Saturday, May 10, 2008

Still Here

"The report of my death was an exaggeration." ~ Mark Twain

Trader Rick sent me a message asking, "Where are you?"

I am here.

I've been either too busy or I've already commented on every current event about which I've been passionate.

It's nice to know I'm missed, though. Thanks, Rick.

The presidential campaign goes on, with the Democrats continuing to shoot themselves in the foot, and McCain in the wings, just sitting the fray out and probably smiling, because so far, he doesn't have to actively campaign. The Democrats are running his campaign for him.

My wife e-mailed me some Democrat blog (believe me, if she hadn't, I never would have read it myself. I have no interest in what idiots have to say), and many Democrats are saying if Obama wins the nomination, they'll either vote for McCain or sit this one out.

Little difference as far as I can see. A vote for McCain is very much the same as a vote for a Democrat.

Some Democrats are speculating that Obama will choose Hillary as his running mate.

Not gonna happen. Presidential contenders never choose a rival for their running mate. Never.

Others are speculating that he will choose Ted Kennedy. Maybe. But if Kennedy wanted to be in the executive branch of Government he would have run for President long ago. It isn't because he hasn't been asked, for sure.

Wait. I do have one event that I feel deserves my comment:

Where is Adrian Monk when we need him?

The "suicide" of D.C. Madam Deborah Jean Palfrey.

I said in a couple of previous posts (here and here), when her client list is finally revealed, Americans will not be surprised to find the names of many high profile Democratic politicians within.

Then I corrected myself.

Democrats would never allow their names to be released, and their friends in the Liberal biased media would scramble like Warren Moon to make sure it stays that way.

I also said if any Republican names were on her list, we will soon find out, and that proved to be true. Republican Senator David Vitter (LA) and an aide to President Bush were listed.

We will never know if my prediction about Democrats being on the list will come true because, as I already mentioned, Democrats and their willing accomplices in the media will squash that news.

I believe the "suicide" death of MS Palfrey is about as much validation we're going to get that Democrats were indeed on the list.

This is my theory:

I know I risk being called a conspiracy theorist, but I think some high ranking Democrats who's names are on Ms. Palfrey's list had her killed, and made it look like suicide.

I guarantee you one thing:

If there was any indication that any Republicans had anything at all to do with Ms. Palfrey and her list, the media would be all over this story, implying and downright accusing Republicans of dirty dealings.

Why has there not been any criminal investigation? Because the media will not reveal Democrat involvement. It's that simple.

Mark my words. It might take a couple of decades, but it will eventually be revealed that some high ranking Democrat politician had her murdered. Probably not until after that politician is dead and buried, though.

Wait and see.

29 comments:

BB-Idaho said...

Here is another suspect...
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JC18Aa01.html

Jim said...

Proof that you have no sense of historical perspective. Ted Kennedy DID run for president in 1972 and 1976.

You also seem to confuse criminal investigation and "the media". Criminal investigations are conducted by law enforcement agencies including the Bush justice department. Whether a name is released would be dependent on those agencies.

Mark said...

No, Jim. If Kennedy did run for President before that would be a case of my bad memory. No sense of historical perspective just means I don't have an opinion on it.

Criminal investigations are often instigated by journalists if they think there may be some things left un-investigated. In this case, Possibly Democrats with deep pockets and a potential to murder can keep snoopy news reporters at bay.

Remember Vince Foster? You think that was a suicide? Ha Ha Ha!

Jim said...

Oh my God! Vince Foster? Still? Jeebuz!

Erudite Redneck said...

Mark, you are a sick sumbitch. You are part of no conspiracy, and you're no theorist. You're just sick. Does your new wife know about you? Or have you hidden this blog from her?

Lone Ranger said...

Before we put Monk on this case, we should first have him solve some of these deaths.

Trader Rick said...

There is nothing BO could do to make himself more un-electable than perhaps adding that bloated, drunk old murderer to his ticket...

Mark said...

Oh, right, ER. Like no Democrat poltician has ever been implicated in the death of someone who could bring him down politically.

My memory, as I said, is horrible, but Chandra Levy and Vince Foster jump to mind immediately. And then read the list LR provided. Now, I realize sometimes people really do just die unexpectedly in accidents and by natural causes, but some of those deaths defy reason.

I especially like the one who was shot in the back of the head and ruled a suicide, and the one found decapitated and ruled natural causes.

To be called sick by ER is a compliment.

Henry said...

Please, Ballsack, please pick Kennedrunk as your running mate. Please.

Al-Ozarka said...

"Not gonna happen. Presidential contenders never choose a rival for their running mate. Never."

The mold will be broken this time, Mark. I've said it since the beginning of the year, the Dems have painted themselves into a corner. There will be an B Hussein Obama/H. Rodham Clinton ticket.

Al-Ozarka said...

"Mark, you are a sick sumbitch." -ER

You, ER, are a sorry excuse for a human-being.

Mark said...

"There will be an B Hussein Obama/H. Rodham Clinton ticket."

Wanna put money on that, Daddio?

Abouna said...

I was leaning toward Bubba being involved with D.C. Madam Deborah Jean Palfrey.

But then I figured no, he would be more apt to raped her rather then pay for her services.

blamin said...

I suspect Obama will pick Edwards as his mate.

