late

Volume 219 - The Silver Queen

June 27, 2000

Subject: Liberals are Biological Errors?

Bartcop,
I heard that fat bastard an hour ago scream that Liberals are biological
errors, and that he hopes that we can wipe out liberals and the like.

1) Doesnt that take away from the freedom he so endears,
by not allowing people to be liberal.
2) He defined biological error as "not normal.",
Does that mean left handed people are biological errors?

Or better yet

Globally speaking, white people are the minority.
So by his own defintion are white people "Biological errors" ?

Need some help understanding the logic.....

Hades, you'll get no such help from me :)
If logic was lard, neither Rush nor Laura could grease a very big tub.

If minority status equals a "biological error,"
then smart people and good-looking people are "deviants."

From: (withheld)

Subject: Especially For You

ISLIP, N.Y. (AP) -- Joan Johnson is insulted when people ask why she's a Republican.

"This is a question that's never asked of a white person,'' snaps Johnson,
who jumped into the race for Rick the Lick's House seat when he decided
to engage in his Hillary-assisted political suicide.

"It says to me that in America, the majority race thinks that blacks are
assigned to one party, and that's an insult,'' she says. ``Because people
can get off the boat from China, Vietnam or any place and be anything they
want to be. But if I'm black in America, I'm supposed to be a Democrat.''

ha ha

Joan, you're pretty sharp.
It's meant as an insult, you nut!
And don't blame "the majority race" if blacks vote 90 percent Democrat.
remember what Uncle OJ Watt's father said,
"A black man voting Republican is like a chicken voting for Col. Sanders."

By the way,
people who get off the boat from China and Vietnam are Democrats, too.
I'm not sure why, let's ask Pat Buchanan.

Yesterday, on the way home from work, I saw a B-2 land at K-Drag airport.

Is that normal?

There's a Air National Guard base right next door, so it could have
been going there, but it's not everyday you see a stealth bomber flying around.

Also, sometimes what I'd guess is a dummy or back-up Air Force One
practices landings and take-offs at K-Drag. Why is that?

You can say I'm seeing things, but we don't even get 747's here,
so when a blue and white one with "The United States of America"
painted on the side lands, one tends to take notice.

So we have a B-2 and Air Force One landing now & then.
Any ideas?

From: rick_stump@yahoo.com

Subject: Attacks and such

Bartcop,

While I generally support your positions and opinions,
I am increasingly unable to reconcile your statements that you dislike
republicans because they are 'anti-Jew, anti-Gay...' etc. with your vicious
commentary on Catholics. The strong implication is that it is OK to be anti-Catholic.
Why the distinction?

Where to start?
I'm not anti-Catholic, I'm anti-organized religion.
Organized religion exists to separate you from your money.
Show me a church who doesn't ask for money and I'll recommend them
to anyone who can't make it without the help of the invisible ghosts.
Just don't give them your money and you'll have no problem from me.
Since I was held captive by the Catholics for 12 years, I am familiar with
their particular brand of insanity. I don't talk much about Jews, Episcopalians
or snake-handlers because I was not held captive by them.

If I were to take some of your attacks and replace
'Catholic' with 'Jew' you would find it unacceptable.
If I were to take todays *ahem* 'joke' and replace 'priest 1' and 'priest 2' with
'gay man 1' and 'gay man 2' it would be unacceptable to you.
Why is one funny and the other mean-spirited?

I'm guessing you didn't quite get the joke.
(Not surprising, with my now-corrected typo)
The first priest is asking the second priest what penance he gives
in his confessional when someone confesses the sin of sodomy.
The second priest misunderstands and gives an "honest" answer.
Is it your opinion sodomy is a sin not often confessed?

The problem is the insanity of a celibate lifestyle.
Priests are going to have sex. It's my opinion that that's a fact.
He could be having it with a loving woman in a sacred union with God,
but noooooooooooooooooo. "The Church," (not Jesus, not the Bible)
says priests can't ever have sex, ever. Meanwhile, the priests have hormones
running thru their bodies at light speed that they are forbidden to acknowledge.
Since those natural urges are artificially suppressed, they often explode
at inappropraite times, hopefully outside the rectum of a nine-year old boy.

I don't write the headlines you see in your local newspaper.
This forced, lewd sexual behavior is a systemic problem that the Vatican
is unwilling to fix because Rule One for Catholics is "change nothing."

The Dallas Diocese recently had to pay out $100,000,000 because the jury
was convinced the Church aided and abetted these sexual predators by
relocating them to new, unsuspecting parishes where new prey could be
hunted with the element of surprise until they were inevitably caught again.

Sometimes the jokes on bartcop.com are just plain silly, but sometimes
they are meant to sting or to force people to decide where to draw the line.
Under the current Catholic system, hundreds or thousands of young boys
will be sexually assaulted by men who represent God on Earth.

...and you think I'm out-of-line addressing a problem like that?

Do you think a "don't-go-there" approach would be more effective?
Should we all just be good Catholics and let the church handle it?
I have no kids, and I was never molested so my "interest" in this is only
in passing. Sometimes, I confess, when I pursue a subject like this,
I'm looking for someone to challenge me and say, "That's not true,"
and set me straight. Education is almost always a good thing.

