Yup.

Mitt Happens on the other hand looks destined to be President. He was funny, engaged and didn’t take himself seriously at the Al Smith Memorial Dinner last week.

That’s a side of him people haven’t seen before and they liked it! McGovern ended up as a footnote in the history books because he simply was out of touch with the country.

Obama looks set to be a one term Democratic President cuz big issues are Big Bird, binders full of women and acting in generally like a silly guy on the campaign trail. When you begin insulting your opponent, this election is over.

We’ll see more evidence of that in the last debate this coming week. The only person who still thinks Obama will be re-elected is Nate Silver – not the sharpest guy in the drawer.

The death of the late and unlamented George McGovern is a reminder of what we don’t need four more years of. And the American seem inclined to take that to heart in November.

NormanF on October 21, 2012 at 1:27 pm

Wasn’t McGovern’s daughter a notorious party girl around DC?

Rochelle on October 21, 2012 at 2:12 pm

“Billy Joel sang that only the good die young. And that’s gotta be why former U.S. Senator George McGovern died today at the ripe old age of 90.”

All-too painfully true. The umpteenth-millionth villain that lived far too undeservedly longer than he should have; should have met his maker at least 50 years ago,before he got any chance to poison the political landscape.

He should have died in WWII; I might have had a small amount of respect for him.

CharlesMartelReborn on October 21, 2012 at 2:17 pm

Debbie:

Spot On:

Leftists never change.

The less those like McGovern achieve in the real world, and the more they express hatred of America, the more the MSM and elites gush over them.

Like Gore Vidal.

Frank Zavisca on October 21, 2012 at 2:26 pm

when the liar wally crankcase made nice with mcgovern, i knew he was a traitor to the constitution just like wally.the anti-war punks were not anti-war they were anti-american and pro-commie.that is what they had in common with wally and mcgovern who both love commie traitors like alger hiss,the rosenbergs and hanoi jane.our government and media are infested with parasite commie traitors that need to be eliminated.

bruce on October 21, 2012 at 2:40 pm

Is there an email in hell.com to send him f–k his mother ???

arturo alcubierre on October 21, 2012 at 3:04 pm

Deb and Jon–

Nice work on this. McGovern—like virtually all the small staters who dominate the Senate (because of the stupid 17th amendment)—are uniformly terrible.

Red Ryder on October 21, 2012 at 3:12 pm

Good piece Debbie and also I would like to give some kudos/props to our pal Jonathan Grant who normally comments on this blog of yours DS.

I sorta anticipated that Mr. McGovern was an anti-American, but I didn’t know the dude was a creep and a scumbag during his time around, and with him being a water-barrier for the arab governments in the middle east for islam/muslims, I assume they’d consider McGovern as a “dhimmi”?

“A nation is defined by its borders, language & culture!”

Sean R. on October 21, 2012 at 3:21 pm

George McGovern–RIH.

With the faux conservatives that Debbie mentioned here that are shedding tears for McGovern, this reminds me of a point that Debbie made when people from the right has criticized Debbie for calling a spade a spade on famous bad people who had just died. The one example that I remember is when after Bob Novak died in 2009 and Newsbusters and other conservative outlets refused to allow Debbie and others to post comments there, saying that it is in bad taste to say bad things about someone who died. Debbie responded by asking what their reactions will be when Jimmy Carter dies–will they give him the same treatment? Debbie said that they will not and therefore Newsbusters, et al, on the right would be partisan hyprocrites.

Well based on how the right is reacting to George McGovern’s death, I predict that when Carter dies, they will be giving Carter the same treatment as they did to Novak when he died and are giving to McGovern now that he died–a pass and struggling to find good things to say about him and ignore the bad things that he has said and done. If I’m correct in my prediction, then it would clear them of the charge of them being partisan hypocrites. Instead they would be morons, but at least they would be consistent.

JeffE on October 21, 2012 at 3:27 pm

Also, great job, Debbie and Jon Grant for calling a spade a spade on McGovern.

