Saturday, March 27, 2010

Damn Lies, Statistically Speaking

The health care debate has (temporarily, no doubt) eclipsed the rage of the right over the Obama administration's plans to try terrorists in federal courts. Along the way, when it was pointed out that the Bush administration did the same, to the tune of some three hundred cases, the reaction of the right wing echo chamber was to deny it. To call the numbers false. Unsubstantiated. Suspicious. Such lights as Dana Perino and Jeff Sessions and Jon Kyl derided the claim with derisive derision.

Turns out they were right. The number of terrorism convictions in federal court under Bush wasn't anything close to three hundred. Shame on Obama for saying otherwise.


  1. Try Terrorist in Federal Courts???...
    Oh, you mean like KSM's trial in downtown Manhattan??? Wateva happend to that anyway???
    That'll happen about the same time you get that Middle Class Taxcut...
    or Gitmo's closed,
    or DOMA is repealed, i.e. NEV-UH
    403??? what a coincidence, Obama's(Peace be upon Him) been in Office 403 days.
    OK, its really 431 days, or 546 dead Americans in Iraq/Afghanistan ago...
    and didn't Martin Lucifer King say we should be taxed by the content of our character, and not the melanin content of our skin???
    a 10% Tax on Tanning??? Where's the Watermelon Surcharge? the Malt Liquor excise tax? the Afro-Sheen User Fee???
    You ever look at what goes into "Hair Relaxers"??? Makes Chernobl look like a friggin Oasis...



    Hmmm...not every one of these was an international terrorism case, though, was it? I think everyone can agree that local terrorists (animal rights people, Bill Ayers) should be tried in federal courts.

    Nice try, though. You bit on the Obama bait. Maybe you should think about it next time.


  3. So your point would be what? That Bush didn't try terrorists in federal court? That the shoe bomber was with PETA? That the Blind Sheik was working for Greenpeace? That Padilla is ELF?

    How about following my link and reading the whole list, instead of getting your news from the tools at NRO?

    Nice try, though, and very jd-esque.

  4. The pdf came from the government.

    You can change your name but you can't change the fact that claiming Obama's plan for KSM was some sort of unprecedented act of weakness, was typical RWS™ and Republican hypocrisy. Which, you know, was sort of the point

  5. It was "sort of" the point. Looks like your point was those evil right-wingers lying.

    But now you're caught with the holy Obama people lying and you don't know how to handle it. You can try to slough it off, but you were wrong, wrong, wrong. The right-wingers were right, right, right.

    How will you ever cope?


  6. You're the perfect substrate. It's really quite breathtaking.

    And unless you feel like addressing the fact that bush did the same thing the RW are screaming about, don't expect to see your next comment in this thread find the light of day.

  7. PS: you're aware, I'm sure, that the statistics that drew the criticism by Rs were, in fact, released and touted by Bush, to show his toughness on terror. RIght?

  8. See, here's the thing, rocket-scientist: I posted a report of data. That is in no way a lie. It's data. Numbers. Things on a page. I don't lie, and linking to data is not a lie. It's data. A report. By someone else. Get it? Take a minute, if you need to.

    If some on the list (and, to repeat, the data came originally from bush, with over 300 names, and was touted by bush....) weren't Muslims in airplanes, it neither makes it a lie nor disproves the central point.

    The problem is that people like you simply have so much commitment to crazy that no amount of data will change your mind. You are literally unable to see facts, because you need to believe what you want to believe.

    If you'd care to address the central point -- that bush did the same thing Obama is being criticized for -- and to explain in what way one is different from the other, please do. Otherwise, call it a day. Surely you have something better to do than come here and reveal to the world (such as it is) how idiotic your arguments are.

    Go somewhere where people like you congregate, where they'll think you're a genius.


Comments back, moderated. Preference given for those who stay on topic.

Popular posts