The simple answer is there *is* no distinction and it *was* a mean-spirited attack.
I understand that your website is a parody site and made to make people laugh.
However, some of what you put there is hate, pure and simple; the sort of hate
you rail against *if* it is directed at anyone but Catholics.

Richard Stump

Richard, if the gays or the Jews had a thousand-year-old system
that all but guaranteed the continued molestation of young boys,
do you think I'd be too shy to mention it?

The argument I'm putting forth to you right now - have you ever heard it before?
If so, why did you dismiss it?

If you've never heard this argument before, the argument that the Catholic
Church should reverse it's idiotic system of "pretend celibacy" that forces men
to attack young boys instead of enjoying a loving, natural sexual relationship
with a woman, then maybe you've seen a point of view that's new to you.

Back to the joke:
When priest #1 confesses to priest #2 that he's molesting young boys,
priest #2 is FORBIDDEN to ever disclose that crime to anyone.
Their "prime directive" is a little "too convenient," don't you think?
They'd sooner die than speak the truth, if it was learned thru confession.
They'd let an innocent man be executed before they'd break that vow.
Doesn't that seem a little too convenient?

I have no doubt they are truly sorry for their molestations.
I also have no doubt they will molest again, but the church won't allow
a "natural outlet" and they forbid exposing the serial child molesters.

So let me ask you a question:
Should the present system be kept in place?

Some people use ammonium nitrate to make a point.
Some use humor.

John Rocker Battery Night

Tomorrow's game between Smirk-voter John Rocker and the liberal,
battery using liberals of New York is one you don't want to miss.

It's on Fox Sports Network, - check your listings.

ha ha

The over/under on minutes played by Rocker is 2.
The over/under on stitches needed is eleven.

There he goes again...

So far, today's show has been all Tiger Woo.

Tiger is the greatest.
Tiger is a black man who, unlike the others, gets up to go to work.
Tiger's not lazy, not like the others.
Tiger's one of the good ones.
Tiger's rugged individualism makes him great, just like me.
Tiger didn't need big government, why to the other negroes?
Tiger gets into Pebble Beach, proving they accept blacks.
The other blacks just haven't tried, like Tiger has.
Tiger is proof that racism exists no more.
Tiger wants to win, just like me.
Tiger proves me right every time.

Rick the Lick - History Teacher

Then, in Buffalo on Sunday, Lazio talked about how he felt it was
"only fair" that Indians should have gambling casinos on their own lands
given that "Native Americans were given many parts of our country,
some of it very difficult land, with very few opportunities."

That didn't sit well with Rowena General, a spokeswoman for
the St. Regis Mohawk Tribal Council.

"We take offense that Native Americans were given land," she said.
"Mr. Lazio is simply inaccurate if the thinks that. We would encourage
him to read more Native American history ...
Nothing was given to us. It was taken from us."

From:chrisotto@stockamerica.com

Subject: unbelievability of the mexican jail story

Hey dere, Bartcop hey --

(that's the proper, formal correspondence salutation, up here in 'usconsin.
But I digress.)

I was readin' your mexican jail story just now.
I found it completely unbelievable.
I've been in Fayetteville and can't for the life of me conceive that anyone
"rich" or "connected" would live there.

What's next, the wild, vibrant night life in Schulenburg???

Best Regards,
Chris O.

Chris,
Two things:
Fayetteville is a college town, the best in Arkansas.
Back then, anyway, it was so cheap, wealthy people from other states
sent their kids to Fayetteville to get that fine education at a discount.

Second, Fayetteville is small, but it's only crime is being undeveloped.
Republicans should love Arkansas.
Low taxes, few services, everything they CLAIM they want, but noooooooo.
When Clinton ran for president in '92, they used Arkansas as an example of
how bad government could be because Arkansas was last in everything.

Yet, if Clinton tried to raise funds for more hospitals, teacher's pay,
better roads, etc. they'd just call him "tax & spend, tax & spend."

If ditto-monkeys knew what they wanted, they'd love Arkansas.

PS. Never been to Schulenburg.

In Oklahoma City, some Smirk-voting, anti-government Republican
has been the first to deface the Oklahoma City Bombing Memorial.

The bastard took a can of red spray paint and went nuts.

(artist's interpretation of the possible damage)

Why are Republicans so hateful?
Why are Republicans so anti-government?

And why is Smirk going to spend over $100,000,000 just for the chance to
run a government that the McVeigh wing of his party wants blown up?

From: genslab@genslab.com

Subject: nader

Nader doesn't threaten Gore in any way. I think most of Nader's support is
going to come from traditional non-voters many of whom can be led over to the
more centrist Gore camp as November approaches. More people in the process is
always good for the D's.

Nader also gives Gore somebody to triangulate off of when the pugs try to
paint Gore as a tree-hugging acid head. Hell, even most Libs are annoyed by
the Birkenstock crowd. With Nader around as their standard-bearer, Gore is
going to appear as sensible, moderate, and well...Presidential!