JeffE on October 21, 2012 at 3:31 pm

It is revealing how you can kvetch about McGovern
but have nothing to say about Specter passing.
Was he not Jewish enough for you, or that his
position on Israel was too Obama like.

CZ: Huh? Arlen Specter didn’t make a career of attacking American soldiers and Israel, never took money from the Arabs, and never said Jews should rot in gulags. What the heck does he have anything to do with McGovern? He wasn’t even nearly half as bad. DS

Commander Zero on October 21, 2012 at 4:45 pm

I noticed all the pro-McGovern palaver on Twitter. I was very cautious that I didn’t re-tweet what some Conservatives were (and I am speaking of the non-famous Conservatives not the types of tweets DS provided here) because I didn’t know much about GMc. I knew he was a Liberal but that was it. Embarrassingly, I always get him confused with George Wallace.

If I have learned anything at this site (which is my go-to site) it is to please know what you are speaking of before you speak.

Many Conservatives on Twitter mean well but many try to be too conciliatory and many don’t understand the history behind the person. I am better at that since I learn so much here. That said, you can tell certain peeps have no back ground history when they try to be too nice. You can see that by how they treated the GMc news.

But some like to be ignorant. Just this week someone whinged about the soft gloves treatment Loofah O’Reilly was giving Candy Crowley. When I tweeted back that he ought not waste time on such an obvious hack he tweeted me back many of his followers said the same thing I did but he “likes some of the stuff he does”. That right there told me this dude was not a great thinker (unlike Rodan!).

I follow Monica Crowley on Twitter and will re-tweet her tweets when the content supersedes who it’s coming from (like today she made a prediction and I wanna see if it indeed does come true and also see if the rumours about Iran are true…since they are just rumours right now…) but I used to listen to her show and don’t anymore because her podcasts are lousy and late and by the time her show hits, I’ve already heard of the stuff.

Plus what DS has said rings in my head every time I hear her name. Didn’t know info on her before coming HERE.

But as we have seen and also learned concretely here many so called Conservatives are cliquey. And she is part of that clique.

She also see Kirsten “Luckiest Girl In The World” Powers as a “friend” and many Conservatives dopily think (these days) that KP is Conservative. It’s jarring and annoying. Sorry, I view KP not only as a dope but a dope who looks at “Conservatives” the way Dracula looks at his next victim.

I am reticent to speak out on stuff I don’t know. This very post by DS proves again it’s best to know your stuff than speak out and look like a jackass.

S: How do you know that anything plagiarist Monica Crowley says is hers? Her history is lifting word for word the work of others. Kirsten Powers is an airhead extraordinaire who praised the Egyptian takeover by the Muslim Brotherhood, since she’s married to an Egyptian Arab doctor. She also attacked me for exposing what the Egyptian “liberation” was all about. And that’s not to mention her defense of the New Black Panther Party harassment of voters and the Obama Justice Dept decision not to prosecute them. She is on TV for one reason: she looks good. And it’s show biz. She’s a complete ignoramus and knows absolutely nothing. DS

Skunky on October 21, 2012 at 6:46 pm

Also (now that I have read the update) I am VERY cautious about reTweeting anything from Breitfraud. The update reminds me to be even MORE diligent.

Also, on the weekend replay of “The David Webb Show” they were sad about the b-day of Breitfraud. They wondered why anyone who was a Conservative would hate him. I was yelling at my satellite radio a few I learned HERE.

And they came out and admitted that Breitfraud was showing the naked picture of Anthony Weiner to his friends. I can’t stand Weiner and have ZERO sympathy for him but Breitfraud came out and said he would not release and show those snaps…and he did. I think that is low because the fraud said he would NOT. He should have just STFU and would have been less of a fraud. I still don’t like Breitfraud. Dead or NOT!

Skunky on October 21, 2012 at 7:04 pm

Telling the truth about McGovern is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for being conservative. It is amazing, and I was a little surprised, frankly to learn how many pseudo-conservatives nice things to say about McGovern. I guess we never stop learning. Perhaps given what the ‘conservatives’ are saying about McGovern, it is not surprising the complete axxxs that the Republicans accepted as debate ‘moderators.’