Your theory on Palfrey is not “sick” at all. It’s the very first thing that crossed my mind when I heard of her death. She was sitting on a gold mine, with endless interviews and a book deal just around the corner. However, it’s possible her demise was a joint operation between the donkeys and elephants.

Of course we could be wrong, perhaps the prospect of a future filled with all that publicity and money was just too much for the poor girl to handle. After all, most women I know can’t stand the thought of fame and fortune.

Cameron said...

Nice Warren Moon reference. I didn't realize he was known as a scrambler. :-)

Orson Scott Card has an interesting column about the Democratic primary. He thinks Hillary's campaigning for 2012, that she doesn't think Obama can win in 08 and so doesn't care if she's hurting his chances.

Cameron said...

bb-idaho,

I followed your link and it went to a column criticizing Obama and Black Liberation Theology. What's the deal?

Al-Ozarka said...

Mark,

LOL! I don't put much faith in my own predictions. Sometimes I'm right...other times I'm not.

How about...if you're right, you can write a post at Daddio's. If I'm right...I can write a post here?

Mark said...

You're on...but can I post a critique of Daddio's?

Al-Ozarka said...

A critique? Shore!

I'd be amused.

Al-Ozarka said...

Daddio's? Or...Daddio?

Dan Trabue said...

I believe the "suicide" death of MS Palfrey is about as much validation we're going to get that Democrats were indeed on the list.

Orrr, if we're gonna do play pretend, couldn't it just as easily have been a Republican conspiracy to keep their names from being released?

Let's see, of the names released from her little black book already, how many Dems were named? None? Well, then, who HAS been named thus far? Two REPUBLICANS?? Surely you jest?!

Of course, I see it now, the sheer LACK of Democrat names being leaked out can ONLY MEAN ONE THING: That the Dems had her killed!!

It doesn't matter to you HOW many more Republicans get involved and caught in sleazy sex shenanigans, it doesn't matter that it has happened more frequently with these fellas, all that means to you is that the Dems are better at hiding their shenanigans.

The sheer lack of evidence is all the evidence you need!

You so kwaaaazy, Mark.

Mark said...

Dan, my point, as it always has been, is that the Liberally biased media will keep any Democrats names that are in the book out of the news and will make sure any Republican names will be published. They have done it many times before and they will continue as long as the public lets them.

So, it's not surprising that no Democrat names have been mentioned in connection, and now that Ms. Palfrey is dead, unless some brave newsman bucks the tide and pursues this theory, we may never know how many, if any Democrats are on the list.

And while I'm on the subject of Democrats who have political threats killed, that could be why Obama won't choose Hillary as his running mate. He could literally be taking his life in his hands by placing her within a heartbeat of the presidency. If, as it has been suggested, the Clintons really do have their political enemies killed, it falls within the realm of plausibility.

Dan Trabue said...

If, as it has been suggested, the Clintons really do have their political enemies killed, it falls within the realm of plausibility.

And IF there is no real evidence to support such a claim, then continuing to repeat that is rumor-mongering. You know, rumors? Bearing false witness?

You know, those sorts of sins that keep you out of heaven?

Al-Ozarka said...

"You know, those sorts of sins that keep you out of heaven?"

Fianlly! An admission that Dan is in no way a Christian.

Al-Ozarka said...

"And IF there is no real evidence to support such a claim..."

The evidence exists...but is ignored by folks like Dan.

Dan Trabue said...

Ozarka said:

An admission that Dan is in no way a Christian.

? Pointing out what the Bible has to say about sin means I'm not a Christian?? Says who?

You'll have to take it up with Paul and John:

Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites, nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Cor 6: 9-10

But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone...

Rev. 21:8

In fact, by suggesting that I "admitted" to not being a Christian, that is a bearing of false witness. A lie.

And we know what happens to ALL LIARS, according to St John, right?

Careful, brother.

Anonymous said...

Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites, nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Cor 6: 9-10 from Dan's post.

Dan, you just proved that you need to evangelize some of your friends that you have been defending. We all have some examining to do, but it is not helpful to us or them to try to prove that sin is not sin if it doesn't fit our wishes. Maybe this old woman doesn't know what the word sodomy means or maybe the definition has been changed, huh? Mom2

Dan Trabue said...

. Maybe this old woman doesn't know what the word sodomy means or maybe the definition has been changed, huh?

Actually, the word translated "sodomy" in that version is the Greek word, "arsenokoitai," which translators are unsure of the definition. There seems to be some agreement, though, that it is talking about men who use boy prostitutes.

For instance, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops says "The term translated Sodomites refers to adult males who indulged in homosexual practices with boy prostitutes."

If Paul had wanted to refer to homosexual behavior, he would have used the word "paiderasste." That was the standard Greek term at the time for sexual behavior between males. Paul did not use that term.

By the way, the "sin of Sodom"? According to Ezekiel, God's own Self says that it was "pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me" and, in the context of Lot's story, a bunch of men wanted to rape the angels visiting Lot.

All of that off-topic material to say, I am not at all sure, mom2, that you know the meaning of the word "sodomy," as used biblically, and it appears that you don't know that the definition WAS changed, but not the way you think.

Anonymous said...

Dan, Your interpretations of scripture do not impress me one whit and your knowledge of Greek doesn't help you either. That's my opinion. Mom2