Rob D

Smirk - a favorite among the Texas electorate!

From: (withheld)

Subject: My Dr. Laura/Time contribution

Oh cry me a river, poor, persecuted Dr. Laura.
If you're so shocked about a backlash against your holier-than-thou
attitude and hypocrisy, then you have no business in a media career.
Why don't you stay home and RAISE YOUR SON,
as you so harshly advise others to do?

If you spent as much time doing something useful as you spend being divisive
or posing for nude, bushy photos, your poor widdle feelings wouldn't be hurt today.

Why don't you hold hands with Judge Judy and both-a ya'z jump in front of a bus?

ha ha

Works for me...

Historical Mail

From:christian06@earthlink.net

Subject: Thrown in Mexican jail

Hey,

So I'm readin' Volume 130, and you mention something about
once being thrown in a Mexican jail, but you don't tell the story.

If the story is in one of the issues after #130, then I'll come across it eventually.
But if it isn't, what's the story?

Issue #130 says to ask you sometime, so I'm askin'. :)

christian

Click Here

From: Skewthat@aol.com

Subject: Nader+the Greens

As a Green/Ralph Nader Supporter/Bartcop fan I'm finding you attacks against
him very unnecessary. First and most importantly he WON'T, and I am 100% sure
of it, hurt Gores chances. Lets get this straight Gore will win, even if Ralph
runs a good campaign or not. Ralph brings up very good concerns such as the
fact that Corporations only pay on average 4% income taxes. He is the only
non DP supporting candidate and the only ultra liberal (besides David
McReynolds) running for Prez. We don't see the moderate Republican bashing
their Ultra-Righters that hard and neither should we to our side. A super
liberal alternative pushes the spectrum of political views left instead of
rightwards as Buchanan has done for years. Think for the long term and please
don't worry about Nader go after Murder in Chief Shrub Jr.

Peace,
SkewThat

Skew, what is the purpose of the Nader run?
He's not going to be elected, so why is he running?

At best, he's trying to stake out a position, so at the convention he can
get some concessions, but what does that mean? Gore's not green enough?

I think Gore will win by a small landslide, but why should he have to
worry about Ralph Nader coming at him from the left?
McCain pulled Smirk father right than he wanted to go, and it hurt him.

What's the good news about Nader running?

Python, Heal Thyself

Ever heard of Eric Zorn?

He gets a few good shots in on Doc Harpy.

Click Here

Joke from the Dr. Laura Time.com debate site:

Priest One: What do you usually give for sodomy?

Priest Two: Cookies and milk.

ha ha

So, if you have nothing better to do, Click Here and meet me at
Time.Com to post all kinds of degenerate things about Ol' Harpy.

For each post, you have to sign in as somebody, so we won't know
who each other is, but it could be fun. I'm not sure how long they'll keep
this message board up, but might as well take advantage while we can.

See you there at 10 AM CST, noon, 2PM and 4 PM.

Ralph Nader

I think he should mind his own business.
The average consumer never had it as good as he does under Clinton.
Maybe Nader wants a perfect America, I don't know.
But in his wildest dreams, he might become successful enough to get that
idiot Smirk elected, knowing Smirk hates consumers and loves big Business.

Click Here

From: amnesiafl@earthlink.net

Subject: posted to TIME

posted this today...

Anyone who's ever listened to Dr. Laura has to have
cringed more than once from her pure meanness.

She's rude, overbearing, and holier-than-thou.
She makes a living cutting down single moms, gays, and anyone else
who doesn't conform to her idea of what's "normal."

She says that men and women were made to reproduce,
and that those who can't relate to the opposite sex are deviant.

Is the Pope deviant?
Was Mother Theresa deviant?
This woman is nothing more than a hate-mongerer who wants
everyone to follow her rules...remind you of anyone?

Heil, Dr. Laura!!!!!

ha ha

I think what we should do is meet over at time.com
and talk about our favorite She-Thing all day Tuesday.

Say, ... even hours central time... 10, 12, 2 and 4.
You can sign in as anybody and say anything and you're "in" Time Magazine.

ha ha

It's a lot of fun.

From the Mind of BrainSmasher

Click Here

June 26, 2000

The Biggest Unreported Crime in History
by Tamara Baker

Click Here

From: (withheld)

Subject: Earth Nader

So, Ralph's thrown his hat in the ring. No problem, I like the guy.
Problem is, as the Washington Post reported, "Greens don't care, many said,
if a Nader candidacy puts Bush in the White House".

Then I read, the party adopted it's platform:

*Ending child poverty* -I'm for that, as are all liberals who are for
tax progressivity, so the wealthy pay their fair share
and income inequality is lessened.

*Protecting citizens regardless of sexual orientation* -O.K., they
don't sound like Republicans.

*Preserving labor, human and ABORTION rights* -kudos,kudos!

*Health care reform (Bill and Hillary), environmental protection (Al)
and campaign finance reform*

All great ideas, and suspiciously Liberal Democrat sounding
(except the last, hey we have to compete), yet . . .
"'Greens don't care . . . if a Nader candidacy puts Bush in the White House".