But it certainly shows what frauds the elected politicians are. I am not surprised at all that all of them are whitewashing McGovern.

Little Al on October 21, 2012 at 7:15 pm

And while Spector has done many disgraceful things, he did have one partial moment of glory during the Clarence Thomas hearings.

Little Al on October 21, 2012 at 7:16 pm

well, he (McGovern) served his country in a time of war….whereas Ms. Schlussel never did.

Howard Fine on October 21, 2012 at 7:42 pm

I never knew of the full range of McGovern’s evil, or his personal hypocrisy regarding such issues as busing. It’s odd that his anti-Israel attitudes didn’t register on my (then liberal) parents, whereas Carter’s anti-Semitism did.

skzion on October 21, 2012 at 8:22 pm

Incidentally, nothing about him and Israel or Muslims on Wikipedia. A big coverup.

S: Are you surprised? Wikipedia is a fraud and a lying waste of time. It’s like Snopes. Anyone who relies on it is not too bright and is relying on left-wing propagandists for their version of “truth.” DS

skzion on October 21, 2012 at 8:28 pm

I will never stop being amazed at the liberal fools who instead of responding to Debbie’s arguments, attack her personally. I really should have stopped being surprised years ago, but their stupidity and obtuseness is something that I think I will never completely get used to.

Little Al on October 21, 2012 at 9:32 pm

George McGovern hated Israel. He made no secret of that.

I’m sure some of your liberal readers needed to hear that. I did not.

Here was a man who flew dangerous bombing missions during World War II against the Nazis. Yet he could not show the same bravery in standing against anti-Semitism.

The next time someone throws the label of “war hero” to give credibility of a politician’s policy proposals, think of George McGovern. Think of Marshall Petain; a decorated hero of WWI who betrayed France, helped send Jews to their deaths, and was convicted of treason after World War II. So much for “war heroes”.

I believe that public policy should stand on its own merits; not on the claim of “war hero” by those who propose it.

There is NO Santa Claus on October 21, 2012 at 9:45 pm

Good article. I confess I have the same reflex when it comes to calling b.s. on gushing people for the dead. If it’s a fact somebody was evil in life, then why dress it all up when they finally die already. It’s always driven me crazy to hear people speak nicely about a jerk just because they died. Him and jane fonda together was a nice touch.

samurai on October 21, 2012 at 10:53 pm

Former Senator George McGovern is dead. I have nothing good to say about the man.

Worry01 on October 21, 2012 at 11:53 pm

Debbie,

I disagree with your assertion that McGovern was anti-American and anti-Semitic.

Richard Nixon was the anti-Semite. Listen to the hate he spewed on those tapes.

Yes,he shifted to a pro-Arab point of view in the 1980s,and he complained about the power of the “Israeli lobby”,but that in itself is not anti-Semitism.

Unlike many other critics of Israel(Pat Buchanan,etc), McGovern’s view on the Mideast reflected his bleeding heart liberal outlook of the “bully vs the underdog” scenario where in his misguided view,Israel was the bully of the “poor Palestinians”.

Yes,he was wrong on the Mideast.He criticized the influence of the Israeli lobby on the US gov’t, in which he correctly pointed out their strength on Capitol Hill,yet he failed to also point out the strength of the Arab lobby as well.

Many other critics of Israel such as Buchanan,Paul Craig Roberts,etc went beyond attacking Israel and attacked Jews as well.They attack Israel because of an anti-Semitic bias against Israel,and/or do it as a way to stick a finger in the eye of Jews.

I’ve seen no anti-Semitic comment or attack on Jews from McGovern.

Ironically,in 1972,he attacked Nixon for not doing enough to help Soviet Jews and he criticized Nixon for voting to condemn Israel 5 times in the UN.

He later criticized Prime Minister Shamir for trying to force Soviet Jews to go to Israel instead of the US,where many of them wanted to go.

He was not anti-American. He was a highly decorated WW2 hero as a B24 pilot. He was against the Vietnam war,and it’s sort of a catch 22 to advocate the withdrawal of American forces from a war they’re currently engaged in.

