Actor Richard Dreyfus And Treason

Richard Dreyfus is guilty of treason. I don’t know that he actually is but he said he would lose his “humor” if someone said it so I did. I want to see him lose his humor and then I want to see what he does after that. I would like to see if he thinks that an attack upon his honor is worth fighting for. You see, Dreyfus said that there are some things worth fighting for and one of those things is the impeachment of the President. He then said that the responses to 9/11 were reflexive actions that were fueled by the instant images shown on TV. He had these words of wisdom:

In the past, “time and distance played an amazing part in keeping the human race from killing itself,” the actor noted. The need for revenge after an attack “inevitably weakened because it took a lot of time to get men into ships and move them to the right battlefield. Only those truly staunch of heart and truly zealous could keep up that hatred.

“But now, people in Kansas see the [Twin] Towers fall at the exact instant as people in Nigeria or Cairo,” he said. “Instantaneous knowledge leads to instantaneous reaction, which creates a demand for an instantaneous, reflexive response.”

Time and distance did not stop terrorists from taking airplanes and flying them into buildings. Instead of blaming the media for showing the images why do you not place the blame where it belongs? It belongs solely on the people who planned the attacks and those who executed them. It also belongs to nations who helped, in any way, with the attacks. But the idiot Dreyfus is another blame America first jackass.

Dreyfus says that it is worth fighting to get Bush impeached because Bush tortures everyone and wiretaps everyone. Dreyfus fails to make any distinction by noting that those who tortured were punished and that there are different ideas as to what actually constitutes torture (it is too cold, I am being tortured). He fails to comprehend that the President has the legal authority to listen to the communications of our enemies. We are listening to enemies of our country not Dreyfus’ calls to his drug dealer or prostitutes. By the way, from what I have seen, most of the films Dreyfus has been in could be considered torture for those who endure them.

It is amazing to me that this guy believes there are some things worth fighting for but one of them is not his country. He believes that our actions after 9/11 were reflexive. He actually thinks that if we had all just sat down, held hands, passed a bong and analyzed why we deserved to be attacked then we would not have gone to war. It is also amazing that this jackass infers that he would be willing to fight for his honor if someone accused him of treason but that our country should not fight for its honor after being attacked.

It is evident that most of the people from Hollywood do not support this President or his defense of our country. This should not surprise anyone considering the entertainment industry had all the commies in it back in the 50s. It is not surprising that Hollywood would not support a President who tries to do the right thing considering most of its inhabitants have been married and divorced multiple times, have been admitted to substance abuse treatment facilities over and over, have been involved in a number of projects designed to change the American landscape, and are self absorbed with overly inflated egos. They think they are the mainstream and the only thing worth fighting for, to them, is an attack upon their beliefs.

Well, let me lob the first round for Dreyfus. Dick, you are a treasonous person. There, let me see if you have any reflexive action for that statement. But beware Dick, I am not the Press Club. Mess with the Dog, you will probably get bitten.

Source: CNN News.com



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

2 Responses to “Actor Richard Dreyfus And Treason”

  1. Verge Limbo says:

    Hey Dog!

    I like your weblog layout and design.Personally I am a little less violent; As I type this I am “bombarded” with several violent images: Bomb laden F-18, “Buy a Gun”, Bulldog pissing, shovel swinging torso, a swinging Ted Kennedy, soldier of fortune cartoon, menacing Bulldog, etc.
    The one that really catches my eye though is “Terrorism is War”. A little high school logic equivalence proves that if A is B then B is B. That is to say “War is terrorism”, and with this I agree, By extension if Bush is Pro-war, then he is pro-terrorism. And, well, he is…his presidency is defined by his war against Iraq, Afghanistan. If he were not so effective at redirecting the American public’s eye away from his flailing domestic programs, spiralling debt load, collapsing economy, and the seemingly endless list of republican scandals, he would surely not have been re-elected. He is directing and creating “Fear for Abroad” while obscuring the fearful situation his government is creating right here at home.

  2. Big Dog says:

    Well, I appreciate you stopping by. The images are only violent to those who see them that way. The aircraft and guns are symbols of freedom. A gun is not violent. Criminals (released by liberals) who use guns to commit crimes, are. That “soldier of fortune” cartoon is a caricature of me and I am no SOF. I am a veteran of the armed forces.

    Terrorism is war. It is not equivocal the other way around. Just like you can say all Budweiser is beer. Your logic would then extend to all beer is Budweiser. Terrorism against this country is war. It is a different kind that most liberals fail to recognize. War is not terrorism. War is waged by men in uniforms representing a country. Terrorism is a means to wage war that instills fear and targets innocent lives. To say being pro war is the same as pro terrorism is ill defined and does not follow logically, as I have pointed out with the beer comparison. Her is another Toyotas are vehicles therefore vehicles are Toyotas. That is not true and neither is the poor analogy you tried to make.

    I will admit that the debt is rising. There are over 600 programs that can be cut and the budget will be balanced in less than 10 years and start showing a surplus, all without raising taxes. Bush is responsible for spending but the budget was not balanced when any other president was there, despite what the Clintons want you to believe. If we stop all pork spending then we have no money problems. They all do it, both parties. I would like to know how the economy is so poor when it was so “good” during the Clinton years. The unemployment numbers are about the same for both Presidents. Bush took us out of the Clinton recession and the stock market is very high. There are plenty of jobs and more people are working. How any of this equates to a poor economy, especially after 9/11 practically crippled our financial system, is beyond me.

    It was the Democrats lack of national security that gave us 9/11. Their failure to appropriately handle the Blackhawk Down incident and all the other acts of terror emboldened our enemies. Americans could see that Kerry was weak on defense and that he pandered to polls and opinion rather than being a leader. No one was tricked into voting for Bush. Fact is, he was the best of the 2 choices. I guess you feel there is an atmosphere of fear because you do not realize the dangers. They did not hit you on 9/11. Perhaps if the next attack hurts people you know or love you will have a different opinion. More likely, you will blame that on Bush.

    As for scandal, both parties are neck deep with their own problems. The left continues to try and manufacture things from nothing. Plame-a non issue. She was not covert, but don’t let the facts get in the way. Wiretapping, legal per precedent, law, and Congressional authority to take all actions necessary. Abramoff, gave money to both parties. Harry Reid took a lot, so did others. It will probably hurt 5-8 people from both parties (some donations, I am sure, were legal). Clinton had far more scandals than the Bush administration. While the left is rewriting history they forget all the scandal that involved a lot of illegal acts.

    Well, that is my 2 cents. You might think this is violent. It is not. These are symbols of freedom and I represent freedom. I might not agree with what you say but I will fight to my death defending your right to say it. Can you say the same??