HELP me understand.

Signed,
tommyb

For sure, a vote for Nader is a vote for Smirk,
but then again, a vote for Buchanan is a vote for Gore.
If Smirk picks a pro-choicer or a Catholic for VP,
Buchanan will siphon off 20 percent of Smirk's votes.
If he picks a pro-choice Catholic, like front-runner Ridge,
Gore will win 44 states.

I Was Certain, But I Was Dead Wrong
by Jennifer Thompson, in the Houston Chronicle

In 1984 I was a 22-year-old college student with a grade-point average of 4.0, and I really
wanted to do something with my life. One night someone broke into my apartment, put a
knife to my throat and raped me.

During my ordeal, some of my determination took an urgent new direction. I studied every
single detail on the rapist's face. I looked at his hairline. I looked for scars, for tattoos, for
anything that would help me identify him. When and if I survived the attack, I was going to
make sure that he was put in prison and he was going to rot.

When I went to the police department later that day, I worked on a composite sketch to the
very best of my ability. I looked through hundreds of noses and eyes and eyebrows and
hairlines and nostrils and lips.

Several days later, looking at a series of police photos, I identified my attacker. I knew this
was the man. I was completely confident. I was sure.

I picked the same man in a lineup. Again, I was sure. I knew it. I had picked the right guy,
and he was going to go to jail. If there was the possibility of a death sentence, I wanted him
to die. I wanted to flip the switch.

When the case went to trial in 1986, I stood up on the stand, put my hand on the Bible and
swore to tell the truth. Based on my testimony, Ronald Cotton was sentenced to prison for life.
It was the happiest day of my life, because I could begin to put it all behind me.

In 1987, the case was retried because an appellate court had overturned Ronald Cotton's
conviction. During a pretrial hearing, I learned that another man had supposedly claimed to
be my attacker and was bragging about it in the same prison wing where Ronald Cotton
was being held.

This man, Bobby Poole, was brought into court, and I was asked, "Ms. Thompson, have
you ever seen this man?"

"I have never seen him in my life," I answered. "I have no idea who he is."

Ronald Cotton was sentenced again to two life sentences. Ronald Cotton was never going
to see light. He was never going to get out. He was never going to hurt another woman.
He was never going to rape another woman.

In 1995, 11 years after I had first identified Ronald Cotton, I was asked to provide a blood
sample so that DNA tests could be run on evidence from the rape. I agreed, because I knew
that Ronald Cotton had raped me and DNA was only going to confirm that. The test would
allow me to move on once and for all.

I will never forget the day I learned about the DNA results. I was standing in my kitchen
when the detective and the district attorney visited. They were good and decent people who
were trying to do their jobs -- as I had done mine, as anyone would try to do the right thing.

"Ronald Cotton didn't rape you," they told me. "It was Bobby Poole."

The man I was so sure I had never seen in my life was the man who was inches from my
throat, who raped me, who hurt me, who took my spirit away, who robbed me of my soul.
And the man I had identified emphatically on many occasions was absolutely innocent.

Ronald Cotton was released from prison after serving 11 years.
Bobby Poole pleaded guilty to raping me.

Ronald Cotton and I are the same age, so I knew what he had missed during those 11
years. My life had gone on. I had gotten married. I had graduated from college. I worked. I
was a parent. Ronald Cotton hadn't gotten to do any of that.

Ronald Cotton and I have now crossed the boundaries of both the terrible way we came
together and our racial difference -- he is black and I am white -- and have become friends.

Although he is now moving on with his own life, I live with constant anguish that my
profound mistake cost him so dearly. I cannot begin to imagine what would have happened
had my mistaken identification occurred in a capital case.

Today (This was written 6.20) there is a man named Gary Graham who is about to be
executed because one witness is confident that Graham is the killer she saw.

This woman saw the murderer for only a fraction of the time that I saw the man who raped
me. Several other witnesses contradict her, but the jury that convicted Graham never heard
any of the conflicting testimony.

If anything good can come out of what Ronald Cotton suffered because of my limitations as
a human being, let it be an awareness of the fact that eyewitnesses can and do make mistakes.

I have now had occasion to study this subject a bit, and I have come to realize that
eyewitness error has been recognized as the leading cause of wrongful convictions.
One witness is not enough, especially when her story is contradicted by other good people.

Last week, I traveled to Houston to beg Gov. George W. Bush and his parole board
not to execute Gary Graham based on this kind of evidence.

I have never before spoken out on behalf of any inmate. I stood with a group of 11 men and
women who had been convicted based on mistaken eyewitness testimony, only to be
exonerated later by DNA or other evidence.

With them, I urged the Texas officials to grant Gary Graham a new trial, so that the
eyewitnesses who are so sure that he is innocent can at long last be heard.

I know that there is an eyewitness who is absolutely positive she saw Gary Graham commit
murder. But she cannot possibly be any more positive than I was about Ronald Cotton.

What if she is dead wrong?

From: bogey5@icx.net

Subject: liberals

Liberals are losers!

