was as “nasty” as you claim, he’d have banned you looooong ago, and deleted your now-useless blog.

    You really know how to be grateful, don’t'cha, Perry?

  2. But I will point this out: Republicans have proposed John Kerry for Secretary of State to replace Hillary Clinton, after trashing UN Ambassador Susan Rice for the position, whom they thoroughly trashed personally, this being what today’s Republicans do, like our Editor here. But this behavior reemphasizes how out of touch Republicans have become, in my view, incapable of making rational judgments about anybody or any issue.

    And btw, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has approval ratings the likings of which any and all political organisms would love to have. Moreover, she bodes bad news for Republicans who may have an eye on the Presidency in 2016, like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio. Perhaps it is time for you Righties to defect, in search of a constituency which would embrace your extremely radical politics, assuming there is one somewhere, certainly not here and now.

  3. But I will point this out: Republicans have proposed John Kerry for Secretary of State to replace Hillary Clinton, after trashing UN Ambassador Susan Rice for the position, whom they thoroughly trashed personally, this being what today’s Republicans do, like our Editor here. But this behavior reemphasizes how out of touch Republicans have become, in my view, incapable of making rational judgments about anybody or any issue.

    Oh, please. Rice was “trashed” because she’s a dangerously incompetent mouthpiece dolt. I would have loved seeing here, tho, explain all that happened in the 90s on her watch — and recommendations — during all the terror attacks against our embassies/interests in Africa.

  4. Not quite. If he was as “nasty” as you claim, he’d have banned you looooong ago, and deleted your now-useless blog.

    You really know how to be grateful, don’t’cha, Perry?

    On the contrary, koolo, I am and have been gracious to our Editor, concerning his generosity. However, his kindness does not negate his being called him down when his conduct merits criticism.

    It is cowards like you, koolo, who obviously would permit himself to be bought off and remain silent when speaking out should be carried out.

    Your campaign on here to ban me and my blog is not working, coward koolo. Now go focus on your students and teach your class, which is what you should be doing anyway, exclusively, during school hours. If I were your administrator, knowing of your attitude and behavior on this blog, I would have fired you long ago. From my admittedly one dimensional view of you which we all see on this blog, you should definitely not be a school teacher. However, were I to actually meet you, I might feel differently, and positively, about your qualifications and demeanor. I have offered to meet you in person over lunch, an offer which you have declined. Why decline, koolo?

  5. Oh, please. Rice was “trashed” because she’s a dangerously incompetent mouthpiece dolt. I would have loved seeing here, tho, explain all that happened in the 90s on her watch — and recommendations — during all the terror attacks against our embassies/interests in Africa.

    A “dangerously incompetent mouthpiece dolt”, is that your assessment of Susan Rice, koolo. You need to back up that allegation, else be considered incompetent yourself, and a “dolt” yourself, for making such an allegation out of thin air. Would you accept such a statement from one of your students, without requiring some references? I certainly hope not. What subject do you teach, koolo?

  6. It is cowards like you, koolo, who obviously would permit himself to be bought off and remain silent when speaking out should be carried out.

    LOL … yeah, I’m “bought off.” More irrationality from the master of reality denial. At least I have a sense of gratitude, like being thankful to the Editor for even allowing comments of differing opinions to appear here.

    Your campaign on here to ban me and my blog is not working, coward koolo.

    I’m engaging in no “campaign.” All I note is that Editor is incredibly gracious in permanently banning you since you have a habit of threatening people on here with whom you disagree. That is cowardly, reality-denier.

    I have offered to meet you in person over lunch, an offer which you have declined. Why decline, koolo?

    Why do you ask the question again when we dissected such days ago? The answer, again, is simple: You’re a completely untrustworthy troll, that’s why. No one should trust you one iota.

  7. A “dangerously incompetent mouthpiece dolt”, is that your assessment of Susan Rice, koolo. You need to back up that allegation, else be considered incompetent yourself, and a “dolt” yourself, for making such an allegation out of thin air.

    Here’s the “thin air”. Which any minimally incompetent dolt could have found by a few keystrokes on Google.

    Providing sources matters little to you anyway, Perry, because you either ignore them or fail to acknowledge them. Or, when they really hit home, trash the source.

  8. From my admittedly one dimensional view of you which we all see on this blog, you should definitely not be a school teacher.

    From my admittedly one dimensional view of you which we all see on this blog, you should definitely not be a father, grandfather, or husband. So?