You can disagree with his view on Vietnam and military spending,but that is not evidence of being anti-American.

Scott on October 21, 2012 at 11:58 pm

Used to be the case that if you were against your country in time of war, it was taken for granted that you were anti-American. It was during the Vietnam war that the tradition of not criticizing your country in time of war went by the wayside, and McGovern did a great sea to scuttle the tradition of supporting your country in time of war.

Those who say he served in WW II are taking an ahistorical approach. As was said, everyone served. Would he have served if he had reached his 18th birthday in 1971? And is Kerry patriotic? He went to Vietnam, and then when he came back, did all he could to see his country defeated in the war.

In assessing a person, the things he does differently are the ones that distinguish him. If a bank robber has gone into a restaurant numerous times and paid his check in full, that does not stop us from calling him a crook, at least those of us who have not become hopelessly crazed by liberalism. If someone dates 20 women and is a perfect gentleman, and then rapes the 21st, we still call him a rapist because of what he did to the 21st woman. Similarly, if he supported one war, but urged defeat of his country in another, he is a traitor, even though he supported one war.

Nixon wasn’t doing enough to help the Jews in the Soviet Union? In 1972? How dumb cam you get? What was McGovern doing in 1972? Trying to get Jewish votes, nitwit. Just like ‘all options are on the table’ in Iran. Politicians will say all kinds of things to get votes. Verbal commitments to help Soviet Jews, especially when not backed up by meaningful action, such as trying to defeat Communism, have the effect of bolstering the Soviet Union, including its treatment of Jews. It also serves as a shield against attacking such politicians for their desire and actions in trying to weaken Israel. ‘Duh, but I support Soviet Jews’. So never mind my actions in trying to hurt Israel. Just like the bank robber. He doesn’t rob all the time, only sometimes. But in McGovern’s case, even when nominally supporting Jewish causes, it is lukewarm, incomplete, and meant to deflect.

It is embarrassing to have to explain such simple things. But this is one of the reasons we are drifting towards Socialism. Partly a desire to get stuff without working, but part of it is also dumbness, as exhibited by some of the comments here. I wonder how many of these people are in the education racket?

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 12:35 am

Sorry, I meant to lead the paragraph bv saying ‘McGovern’ wasn’t doing enough in 1972? McGovern, not Nixon.

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 12:37 am

And to carry my argument further, if you oppose Obama on one important issue, but support him on another important issue, that damages our country, you need to look at the issue where he is hurting our country. Just like the bank robber who doesn’t rob all banks, but we still (used to) put him in jail because of the bank he robbed. We don’t free him (ideally) because he didn’t rob 100 other banks.

But understanding this requires post-primary grade logic skills, and sadly, these skills are becoming rare.

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 12:42 am

Little Al,

McGovern wasn’t against the country, he wanted the US to get out of Vietnam,the same way that there are both Democrats and Republicans who want us out of Afghanistan because they believe it’s a quagmire. McGovern felt the same way about Vietnam.

That’s why I said it’s a catch 22.On one hand,speaking out against a war could help the enemy,but on the other hand,if you truly believe being in the war is a mistake,or is not being conducted properly,then there is nothing unpatriotic about opposing it. That was the decision McGovern made,rightly or wrongly. But he never spoke in support of the Viet Cong or North Vietnam.

Of course McGovern wanted Jewish votes,so like most politicans he may have pandered on Israel and Soviet Jews. Nixon did vote to condemn Israel in the UN on several occasions,so he gave McGovern an issue to use against him.

You’re another one who throws the word socialism around. We already have socialism in the US. Social Security,Medicare,AFDC,Welfare,etc. Where have you been?

Scott on October 22, 2012 at 1:11 am

McGovern’s daughter died homeless on a Madison Street of exposure (I was at UW at the time). She was an alcoholic.

adam on October 22, 2012 at 2:13 am

That photo with Hanoi Jane pretty much sums up McGovern.
Where was the sickness (Krankheit) for thatphoto op?