First Lady vs. Rick the Lick

JUDICIAL WATCH JOINS ELIAN CASE
Dual-track Effort To Stop Repatriation

Judicial Watch has been enlisted by the Lazaro Gonzalez family to help pursue
a "dual track" legal effort to prevent six-year-old Elian from being returned to
Cuba without a proper INS asylum hearing.

The 11th-hour move, taken over the weekend, teams Judicial Watch as
co-counsel with Kendall Coffee and Manny Diaz, the family's Miami attorneys,
who had previously filed appeals concerning a federal court decision that the boy
was not entitled to a hearing, despite his previously stated wishes to remain in the
United States and his signature on an asylum petition.

"We plan to go into the lower court and seek to set aside the lower court's
judgment on the basis of fraud," said Larry Inchdick Klayman, Judicial Watch
Chairman and General Counsel.

"Smoking gun" Immigration and Naturalization Service documents obtained
by Judicial Watch were not considered by the lower court. They show collusion
between the Clinton-Gore Administration and Fidel Castro in the Elian affair,
so "therefore the judgment against Elian's petition for asylum was procured by
fraud and should be set aside," Klayman begs the court.

Judicial Watch is a pubic interest law firm that investigates and prosecutes
things having to do with Clinton's Cock.

From: JoeatPrince@aol.com

Subject: Please repost Dr. Harpie comments

Please re-post your Time.com messages since
your originals are no longer on the site.

Joe

Joe, it was a real heartbreaker.
Each time I posted something truly awful, I hit "Save as,"
and did everything right, except all I got was the Time.com
headers and banners and logo stuff - none of the instant text.

Most of what I did was links to her vulgar pics on bartcop.com
plus some silliness such as a series of endorsements from people like
Trent "White Power" Lott and Uncle OJ Watts and Barr and Burton.
One praise mail was from Paul Harvey, saying if he was 130 years younger,
he'd like a crack at Laura to see if she smelled better than those horses.

My chest became sore from laughing after an hour or two.
It was a lot of fun, but damn Time.com and they're "half-save" webmasters.

Stroke Me, Stroke Me

Bill Clinton set out to personally destroy Billy Dale so he could
re-populate the White House Travel Office with his own cronies.

what?

Shame on the Doctor

Subject: "no black" golf courses...

You mightpoint out to Kirk from Bethesda that the local country clubs in
HIS AREA are still "no blacks".

Its not that blacks are not allowed on the course but that they are not
invited to be members. If they can't be members then well, they don't
have permission to play because they aren't members.
Now the "no blacks" rules are not "written" but they still exist.

My skanky sister-in-law is a member of one of these clubs.
We do not like to be at the club as it is racist.

Someone in the public eye is someone who SHOULD make a statement.
He can.
The guy paying out the nose to hit balls on the public course but will
never make the pros has no opportunity to make a statement.
Who would listen?

bill and diane killian
zen and the art of ferrets

http://www.zenferret.com
mailto:killian@zenferret.com

Finally.
My mail is running 10-to-1 for me to "lay off" the Tiger Superman Woods.

Maybe they're just remembering what the great Richard Pryor said:
"Be happy for any nigger who makes it."

From: kalexa2@yahoo.com

Subject: somnolent?!?!

Did you actually use "somnolent" in a sentence?
Seems like you've been spending the time you once spent drinking a crisp shot
of Chinaco bettering youself with a little reading!
You keep this pace up and your IQ will break the 70-point barrier..

Kevin Alexander

Kevin,

big words put me to sleep

From: duhboid@hotmail.com

Subject: Gary Graham

I believe that Glassa is wrong about President Clinton being able to pardon
Gary Graham. The President can only grant pardons for federal crimes not
state crimes. Mr. Graham was convicted of murder by the State of Texas.
See Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the US Constitution.

Duhboid

The Bloody Bush Brothers

Click Here

From: randy@e-jam.net

Subject: Suspend Federal Gas Taxes

Do you think we ought to suspend the 18 cent gas tax to
help relieve the high gas prices? The highways that need
to be built or repaired can just be put off, if we run out of
money. This would only be an inconvienience to the millions
of people who drive the highways daily.

We sure as hell can't ask the oil companies to lower their prices
and cut into their 500% increase in profits, and end up inconveniencing
Shrub's oil buddies and the stockholders in oil companies.

Randy Williams

Great Laura Quotes

"Not being able to relate normally to a member of the opposite sex is
some kind of error. We were biologically meant to give birth to more people."

Hey, Laura, how do the dozens of celibate priests and nuns feel
about you calling them "some kind of error?

Koresh, help me, I'm so out of breath from laughing.

The Laura the Unloved gang-tackle is still going on at time.com.

We've "heard from" Rush, Paul Harvey, Uncle OJ Watts
and others about what they'd like to do to Laura,
right on the Time.com with her interview..

As of 12:45 CST, it's still going on.
You can say anything you want about that harpie, and I have!

ha ha

Hurry!