  9. LOL … yeah, I’m “bought off.” More irrationality from the master of reality denial. At least I have a sense of gratitude, like being thankful to the Editor for even allowing comments of differing opinions to appear here.

    Thus saith koolo, the one with the mentality of a propagandist, as only that kind of organism would think in this matter. (See your influence here, DNW?) And you tell us you’re a school teacher, correct koolo? Cannot be true!

    I’m engaging in no “campaign.” All I note is that Editor is incredibly gracious in permanently banning you since you have a habit of threatening people on here with whom you disagree. That is cowardly, reality-denier.

    You are engaged in a campaign, as you repeat the same allegation over and over and over. Moreover, the so-called threatening is only in the perception of the alleged victim, that’s you, koolo. There is no threat to anyone whose behavior is exemplary, even normal. Yours isn’t either, koolo. Moreover, and most important, you have yet to produce evidence to back up your allegation. When you do, we can discuss it.

    But I will say this again: No way do I think your attitude or behavior, as seen on this blog, qualifies you to be a teacher of our children. I could be convinced otherwise were I to meet you in person, with the three dimensional koolo on full view. But you don’t go for that! I wonder why? If you would like, bring along a friend.

    Why do you ask the question again when we dissected such days ago? The answer, again, is simple: You’re a completely untrustworthy troll, that’s why. No one should trust you one iota.

    As you know well, koolo, I have met and know our Editor personally, as well as Hoagie, and as well as your friend Hube, with whom there was a cordial meeting for lunch. I’d say that pretty much neutralizes your latest excuse. What are you hiding, koolo? What do you fear? Trust me, it would do you well to step forward on this challenge.

  10. You are engaged in a campaign, as you repeat the same allegation over and over and over. Moreover, the so-called threatening is only in the perception of the alleged victim, that’s you, koolo. There is no threat to anyone whose behavior is exemplary, even normal. Yours isn’t either, koolo. Moreover, and most important, you have yet to produce evidence to back up your allegation. When you do, we can discuss it.

    You must put everyone whom you encounter to sleep within minutes, Perry, due to your constant repetitious falsehoods. People just tune out to maintain their sanity. It’s old, already. You’re wrong; we’re right. Again, I direct you to Editor’s message on the matter.

    As you know well, koolo, I have met and know our Editor personally, as well as Hoagie, and as well as your friend Hube, with whom there was a cordial meeting for lunch. I’d say that pretty much neutralizes your latest excuse. What are you hiding, koolo? What do you fear? Trust me, it would do you well to step forward on this challenge.

    And what was Hoagie’s remark about meeting you, hmm? I’ve already stated what I fear, and you’ve given more than abundant reason for such concern. You’ve no one to blame but. Your. Self.

    Period. Now, try to grow up. Just a little.

  11. Here’s the “thin air”. Which any minimally incompetent dolt could have found by a few keystrokes on Google.

    Let’s take a look at the quality of the report which koolo references:

    But Rice couldn’t even be bothered to remember the name of the group that took responsibility. And warnings that Bin Laden was planning to carry out an attack were similarly ignored.

    ….

    But again it’s not as if Rice could have known that. It’s not as if she can read. Or remember.

    ….

    And no American embassy or mission was ever successfully attacked by Al Qaeda again while a Democratic administration sat on its ass. Nor did Susan Rice come out to lie to the American people ever again. And if you think otherwise… well you just might be racist.

    These are the comments of a nasty right-wing partisan, koolo, certainly not one who is in search of the truth, therefore well deserving of being “trashed”. You need to do better than this.

  12. Perry says:

    These are the comments of a nasty right-wing partisan, koolo, certainly not one who is in search of the truth, therefore well deserving of being “trashed”. You need to do better than this.

    To which I correctly foreshadowed:

    Providing sources matters little to you anyway, Perry, because you either ignore them or fail to acknowledge them. Or, when they really hit home, trash the source.

    Rice probably withdrew partly because she didn’t want to be subjected to what you and yours put the aforementioned Robert Bork through.

  13. From my admittedly one dimensional view of you which we all see on this blog, you should definitely not be a father, grandfather, or husband. So?

    Which is one reason I invited you to lunch, koolo, so you will see that a one dimensional view is inadequate. But you decline. That’s on you, koolo. I’m more than willing to meet, as repeated quite often lately.

  14. Correct. You could learn something from his example here noted by you, koolo.

    You forget that I have threatened not a soul in here. You have. Several times.

