Re Stu Bykofsky: Isn't this what Couter said about The Left??? Hypocritical Scumbags!

[Mugsy]

I'm sorry, but so rarely does a subject make me SO angry that I can't wait hours to write a piece on my blog on the subject.

By now, you've also certainly have heard about and/or seen the comments by Conservative Philadelphia newspaper columnist Stu Bykofsky's rumination that "another 9/11 style attack would help bring the country together again".

Now, ignoring the delusional belief by anyone that a SECOND attack would be seen as anything but a MASSIVE FAILURE on the part of this Administration, and proof that after six years, $650 Billion dollars and 3,800 dead soldiers, we are *not*... as they keep assuring us... "safer"... another point comes to mind:

ISN'T THIS EXACTLY THE BASIS FOR ANN COULTER'S BOOK "TREASON"?

I mean, didn't she write an entire book suggesting that "Liberals are guilty of treason because they wished for another 9/11-like attack on the U.S. to make Bush look BAD and prove their point"?

And now, this guy Bykofsky is appearing on Right Wing TV and radio, heralded on Drudges front page, with these Right-Wing fascist scumbags nodding in agreement that, "Hey, maybe there's something to what he's saying?"

Where's Ann Coulter *now*? :banghead:

[jimshoes]

1. No thanks Stu,

once was enough for most of us. It's not our fault that the moron in chief squandered all the unity and good will that was so overwhelming in the days and months after 9-11. He'd only squander it again, so I'm fairly sure that I speak for a large percentage of the human race whan I say eat shit and die you hopeless tick wart.

[Mugsy]

2. Coulter didn't seem to agree.

Consider that... according to Ann Coulter... "Liberals believe" that a second attack on the U.S. would make Bush look BAD and prove them *right*.

Now here's this guy saying another attack would make Bush look GOOD and prove THEM right.

Hard to see any agreement there that would result in a groundswell of *unity*. Or is it just me?