Otto Schaden on October 22, 2012 at 7:51 am

I’m another one who throws the word ‘socialism’ around? First, there is a difference between public ownership and public planning. We are getting nearer and nearer to the point of a planned economy, but most ownership in this country is still private. So there is a long way to go before we stop being a capitalist country and become a socialist country.

But at the same time, it is remarkable how many Democrats have Socialist or Communist backgrounds. It is naive to think that they and their younger supporters want to leave things as they are.

And in a broad sense, you are echoing a justification for being a traitor that, as far as I know, was popularized by the Communist sympathizer (if that’s all she was) Hillary Clinton. She said that she strongly supported this country. She just wanted it to change into a country she could be proud of and support (shades of mrs. Obama). She was patriotic, to repeat for your little mind, but she envisioned a different kind of patriotism. A patriotism committed to those values that she supported — which meant increased government control over distribution, and planning.

That’s pretty much the argument the Communists have always made. They have always said they supported America. They just wanted a different kind of America. These arguments consistently subvert the historical values of this country. That is why adherence to them, in better times, used to be called subversion.

And if McGovern never directly supported the Vietcong or North Vietnam, this was typical eft=wing deception. First, his political friends, such as Hanoi Jane, did openly support them. But second, his politics clearly supported them. When the antiwar demonstrators supported immediate withdrawal, they knew the effect would be a Communist victory. But if they supported that victory more subtly, they would gain more adherents, and, to some extent, protect themselves from prosecution as enemies of this country.

This is a tactic that continues today.

If you are against the war, and just keep your thoughts to yourself, you are a fool, but not a traitor. But opposing the US in time of war has become routine. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, defense of our country (SDI) scuttling the budget for our defense, and the usually accompanying mindset that the US oppresses people all over the world, every differing ethnic group within our current borders, and now the people oppressed have apparently expanded to virtually everybody (the so-called 99%).

Yes, this is reflexive disloyalty to the United States and our historical values. It has become commonplace, even among the large numbers of people who, along with their ancestors, have benefitted from the largess and tolerance our country has exhibited. It reminds me of the French who hate the United States even though we saved them twice from extinction.

Weak minds aways try to change the subject. The post was about McGovern, not Nixon. You are probably one of the creeps that has never forgiven Nixon for sending Alger (Commie) Hiss to jail.

And while there were disagreements between Nixon and many Israelis in the aftermath of the 1967 war, Nixon never descended to the overt support of the Arabs, and the de facto extinction of Israel supported by the evil McGovern.

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 7:56 am

Although, unfortunately, another dimension has arisen with regards to opposing current US wars and foreign policy. This is because, with the advent of more socialists and former-Communist-sympathizers into the Government, and their ability to influence others, our foreign policy has often taken a direction different from that of our historical values.

Throwing countries like Taiwan, Israel, Egypt, Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc., under the bus has become a symbol of this change, and, of course should be opposed. And challenging the tactics of one or two wars is different from the reflexive hostility to the US and its values that I spoke of in my 7:56 post.

But most, although not all, opponents of our recent wars oppose them because they see the US as a capitalist country that oppresses everyone, everywhere and has done so since its inception. Because of this complexity, the ability to make distinctions becomes more and more important.

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 8:10 am

Although now, unfortunately, socialist-minded people, and people with Communist-sympathizer backgrounds have assumed control of US foreign policy, along with younger people, and sycophants they are able to influence. This has created a situation where the US has damaged countries like Taiwan, Israel, Egypt (Mubarak), Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc.

In such a situation, it is in accordance with Western tradition to oppose these actions, or to challenge missteps in current wars such as Iraq. But this is different from the reflexive opposition to the Vietnam war which was accompanied, overtly or covertly, but hostility to all our traditions (e.g. the US oppresses everybody, everywhere, and has always done so). McGovern’s hostility was the more generalized type of hostility.

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 8:16 am

Although at the same time we need to keep in mind that the inmates have captured the asylum, and some opposition to their policies falls within a different context.

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 8:20 am

Sorry, I thought my first couple of comments hadn’t gone through.