  15. You must put everyone whom you encounter to sleep within minutes, Perry, due to your constant repetitious falsehoods. People just tune out to maintain their sanity. It’s old, already. You’re wrong; we’re right. Again, I direct you to Editor’s message on the matter.

    As to tuning out, koolo, speak for yourself. Why must you assign yourself to speak for others, who are perfectly capable to speak for themselves? I engender plenty of attention and comment on here, contrary to your comment. I am here to challenge and be challenged, since we make no progress by singing only with our own choirs, which you do not appear to understand.

    And what was Hoagie’s remark about meeting you, hmm? I’ve already stated what I fear, and you’ve given more than abundant reason for such concern. You’ve no one to blame but. Your. Self.

    No, koolo, you have made your decision, and you turn around to blame me. I am trying to help you dig yourself out of this grip which fear has upon you. Think about that. Bring a friend, his/her lunch is on me as well. The bottom line, your bluff is being called. Step up now to prove me wrong, and add a third dimension to each of us. Try to distinguish me from your father, since I have a feeling that that may explain some of what is going on here.

    And on Hoagie, well yes, he declared me “the enemy” a few days ago, so he has regressed back to the uni-dimensional, unfortunately, unwilling any more to have a civil discussion. He is permitting political extremism to rule his world, diminishing himself in the process, in my view.

  16. You forget that I have threatened not a soul in here. You have. Several times.

    This, coming from a person unwilling to meet in order to do better than a one-dimensional blog does.

    OK, koolo, since you refuse to provide evidence, tell everyone exactly what the threat was from me which you perceive to be a threat.

  17. Perry says,

    ” See your influence here, DNW?”

    I merely commented that the site was not working properly … as several others confirmed. Dana had it repaired.

    Perry says to Koolo,

    ” I’m more than willing to meet, as repeated quite often lately …”

    Why don’t you make the invitation to the New Zealand Neurotic, Perry, and then get back with the results?

    No details re. names or addresses, just the results as to your asking for and gaining them.

    And, since you are such an admirer of his, despite his many blunders, one might expect he would be glad to get to know you … to share and compare, and all that stuff you sensitive progressive type males like to do.

    Certainly no fellow lefty would deny you the affirmations and sense of inclusion you seek?

    Would they?

  18. WW wrote:

    A “dangerously incompetent mouthpiece dolt”, is that your assessment of Susan Rice, koolo. You need to back up that allegation, else be considered incompetent yourself, and a “dolt” yourself, for making such an allegation out of thin air. Would you accept such a statement from one of your students, without requiring some references? I certainly hope not.

    I disagree with the assessment that Dr Rice is a “dangerously incompetent mouthpiece dolt.” What she was was being a overly trusting sycophant, who just blithely believed what she was told to say, apparently without any questioning, despite the fact that four days had passed and that there was already evidence coming out which contradicted the Administration’s meme.

    Dr Rice supposedly volunteered for the Sunday shows duty, to burnish her image for becoming Secretary of State. That didn’t work out too well, did it?

  19. “OK, koolo, since you refuse to provide evidence, tell everyone exactly what the threat was from me which you perceive to be a threat.”

    We’ve all seen it many times before, Perry. There is no need to make a demonstration of your practice of menacing into a weekly thing. It’s just distracting.

    Go ask Phoenician in a time of Romans for a date; or even for his name, with the understanding that you will keep it strictly to yourself. You are an admirer and ideological ally. Why would he deny you the validation you seek?

  20. “I disagree with the assessment that Dr Rice is a “dangerously incompetent mouthpiece dolt.” What she was was being a overly trusting sycophant, …”

    The sycophant part sounds about right.

    ” … who just blithely believed what she was told to say, apparently without any questioning, despite the fact that four days had passed and that there was already evidence coming out which contradicted the Administration’s meme.”

    That however, crediting her with sincerity, is going a bit further than the evidence as I read the situation.

  21. Rice probably withdrew partly because she didn’t want to be subjected to what you and yours put the aforementioned Robert Bork through.

    Yeah, let’s talk about Bork: (Wiki)

    President Reagan nominated Bork for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court on July 1, 1987. A hotly contested United States Senate debate over Bork’s nomination ensued. Opposition was partly fueled by strong opposition by civil and women’s rights groups concerned with Bork’s opposition to the authority claimed by the federal government to impose standards of voting fairness upon the states (at his confirmation hearings for the position of Solicitor General, he supported the rights of Southern states to impose a poll tax),[16] and his stated desire to roll back civil rights decisions of the Warren and Burger courts.