Comments from Time.com:

At 12:54 PM Craig said:

                                         It seems pretty obvious, from reading the
                                         previous opinion comments, that Dr. Laura
                                         is right. She is the target of much vitriol
                                         and irrational hatred. 'bartcop' states
                                         earlier that Dr. Laura is a whore, and
                                         'jakthehmmr' states that she is 'a stupid
                                         puke...a bigot, a phony, and a witch.'
                                         Where I come from those words are
                                         contemptuous and represent exactly what
                                         Dr. Laura says should be eradicated. It's
                                         too bad so many critics are irrational,
                                         angry, and contemptuous. I have never
                                         even heard her speak and I already have
                                         sympathy for her.

ha ha

I'd like to thank Time Magazine for giving me a forum, albeit a brief one,
to express my opinion about Rabbi Schlessinger.

And I'd like to thank the Founding Fathers for taking the initiative in
setting the legal foundation for me to not only post the vulgar Laura pictures
on the Internet, but also to advertise their existence on Time.com

In Post One, I explain that Laura was a whore, and how I had more respect
for street-walking whores because they don't lie about their motives.

In Post Two, I gave the URL for the vulgar Laura pictures.

In Post Three, I asked Laura why she felt it was necessary for her to
spread her legs to make a good photograph.

Thanks to the Founding Fathers, Time.com and Al Gore for allowing me
to express the opinion of the majority of Americans about that tramp.

I'm sure Time would like to hear YOUR opinions, as well.

Click Here

Hurry!

Click Here before Time magazine takes it down!!!

ha ha

There's an anti-Harpie free-for-all on Time Magazine's dot.com

Hurry!

ha ha

Preacher, Teacher, Nag: Dr. Laura Speaks
The controversial talk show host talks with TIME

With 18 million listeners a week on 452 stations, Laura Schlessinger is the most
successful female talk-radio host in the country today. This fall the
sharp-tongued psychotherapist is scheduled to bring her views to television with
the syndicated talk show "Dr. Laura." But as its Sept. 11 premier date nears,
she has been the target of a campaign by gay activists who are pressuring
Paramount Domestic Television to pull the plug because of what they contend
are her slurs against homosexuals. Procter & Gamble has backed out as a
sponsor. In an exclusive interview with TIME, Schlessinger, 53, an Orthodox Jew,
discusses the controversy as well as her new book, "Parenthood by Proxy"
(HarperCollins, $24), and what she sees as a moral decline.

(Excerpts)

TIME: What do you think you're tapping into out there that's fueling your show's
growth and your success?

A: A basic moral intuition about what's right and wrong. What I provide for people
is argument and support. I cannot tell you how many women have said my
pounding on about how the first priority in their lives ought to be the child has
helped them. That pounding was met by some negativity at first, but now people
say their lives are just elevated by doing what seems so simple but is counter to
what's going on in society.

TIME: So we’re going to hell in a handbasket, and people want to turn things
around?

A: They're struggling, and I help with the struggle because I preach, I teach —
and boy, do I nag. I'm relentless about it. Everybody at home can make a
decision to do or not do anything, but I nag. I have no power other than nagging.

TIME: But what qualifies you to be a moral authority?

A: I am just conveying my understanding of the deeply felt religious perspectives
that are timeless. I struggle to put those in a context that makes sense for
callers. What the brilliant rabbis have done is take certain laws from the Bible
and values of responsibility and honor and apply them to modern ideas. I struggle
to do the same — understand the religious Scriptures and apply them to the
dilemmas we have today.

TIME: Can you set the record straight and explain your comments about
homosexuals as "deviants"?

A: I never called homosexual human beings deviants. I have pointed out that
homosexual behavior deviates from the norm of heterosexuality and is forbidden
by Scriptures. That is basically the context... Even now I get hundreds of letters
a week from gays and lesbians who realize the way I'm being presented is
nowhere near the truth. I stand behind basic civil rights — where someone is able
to live, and work at his job — and always have. The only place where there is a
divergence is the issue that I consider sacred: marriage and family structure
around children.

TIME: You've said, "If you're gay or a lesbian, it's a biological error that inhibits
you from relating normally to the opposite sex." Do you really believe
homosexuals are biological errors?

A: We have vaginas and penises. We were biologically meant to give birth to
more people. Not being able to relate normally to a member of the opposite sex
is some kind of error. I do not see that as insulting at all. It is a statement of
biological fact. When you read the whole thing in context, I'm anything but
insulting to human beings. Some people just don't want to hear the truth.

TIME: As a deeply religious person, does it trouble you that your words hurt so
many people?

A: What concerns me is the hurt and frightened feelings of gays and lesbians
and their families who have heard this rhetoric, which is untrue, and that has
caused pain. To me, the folks who have an objection don't really listen to the
show and are being disingenuous about their objections. It's about dialogue,
which is pretty much squelched with respect to certain things.

TIME: Should people be able to say whatever they want on the radio?

A: In the United States of America, we have freedom of speech. It doesn't matter
what I think. The Constitution guarantees it.

TIME: Any regrets about some of your comments, given the outcry that has
resulted and the attempts to abort the show?

