Delicious Rage

Well, Radley Balko has up a Fox News column up about the Internet gambling ban by the Fucking Republicans.

He’s blogged some of the responses he’s received to the column: 75 against and only 2 for it. Go read and relish in the delicious rage. Warms me heart all over.

Incidentally, I was talking with someone in the know this last weekend who was invested in at least one of the UK companies whose stock has gone to zero. He’s aware of a number of people, mostly well-to-do conservatives, who have lost in the hundreds of thousands of dollars in various UK gambling companies.

As far as I’m concerned, no amount of backlash will be sufficient. I’d love to see the Republicans lose every single race. Too much to wish for, I know, and I certainly don’t relish the thought of the commies getting their claws deeper into me, but justice needs to prevail, regardless of slippery slopes. The Republicans need to go down, and down hard.


  1. wally on October 25, 2006 at 16:12

    lmao your right anymore compassion from the republicans and some of us will be corraled and shoved into gas chambers.

  2. People in the Sun on October 25, 2006 at 15:11

    Thing is, they thought an online gambling ban will make them again the "values Party" (as long as betting on horses was still allowed).

    Good to see another hypocritical policy backlash.

  3. Jill on October 26, 2006 at 08:43

    Personally, I'd like to see all the Reps go and a lot of the Dems too. But then it would be a case of the inmates are running the asylum. Of course maybe they'd do a better job! Someone needs to read the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. What has happend to our country?

  4. OTTMANN on October 26, 2006 at 13:43

    Saving fools from themselves gets Republicans only heartache. Liberals are the idiots preyed upon by the casino's, you know those huge buildings where they feed free drinks to dopes throwing their money at them? Libs live for money, sex and lies. Why we bother saving them is beyond me.

  5. Pennsylvania Independent on October 26, 2006 at 19:26

    This is a crock of crap. Your politicians think they have to be parents to all Americans. I posted something simular to my blog.
    VOTE for no INCUMBENTS on Nov 7th, 2006

  6. Richard Nikoley on October 27, 2006 at 17:26


    Important to _whom_?

  7. Marie on October 27, 2006 at 15:44

    I think your priorities are unusual. Aren't foreign policy, tax policy, immigration, national security, and a few other issues more important than internet gambling?

    I don't know, maybe you like the democrat position on all of the above.

  8. John Lopez on October 28, 2006 at 16:31

    "Commies". I know what you're saying, but I'm not sure that that term's such a distinction anymore. DuToit just got through saying that the life of every mother's son in this country is the property of the people.

  9. Billy Beck on October 28, 2006 at 19:00

    It doesn't matter whether it's a "distinction", John. What matters is the principles and premises.

  10. Richard Nikoley on October 29, 2006 at 06:38


    Are you saying that there's some important distinction to make between the principles and premises of the Republicans vs. those of the Democrats? Because I just don't think there is, anymore, if there ever really was. It's just all "degree," anymore, and not going "too far" and not being "extreme" and all those other meaningless distinctions.

    No one, certainly not the Republicans, question the state's authority to pass laws that affirm that your life is theirs to dispose of. They just want to you keep a little sliver more of it for yourself than the Democrats do.

  11. John Lopez on October 29, 2006 at 09:19


    Virtually everyone has premises and endorses principles that are no different from Commies. My point was that "commie" can properly describe the overwhelming majority of those who'll be casting votes, let alone whoever it is that they'll elect.

  12. Billy Beck on October 30, 2006 at 08:52

    "Are you saying that there's some important distinction to make between the principles and premises of the Republicans vs. those of the Democrats?"

    Exactly the opposite, Rich.

    And what's identified by the term is distinguished. Whatever qualifies for that definition is distinct from all other concepts, no matter whether it includes "Republicans" or "Democrats" or what. They are what they are, and that is a "distinction".

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.