    Bork, like Justices Scalia and Thomas, was an “originilist”, which means to me that one cannot apply our current context in interpreting the Constitution, thus also contrary to the thinking of our Editor. Obviously, I don’t agree.

    Teddy Kennedy made a blistering rebuke against the nomination by Reagan of Bork: (Wiki)

    Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is—and is often the only—protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy … President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice.

    It carried the day, fortunately; so we got Justice Anthony Kennedy instead.

    All that said, I don’t see the parallel between Bork and Rice. Bork got what he deserved; so far, Rice has not deserved the whipping she has received from the likes of Senator’s McCain and Graham, which amount to no more than a pack of lies, in my view.

  22. The bottom line, your bluff is being called.

    What bluff? There’s no “bluff.” The fact is that you’re an untrustworthy specimen. Anyone’d be incredibly stupid to trust you based on your behavior in here.

    Step up now to prove me wrong, and add a third dimension to each of us.

    Why? On what basis should I? Explain to me why anyone in their right mind would agree to such that what you propose after what you’ve done.

    Try to distinguish me from your father, since I have a feeling that that may explain some of what is going on here.

    Ah, yes — the hypocrisy continues. Mr. “I Hate Personal Attacks” engages in yet another one. God, you’re so predictable …

    OK, koolo, since you refuse to provide evidence, tell everyone exactly what the threat was from me which you perceive to be a threat.

    … and incredibly, incredibly boring.

  23. All that said, I don’t see the parallel between Bork and Rice. Bork got what he deserved; so far, Rice has not deserved the whipping she has received from the likes of Senator’s McCain and Graham, which amount to no more than a pack of lies, in my view.

    Of course you don’t see the parallel. Because you’re an incredibly partisan hack. “Pack of lies?” As if what murder accomplice Kennedy said about Bork is in any way true.

    If Bork didn’t deserve appointment, neither does Rice. Case closed.

  24. DNW’s two cents shows up:

    We’ve all seen it many times before, Perry. There is no need to make a demonstration of your practice of menacing into a weekly thing. It’s just distracting.

    OK DNW, provide the evidence. A collection of partisan wingnuts who have no regard for the truth, only propaganda, is therefore evidence of nothing. So then, describe in detail the alleged threat to koolo, with documentation. Your two cents isn’t even worth a plug nickel!

  25. OK DNW, provide the evidence. A collection of partisan wingnuts who have no regard for the truth, only propaganda, is therefore evidence of nothing. So then, describe in detail the alleged threat to koolo, with documentation. Your two cents isn’t even worth a plug nickel!

    You’re better than Sominex, Perry. Provide the evidence that Barack Obama was elected president. After you do so, we’ll all keep asking you to “provide the evidence.”

    And we’ll keep doing so. Just so you know how ridiculous you are.

  26. Of course you don’t see the parallel. Because you’re an incredibly partisan hack. “Pack of lies?” As if what murder accomplice Kennedy said about Bork is in any way true.

    If Bork didn’t deserve appointment, neither does Rice. Case closed.

    “Murder accomplice”. There goes another unproven allegation by a radical wingnut named koolo.

    On Rice, I am still waiting for one of you partisans to produce the evidence. So far, it’s nothing more than name calling, as per standard procedure from you righties. ‘Tis meaningless.

    And obviously, there is no connection whatsoever between Bork and Rice. You would be laughed off the dais, were you to make such a statement, koolo. Is this your best?

  27. And we’ll keep doing so. Just so you know how ridiculous you are.

    Assigning yourself to speak for the rest again, koolo. You are incorrigible.

    And you are too timid, and fearful as well, to accept my invitation for lunch. What kind of a man are you, koolo, or are you?

  28. What bluff? There’s no “bluff.” The fact is that you’re an untrustworthy specimen. Anyone’d be incredibly stupid to trust you based on your behavior in here.

    So you are calling our Editor, Hube, and Hoagie “incredibly stupid”, is that it koolo.

    No, it is you who are, and fearful too. Trust me, there is nothing whatsoever to fear from me. I may be the least threatening person you’ll ever meet. This is all in your little mind, koolo, and you have not the wherewithall to extricate yourself from your self-imposed prison. If you happen to be a woman, bring a friend, two friends, whatever gets you over your so far insurmountable hump. By your behavior, you are making even more a fool of yourself. For now, I’ll set this to rest, since I am seeing no way to help you resolve your inexplicable fear.

  29. “Murder accomplice”. There goes another unproven allegation by a radical wingnut named koolo.