A: I regret that my words were taken out of context, distorted and lied about so
people were hurt from the lies. But that's not my action. Any time I was on the
air, I had context, clarity and compassion. What is distilled out does not.

TIME: Do you really believe everything you say, or do you just think
it makes great talk radio?

A: That's insulting.
The reason people like my show is they know there is no shtick.
What I say, I mean deeply.
I could not invoke the name of God or Scriptures if I was shticking.
That's even awful to hear.

ha ha
I think she's saying only a despicable whore would say, "Talent on loan from God."

TIME: Has Paramount asked you to tone down your television show?

A: No. They hired me because I'm outgoing and direct. What's unique about this
show is that the host will have a point of view.

TIME: How do you reconcile your harshness toward listeners over their moral
lapses with your own, some of which have come out in the press?

A: I can extrapolate that no mathematician working at NASA should ever have
got a C on a math test when he was learning. So what? I never said I was divine.

TIME: What's been the toll the controversy with the gay community has taken?

A: I've cried more at times than I would like to admit because to see my name,
my character, my person come under attack... It's astonishing to have your
name smeared with such vitriol. I wouldn't wish it on people I dislike.
It's been agonizing, but not enough to make me pull back..

STOP the PRESSES!

From that fuck Drudge:
PHOTO ROCKS OLYMPIC CAMP:
PRESIDENT LOOKS AT GIRL, TOUCHES POLE

Administration officials watched nervously as Clinton worked his charm
on a sexy young Olympic hopeful this weekend in southern California.
(Gee, was there any semen spilled?)

"He's so great," young pole vaulter Aimee Crabtree blushed after meeting
the commander-in-chief.

Crabtree, an Idaho native, received the president's undivided attention
during his visit to the U.S. Olympic Training Center.

"He spotted her right away," claimed one eyewitness, "and zeroed right in!"

Aides traveling with the president scrambled when wire photographer Kevin Lamarqu
captured the president openly flirting with Crabtree, a senior at San Diego State,
while his wife was thousands of miles away in New York.

(Ediotr's Comment: Can impeachment be far away?)

The local AM radio whores, KRoMaG says the new unemployment
figures for Oklhaoma are out. The number is 2.9 percent.

Repeat...
2.9 percent unemployment.

Now I admit I missed some econ classes at the U of A,
but isn't that statistically zero unemployment?

So, how will Oklahoma vote this year?
Smirk will carry this backwards state without even trying, you know why?

Because we need a change.
...and why do we need a change?

Because the country's going in the wrong direction.
...and how can we tell the country's going in the wrong direction?

Because a liberal is leading us, and we can't have that.
...and why can't we have a liberal leading us?

Because liberals "are only out to destroy America," Rush tells us,
and he can't be lying because he and God team up to tell us the truth.

...makes me want to hurl.

From: kirkrolund@hotmail.com

Subject: Tiger

I gotta go with those other emailers. I don't watch Tiger to hear him talk
about race relations or politics. I watch to figure out how he drives those
balls so far. I could just be ignorant, but I don't think there are too many
golf courses that go by the "no colored"rules anymore, at least I haven't
come across any. I don't think Tiger needs to be at the beck and call of the
NAACP either, and I think what they're doing is fine.

I don't concern myself with whether Tiger wants a picture with the
President, an honor but not a requirement, or what new political cause he
takes up. I just enjoy watching him do what he does best...play golf.

Plus, if the color barrier was broken when Michael jordan was around,
which was way before Woods ever went professional,
how did it come back all of the sudden?
Now i gotta go to bed...playing golf tomorrow :)

Kirk Rolund
Bethesda, MD

Kirk,
It's always nice to hear from a doctor.

There's no law that says you should agree with me.
There's no guarantee that I'm right, and there's no law that says you have
to help your people when you have a hundred million dollars in the bank.

If golf wasn't so somnolent, and if things were different,
I might enjoy watching him, too.

Dr. Laura's bad medicine is hard to swallow
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

"So what do you think about Dr. Laura?" a neighbor asked.

"I try not to think about her," I quipped.

"She's awfully popular," he continued.

"Yes, and that's more frightening than what comes out of her mouth," I added.

Lately, a lot of folks - especially readers - have solicited my take on America's
most infamous advice giver. So I'll give it to you, but be advised: If you admire
Dr. Laura, the rest of this column will not please you.

My main beef with the not-so-good doctor (of physiology, mind you) is that
she tramples on a cherished ethical principle in my vocation - inclusion.
The helping professions in general, and counseling in particular, uphold
the ideals of mutual understanding, respect and collaboration among people,
regardless of their differences.

One of our goals is to support what connects us to one another, not what drives
us apart. Dr. Laura wants to craft an exclusive world, a kind of country club that
admits only members with a particular pedigree - her own.

Then there is respect and common human decency. I've forced myself to listen
to some of her radio call-in programs, as well as read her newspaper column
(which she will be discontinuing soon), and it hasn't been easy.
I'd put it right up there with chugging a bottle of bitters.