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 8:31 am

yes i know someone who worked him and quit when he found out he hated jews

martin on October 22, 2012 at 9:08 am

I was 21 in ’72 and believe me, George McGovern was the Barack Obama of his day and he was routed and shunned by the country. What has to show that the country has taken a drastic turn for the worst is Obama(aka black McGovern) being elected just 36 years later!

JohnCollignon on October 22, 2012 at 9:21 am

George McGovern was an opportunist above all else. Before the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, George McGovern had been nothing but an obscure Congressman and then a U.S. Senator from Nebraska. As Debbie noted, he had stuck like glue to President Lyndon Johnson on the Vietnam issue(he voted for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution)until it became unpopular to do so. Senator McGovern even explored running against President Johnson in 1968, but decided that he lacked the means to compete at that time with Senators Robert F. Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy, Senator McGovern was quite enamored with the far left and its ability mobilize its forces, which reached its peak during the Chicago Democratic Convention. This Corn Husker State Senator decided to hitch his star to the New Left. Those new found friends, such as Todd Gitlin did not forget Senator McGovern: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/19/George_McGovern_A_Real_American_Hero

The article fails to mention that Dr. Gitlin was one of the founding members of SDS(Students for a Democratic Society), which spawned the Weathermen after its demise in 1969.

George McGovern thought he could use the muscle that he witnessed in 1968 when he decided to seriously run for the Presidency in 1972. What he failed to realize was the fact that 1968-69 represented the peak of Flower Power. The unity of those New Left groups began to fracture. President Nixon had successfully reduced the American footprint in South Vietnam to the extent that he was able to wind down the draft. This really took a mainstream issue away from the New Left, and left it wallowing in search of relevance. The extent of the Flower Power’s demise became evident when Senator George McGovern not only lost to Richard M. Nixon in 1972, but was trounced.

Unfortunately, Senator McGovern lingered on until he was defeated in his reelection to the U.S. Senate in 1980.. He used this time to hinder U.S. responses to the then quite real threat from the Soviet Union. He was definitely no friend of Israel.

Let the man disappear. He was a prototype for the sort of Democratic politician we see today. George McGovern was deemed to be rather far left in his own party when he was in the U.S. Senate. He would be considered rather ordinary today in the same party.

Worry01 on October 22, 2012 at 10:06 am

Debbie I imagine that you’re very cute when you’re mad. Is that true? Due to my advanced youth I don’t remember McGovern as anything other than a former pol but I won’t be giving him the z’l treatment, etc. And I know that Wiki isn’t reliable as a single source for politics but it’s great for noncontroversial stuff like geography, astronomy, physics and such. I tried to edit the mention of Jews in my city’s Wiki description once but it didn’t stick. B’H we run this town.

Your close personal blog friend,

A1

A1 on October 22, 2012 at 11:42 am

Lol! A1, you’re no friend.

skzion on October 22, 2012 at 11:51 am

Worry01 vomited: “George McGovern had been nothing but an obscure Congressman and then a U.S. Senator from Nebraska.”

What’s the matter, can’t do your homework before you post? McGovern was from SOUTH DAKOTA, not Nebraska.

FrenchKiss on October 22, 2012 at 12:44 pm

Unfortunately, plagiarism has few if any repercussions. Take William Swanson, CEO of Raytheon. He committed plagiarism, admitted to it, and he’s still CEO. Oh, he did have to give up his $2 million dollar raise or bonus (I forgot which one). But he’s still making his modest salary of $18 million.

FrenchKiss on October 22, 2012 at 12:52 pm

George McGovern while a US Senator and Congressman did not introduce one piece of legislatiuon of note. He did however, introduce a bill which sought to prohibit private American purchase of bonds of a foreign country. Then as now, the only bonds issued by a foreign country to average American citizens was Israeli bonds. The bill never saw the light of day.

After leaving congress and his failed bid for the presidency he became a spokesman for anti-Israel/pro Palestinian causes. He appeared as a lecturer on the anti-Israel circuit for many years, netting hudreds of thousands dollars – paid for by Arab institutions.