    One word: “Chappquiddick.”

    On Rice, I am still waiting for one of you partisans to produce the evidence. So far, it’s nothing more than name calling, as per standard procedure from you righties. ‘Tis meaningless.

    You already addressed the evidence I provided above. If that is “meaningless,” it certainly isn’t any more so than what you provided about Judge Bork.

    You would be laughed off the dais, were you to make such a statement, koolo.

    Only by radical moonbats. And ’tis meaningless.

    And you are too timid, and fearful as well, to accept my invitation for lunch. What kind of a man are you, koolo, or are you?

    To coin a cliché, “Fool me once …”

    Why don’t you be a man and instead of playing your boring, childish games for once, actually apologize for the threats and promise never to do it again. That’d go a long way in resolving things. But, as I said, it’d take a man to do so …

    Trust me, there is nothing whatsoever to fear from me.

    The evidence and past experiences say otherwise. And your word is 100% not good enough.

  30. Wagonwheel says:
    December 19, 2012 at 12:42

    DNW’s two cents shows up:

    We’ve all seen it many times before, Perry. There is no need to make a demonstration of your practice of menacing into a weekly thing. It’s just distracting.

    OK DNW, provide the evidence.

    The “Editor” already did and just recently. Can’t you remember?

  31. WW wrote:

    Rice has not deserved the whipping she has received from the likes of Senator’s McCain and Graham, which amount to no more than a pack of lies, in my view.

    Unfortunately for your position, the “pack of lies” in this case would be what Dr Rice told the American people on those Sunday talk shows. That she might not have known that they were lies is certainly possible, but someone in the Obama Administration was determined to lie to the American people, and Dr Rice was the mouthpiece that someone used to accomplish that task.

    The Administration could have done something really radical like told the truth, but the truth might not have served the President’s re-election campaign very well, so that one was out. The Administration could have simply said that they didn’t know all the facts, and that they were continuing to investigate and evaluate, which wouldn’t have been completely accurate, but would not be deliberately disseminating false information.

    Instead, they chose to lie deliberately, to tell the American people an outright falsehood. In that, they accomplished their mission: they got the damage past the election. Susan Rice may have been complicit, or she might have just been a dupe; either way, she is paying the price. The man who should have paid the price won re-election, and our country is worse off for it.

  32. The “Editor” already did and just recently. Can’t you remember?

    His opinion is not evidence. Provide the evidence, the actual statement, then we can discuss it.

    I absolutely have made no threat, thus, this allegation is nothing more than partisan nonsense. I can understand how koolo would think he/she was threatened, since he/she even feels threatened to sit down with me for lunch at my invitation, even with a friend of his/her choice, or two friends. His/her idea of a threat is a figment of his/her fear filled mind. I’ve been trying to help him/her get passed his/her problem. If anyone should be fearful, that would be I. But I am not, koolo is.

    I’m making an issue of all this today, in order to demonstrate that this fear of threats from me is in koolo’s head, therefore not factual. Moreover, I have been offering to help. Are you also fearful of me, DNW? Oh good god, what next to expect from you people.

  33. I absolutely have made no threat, thus, this allegation is nothing more than partisan nonsense.

    Really? And grass is blue. Both statements exist in the same reality.

    Oh good god, what next to expect from you people.

    Not threats, like what you’ve offered several times.

  34. Unfortunately, koolo, you are a powerless individual whose bluff has been called out here on this issue. Here you have been given an opportunity to take some power, the power which is there when sitting together for lunch and having a conversation to provide better mutual understanding. Perhaps, on further consideration in the future, you will reconsider, as the offer will be kept open indefinitely. I have nothing more to say about it at this time.

  35. I have nothing more to say about it at this time.

    An apology, once again, would be nice. But I won’t hold my breath. It’s too “manly” of a request, I suppose.

  36. Your campaign on here to ban me and my blog is not working, coward koolo. Now go focus on your students and teach your class, which is what you should be doing anyway, exclusively, during school hours. If I were your administrator, knowing of your attitude and behavior on this blog, I would have fired you long ago. From my admittedly one dimensional view of you which we all see on this blog, you should definitely not be a school teacher. However, were I to actually meet you, I might feel differently, and positively, about your qualifications and demeanor. I have offered to meet you in person over lunch, an offer which you have declined. Why decline, koolo?

    Uh, Perry, Koolo is merely expressing his opinions. He hasn’t been “bought off” or whatever nonsensical conspiracy theory you’ve formulated in your mind. You on the other hand focus on throwing personal attacks at him for no reason other than the fact that you disagree with them.