Anyway, the manner in which she treats many (though not all) of her callers is,
at best, rude and, at worst, de-humanizing. I'm assuming her show is very popular
with masochists, because only someone who needs to be abused would call her.

ha ha

Some argue that Dr. Laura simply practices "tough love," and that she is an
alternative to bleeding hearts like yours truly who, according to her, create
sniveling whiners instead of self-reliant people. Maybe, but from where I sit,
she's more into "tough hate."

Any person who has a media pulpit and uses it to appeal to those who enjoy
ridiculing others, who revels in projecting what is euphemistically termed
"attitude," and who desires a world where everyone is forced to live by one
group's version of the truth, scares the blazes out of me.

And that's what I feel most when exposed to this sad, unhappy excuse for an
emotional healer - fear.

Now, some of you may chide me for taking people like her too seriously.
She is, after all, a product of an entertainment industry more interested in
shocking people than uplifting them.

Nevertheless, when voices of disrespect and division enlist a broad audience,
that sets off warning lights in my psyche. We struggle enough with the dark
side of human nature without going out of our way to encourage it.

Does Dr. Laura have an attitude? Yeah, a nasty one, and some people like that.
Does she have a way with words? Absolutely, and often they are more like
weapons than instruments of healing.

Does she think she has a monopoly on the truth? It seems so, and anyone who
is that sure of themselves is potentially dangerous.
Does she have a heart? You'd have to ask her that one.
I can't tell.

Philip Chard is a psychotherapist, author and trainer.
Thanks to Michael Paetzold

From: mikezielinski@mediaone.net

Subject: Chicago gas prices

Hey Bart,
The reason the oil company's are raising their prices is to elect smirk.
The same reforulated gas in St. Louis is much lower, $1.55 ver's $2.25.
Same gas different price.
Could it be the evil CIA Bushmiester calling in some old tabs?

Mike Zielinski

Mike,
It's hard not to be paranoid when dealing with the CIA.

"I'm a uniter, not a divider."
-Smirk

From: kirkrolund@hotmail.com

Subject: one more thing on Tiger

If Rush hadn't cozied up to Tiger, I'm making a friendly bet
you would've pegged him as you always do: a racist.
Are you showing some disdain for Tiger because Rush likes him?

Kirk Rolund

Kirk,
Rush was a racist, Nazi dog of a pig before you or I ever heard of Tiger Woods.
Rush is using Tiger as a shield.
"How can I be racist if I love Tiger Woods?"

He's also using Tiger to attack other blacks.
"If niggers weren't so lazy, they'd all be like Tiger Woods."

I don't think Tiger is the anti-Christ. I think he's Rush-ian in that,
now that he's accepted by white country clubs and has his hundred million,
why should he bother to help those who aren't and don't?

From: GlassA@missouri.edu

Subject: Gary Graham

From what I understand Bill Clinton could have pardoned him.
So Clinton had more power in this than Bush did.
Who's the one responsible?

Alisa Glass

Alisa,
Smirk is responsible.
He's the governor of a state that kills bi-weekly.
Texas doesn't care if poor blacks have drunk, sleepy, incompetent lawyers.
They claim the death penalty is a deterrent, yet every time they kill
that theory seems to be disproven.

Nice try blaming Clinton, tho.

From: (withheld)

When the Nation faced high Interest rates, who brought them down?
When the Nation faced high Unemployment, who brought them down?
High crime rates, who?
Teen Pregnancy?
Now, the Nation faces high gas prices, who do we trust to bring them down?

If you're thinking about Bush, ask yourself this:
Did the Big Oil Companies give him 1.5 million dollars
because they want gas prices to go down?

Hmmmmmmm?

Bill Maher Unbound at Democratic Fund-Raiser

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Fund-raisers featuring President Clinton are typically
polite affairs with plenty of criticism of Republicans but not usually below-the-belt attacks.
Then along came comedian Bill Maher of ABC's ``Politically Incorrect'' show.

Republican George W. Bush, Maher said on Saturday night, was "drunk until he was 40.''

Maher usually dishes it out to all sides in his comedy routine, but on Saturday night,
as the headline act for a DNC reception, he gave high praise to Clinton and blasted
Republicans for pursuing various scandals against him and his wife, Hillary.

"History will show itself to be grateful for the effort and the fortitude and,
I hope, mindful of the sacrifices that he has made,'' Maher said.

"Bill Clinton has taken more crap and been more gracious about it than
anybody who has nuclear weapons should ever be asked to,'' he said.

"Clinton had the strength to fight the battles that this country needed to have fought''
with one hand while he ''beat off the harpies who hated him succeeding with the other.''
The crowd roared its approval.

Actress Viveca Fox followed Maher. ``Gosh, I don't know how to follow that one up,''
she said before giving a straightforward introduction of Clinton.

The president, who has spent a lot of time urging Democrats to keep the campaign positive, obviously loved it.

"I never thought I'd live to hear Bill Maher say those things,'' Clinton said. "
And he said it in front of the press, which means he'll have to dump on me
twice as hard next week. But it'll be worth it. I love it. Thank you, Bill.''

Read Previous Issue

Go bartcop.com