Don’t believe me? Google, if you will. a typical speech made by him January 1992 in the AMEU’s Public Affairs Series. you will read one of the most virulent anti-Isreael addresses ever!

He became the spokesman- go to guy – for the Arab position regarding Israel for any t.v. or radio talk show on the planet

Tears should not be shed for him

martin bernstein on October 22, 2012 at 2:12 pm

Well done, once again, Debbbie.
Pollak sure knows how to lower the bar – greatness defined by, and compared to Dead Kennedy – as long as McGovern didn’t kill anyone, he can be raised to icon status.
This is the anti-Virginia Slims ad from years ago: “You’ve come a long way, baby.”
Hey, I haven’t killed anyone – should be on a postage stamp?

Sanford Horn on October 22, 2012 at 4:11 pm

Liquor stores? Well, they don’t quite dominate the economy yet. The rest of your examples pertain to distribution and planning which I have already acknowledged.

Unfortunately, you did not read (or understand) my subsequent posts. I was speaking about an overall mind set. Of course it depends why the current wars are opposed. Unfortunately, most of the opposition if of the reflexive anti-US type. And yes, such people are disloyal.

You did not read my comments about Nixon carefully. I was refuting your stupid comments suggesting a McGovern sensitivity towards Jews. YOu did not respond to either this or the other 90% of what I said. Duh, he was sorry he didn’t get a chance to bomb the death camps? Easy to say after the fact. I’m sorry I’m not a multi-billionaire.

And a singling out of Israel and support of bloodthirsty Arab killers is, indeed, anti-semitism. Maybe you were too stupid to read about his speeches, who financed them, and what he said. You haven’t responded to any of it. Just vacuous comments supporting McGovern. Better go back and play with your rattles. Your thought is so disjoined that maybe you should see a psychologist for cognitive therapy.

Maybe you are part of the McGovern family. If so, moronism clearly runs in the family.

And what do Buchanan et al have to do with this? Neither Debbie or regular commenters to this blog support them.

Little Al on October 22, 2012 at 4:24 pm

McGovern is dead but McGovernism took over the Democratic Party (starting in 1968) and the ultimate manifestation is Barack Obama.

Repeat on October 22, 2012 at 5:13 pm

Well done, once again, Debbbie.
Pollak sure knows how to lower the bar – greatness defined by, and compared to Dead Kennedy – as long as McGovern didn’t kill anyone, he can be raised to icon status.
This is the anti-Virginia Slims ad from years ago: “You’ve come a long way, baby.”
Hey, I haven’t killed anyone – should I be on a postage stamp?

Sanford Horn on October 22, 2012 at 5:23 pm

Whoa! Tell us how you really feel about the guy,why do you,Ms. Schlussel?

Ghostwriter on October 22, 2012 at 6:23 pm

All I remember about George McGovern is that he was on the receiving end of one of the biggest presidential landslides in history. I mean at least Mondull won DC. Anyway my dad who served in Vietnam had a few choice words for this man. Words like traitor, coward, blowhard were in his email to me. Plus a little of what you highlighted here Debbie. The fact that this bozo hated Israel is no surprise. The early morning CBS crapfest was lauding when McGovern was in the military until he stumped for Odumbo in 2008. The left always manages to get Odummy’s smiling mug on TV. Debbie you’re right about the good dying young while rats like McGovern, Cronkite, and my favorite dead senator Robert(Grand Kleagle)Byrd live to be in their 90s. It was also funny to hear the Fox and Friends hosts this morning give their glowing take on the late Senator. As far as I’m concerned he can go and say hi the two “gentlemen” that I mentioned. Along with Kennedy, Murtha and Mike Wallace. Oh and while he’s at it he can save a place for his buddy Fonda when she takes her little trip on the highway to Hell.

Ken b on October 22, 2012 at 6:59 pm

George McGovern, RIH: No Tears for Dead, Anti-American, Anti-Israel Hypocrite

cheap handbags on July 27, 2013 at 2:43 am

It’s remarkable in support of me to have a web site, which is good for my experience. thanks admin

research.alexsb.org on August 8, 2013 at 10:01 pm