    And what qualifies you to determine what a good teacher is, dude? Koolo seems like he’d be a good teacher.

    Thankfully you’re not a school administrator, because if you were, you’d probably fire people simply for disagreeing with your political views.

  37. Then let’s sit down for lunch, koolo, on me!

    And why would Koolo want to meet you, after you’ve threatened him multiple times? If someone threatens me, I sure as hell wouldn’t want to sit down with them for lunch.

  38. And yes, Perry, Teddy the Swimmer did indeed get away with murder. Heading up with the Watergate hearings was his way of getting even with the GOP.

  39. And why would Koolo want to meet you, after you’ve threatened him multiple times? If someone threatens me, I sure as hell wouldn’t want to sit down with them for lunch.

    W.A. Norman, you now place yourself in the same powerless position which koolo has chosen. Besides, how would you know, as you weren’t here at the time, were you?

    You now choose to inject yourself into an issue between koolo and me. Now koolo is not able to hold up his side on his own, is that it?

    In fact, I’ll even go one step further: You have no idea whatsoever about how good a teacher koolo is, nor do I, unless you know him/her personally. Do you?

    But if he/she is afraid to sit down and have an in-person meeting or discussion, that does not bode well for koolo, nor for you in interjecting yourself and supporting such a weak position. Said position is weak, because you folks shut off an avenue for better understand in the three-dimensional world in which we all live.

    You two are the ones who should act on your own advice to “grow up”!

  40. And yes, Perry, Teddy the Swimmer did indeed get away with murder. Heading up with the Watergate hearings was his way of getting even with the GOP.

    Oh no, not another one on here!

    Citation please, W.A. Norman.

  41. I never said I spoke for Koolo, but I can understand his reasoning for not wanting to meet with you, considering how you’ve threatened his livelihood on multiple occasions. And you’re telling me to grow up? LOL! Adults don’t threaten people for simply disagreeing with them and they most certainly do not threatened one’s livelihood. That’s hardly mature.

    And no, I don’t know him personally… but he doesn’t seem like the “monster” you’re trying to portray him as, that’s for sure.

  42. Besides, how would you know, as you weren’t here at the time, were you?

    What difference does that make? You were here — and made the threats — and you consistently lie that you never made such!

    In fact, I’ll even go one step further: You have no idea whatsoever about how good a teacher koolo is, nor do I, unless you know him/her personally. Do you?

    LOL! But that hasn’t stopped you from opining on how good I am, has it? So why can’t W.A. so opine? Hypocrisy, yet again …

    But if he/she is afraid to sit down and have an in-person meeting or discussion, that does not bode well for koolo

    Why is Perry afraid to apologize for his threats? This doesn’t bode well for Perry or his masculinity …

  43. Citation please, W.A. Norman.

    “Murder” is the incorrect term. More like a degree of manslaughter. And is Perry seriously denying that Teddy Kennedy purposely didn’t tell anyone immediately about Mary Jo Kopechne?

  44. “Murder” is the incorrect term. More like a degree of manslaughter. And is Perry seriously denying that Teddy Kennedy purposely didn’t tell anyone immediately about Mary Jo Kopechne?

    Yeah, you’re right. I should’ve said manslaughter. But it is well-documented that Teddy the Swimmer didn’t immediately tell anyone about Mary Jo Kopechne.

    Besides, how would you know, as you weren’t here at the time, were you?

    It’s called going through the site’s archives, Perry. Although mostly edited, your threats are there for all to see.

  45. THE VIOLENCE NEVER STOPS: 4 Dead In Horrific Murder-Suicide… Man Shot To Death In New Orleans… 2 Killed In Penn. City… Man Shot Dead In Truck… Another Gunned Down In Street… Nightclub Shooting Kills Man

    Then produce it, W.A., otherwise continue obviously lacking credibility!

  46. Correction:

    It’s called going through the site’s archives, Perry. Although mostly edited, your threats are there for all to see.

    Then produce it, W.A., otherwise continue to obviously lack credibility.

  47. Then produce it, W.A., otherwise continue to obviously lack credibility.

    Don’t worry, W.A. — “lacking credibility” to Perry means “refusing to play his childish games.”

    Perry: You’re boring. Grow up, child.

  48. ” Are you also fearful of me, DNW? “

    You know I am not. I offered to prove it to you on some neutral ground up close and in person, but you were having none of it. LOL

Comments are closed.